Search (21 results, page 1 of 2)

0.114750564 = product of:
  0.17212585 = sum of:
    0.15529688 = weight(_text_:systematic in 3404) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.15529688 = score(doc=3404,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.28397155 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.715473 = idf(docFreq=395, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049684696 = queryNorm
        0.54687476 = fieldWeight in 3404, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          5.715473 = idf(docFreq=395, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3404)
    0.016828977 = product of:
      0.033657953 = sum of:
        0.033657953 = weight(_text_:22 in 3404) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.033657953 = score(doc=3404,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17398734 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049684696 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 3404, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3404)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

The present essay is based on research funded by the German Ministry of Economics and Technology and carried out by the Munich School of Philosophy (Prof. Godehard Brüntrup) in cooperation with the IT company Comelio GmbH. It is concerned with setting up the philosophical framework for a systematic, hierarchical and categorical account of questions and answers in order to use this framework as an ontology for software engineers who create a tool for intelligent questionnaire design. In recent years, there has been considerable interest in programming software that enables users to create and carry out their own surveys. Considering the, to say the least, vast amount of areas of applications these software tools try to cover, it is surprising that most of the existing tools lack a systematic approach to what questions and answers really are and in what kind of systematic hierarchical relations different types of questions stand to each other. The theoretical background to this essay is inspired Barry Smith's theory of regional ontologies. The notion of ontology used in this essay can be defined by the following characteristics: (1) The basic notions of the ontology should be defined in a manner that excludes equivocations of any kind. They should also be presented in a way that allows for an easy translation into a semi-formal language, in order to secure easy applicability for software engineers. (2) The hierarchical structure of the ontology should be that of an arbor porphyriana.

Date

9. 2.2017 19:22:59

0.07317951 = product of:
  0.10976927 = sum of:
    0.08966068 = weight(_text_:systematic in 48) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08966068 = score(doc=48,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.28397155 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.715473 = idf(docFreq=395, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049684696 = queryNorm
        0.31573826 = fieldWeight in 48, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.715473 = idf(docFreq=395, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=48)
    0.020108584 = product of:
      0.04021717 = sum of:
        0.04021717 = weight(_text_:indexing in 48) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04021717 = score(doc=48,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19018644 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049684696 = queryNorm
            0.21146181 = fieldWeight in 48, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.8278677 = idf(docFreq=2614, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=48)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

The "Folktales and Facets" project proposes ways to enhance access to folktales-in written and audiovisual formats-through the systematic and rigorous development of user-focused and task-focused models of information representation. Methods used include cognitive task analysis and facet analysis to better understand the information-seeking and information-use practices of people working with folktales and the intellectual dimensions of the domain. Interviews were conducted with 9 informants, representing scholars, storytellers, and teachers who rely on folktales in their professional lives to determine common tasks across user groups. Four tasks were identified: collect, create, instruct, and study. Facet analysis was conducted on the transcripts of these interviews, and a representative set of literature that included subject indexing material and a random stratified set of document surrogates drawn from a collection of folktales, including bibliographic records, introductions, reviews, tables of contents, and bibliographies. Eight facets were identified as most salient for this group of users: agent, association, context, documentation, location, subject, time, and viewpoint. Implications include the need for systems designers to devise methods for harvesting and integrating extant contextual material into search and discovery systems, and to take into account user-desired features in the development of enhanced services for digital repositories.

0.07099311 = product of:
  0.10648966 = sum of:
    0.08966068 = weight(_text_:systematic in 2638) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08966068 = score(doc=2638,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.28397155 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.715473 = idf(docFreq=395, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049684696 = queryNorm
        0.31573826 = fieldWeight in 2638, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.715473 = idf(docFreq=395, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2638)
    0.016828977 = product of:
      0.033657953 = sum of:
        0.033657953 = weight(_text_:22 in 2638) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.033657953 = score(doc=2638,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17398734 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049684696 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2638, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2638)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

In the context of online question-answering services, an intermediary clarifies the user's needs by eliciting additional information. This research proposes that these elicitations will depend on the type of question. In particular, this research explores the relationship between three constructs: question types, elicitations, and the fee that is paid for the answer. These relationships are explored for a few different question typologies, including a new kind of question type that we call Identity. It is found that the kinds of clarifications that intermediaries elicit depend on the type of question in systematic ways. A practical implication is that interactive question-answering services-whether human or automated-can be steered to focus attention on the kinds of clarification that are evidently most needed for that question type. Further, it is found that certain question types, as well as the number of elicitations, are associated with higher fees. This means that it may be possible to define a pricing structure for question-answering services based on objective and predictable characteristics of the question, which would help to establish a rational market for this type of information service. The newly introduced Identity question type was found to be especially reliable in predicting elicitations and fees.

Date

22. 1.2016 11:58:25

0.042266455 = product of:
  0.12679936 = sum of:
    0.12679936 = weight(_text_:systematic in 1756) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.12679936 = score(doc=1756,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.28397155 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.715473 = idf(docFreq=395, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049684696 = queryNorm
        0.44652134 = fieldWeight in 1756, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.715473 = idf(docFreq=395, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1756)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Purpose - The purpose of this review is to draw out patterns of information seeking behavior of graduate students as described in the empirical research published from 1997 to the present. Design/methodology/approach - A systematic search of databases for studies on information behavior and graduate students was employed in order to retrieve studies for a systematic review. Common themes that emerged from the literature were synthesized into a discussion of behavior patterns. Additionally a study quality analysis was conducted for all retrieved studies using a critical appraisal checklist for library and information research. Findings - This review revealed that graduate students begin their research on the internet much like any other information seeker, consult their faculty advisors before other people, and use libraries in diverse ways depending on the discipline studied. Additionally differences were noted between international and home students, and doctoral and master's students. Practical implications - The findings of this review indicate that information behavior research conducted on graduate students should delineate between masters' and doctoral students. Further, the findings may inform both academic librarian and faculty practice as to how to assist students with their research by helping them to understand how students typically approach research and how other institutions address common issues with special populations, such as non-native speakers and distance learners. Originality/value - No comprehensive review of information behavior studies, encompassing only the behaviors of graduate students has been conducted to date.

0.042266455 = product of:
  0.12679936 = sum of:
    0.12679936 = weight(_text_:systematic in 2218) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.12679936 = score(doc=2218,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.28397155 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.715473 = idf(docFreq=395, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049684696 = queryNorm
        0.44652134 = fieldWeight in 2218, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.715473 = idf(docFreq=395, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2218)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The quality of online health information for consumers has been a critical issue that concerns all stakeholders in healthcare. To gain an understanding of how quality is evaluated, this systematic review examined 165 articles in which researchers evaluated the quality of consumer-oriented health information on the web against predefined criteria. It was found that studies typically evaluated quality in relation to the substance and formality of content, as well as to the design of technological platforms. Attention to design, particularly interactivity, privacy, and social and cultural appropriateness is on the rise, which suggests the permeation of a user-centered perspective into the evaluation of health information systems, and a growing recognition of the need to study these systems from a social-technical perspective. Researchers used many preexisting instruments to facilitate evaluation of the formality of content; however, only a few were used in multiple studies, and their validity was questioned. The quality of content (i.e., accuracy and completeness) was always evaluated using proprietary instruments constructed based on medical guidelines or textbooks. The evaluation results revealed that the quality of health information varied across medical domains and across websites, and that the overall quality remained problematic. Future research is needed to examine the quality of user-generated content and to explore opportunities offered by emerging new media that can facilitate the consumer evaluation of health information.

0.042266455 = product of:
  0.12679936 = sum of:
    0.12679936 = weight(_text_:systematic in 5292) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.12679936 = score(doc=5292,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.28397155 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.715473 = idf(docFreq=395, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049684696 = queryNorm
        0.44652134 = fieldWeight in 5292, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.715473 = idf(docFreq=395, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5292)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The Internet has become the first source of consumer health information. Most theoretical and empirical studies are centered on information needs and seeking, rather than on information outcomes. This review's purpose is to explore and explain health outcomes of Online Consumer Health Information (OCHI) in primary care. A participatory systematic mixed studies review with a framework synthesis was undertaken. Starting from an initial conceptual framework, our specific objectives were to (a) identify types of OCHI outcomes in primary care, (b) identify factors associated with these outcomes, and (c) integrate these factors and outcomes into a comprehensive revised framework combining an information theory and a psychosocial theory of behavior. The results of 65 included studies were synthesized using a qualitative thematic data analysis. The themes derived from the literature underwent a harmonization process that produced a comprehensive typology of OCHI outcomes. The revised conceptual framework specifies four individual and one organizational level of OCHI outcomes, while including factors such as consumers' information needs and four interdependent contextual factors. It contributes to theoretical knowledge about OCHI health outcomes, and informs future research, information assessment methods, and tools to help consumers find and use health information.

0.029886894 = product of:
  0.08966068 = sum of:
    0.08966068 = weight(_text_:systematic in 4244) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08966068 = score(doc=4244,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.28397155 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.715473 = idf(docFreq=395, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049684696 = queryNorm
        0.31573826 = fieldWeight in 4244, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.715473 = idf(docFreq=395, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4244)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Purpose The current understanding of serendipity is based primarily on studies employing westerners as the participants, and it remains uncertain whether or not this understanding would be pervasive under different cultures, such as in China. In addition, there is not a sufficient systematic investigation of context during the occurrence of serendipity in current studies. The purpose of this paper is to examine the above issues by conducting a follow-up empirical study with a group of Chinese scholars. Design/methodology/approach The social media application "WeChat" was employed as a research tool. A diary-based study was conducted and 16 participants were required to send to the researchers any cases of serendipity they encountered during a period of two weeks, and this was followed by a post-interview. Findings Chinese scholars experienced serendipity in line with the three main processes of: encountering unexpectedness, connection-making and recognising the value. An updated context-based serendipity model was constructed, where the role of context during each episode of experiencing serendipity was identified, including the external context (e.g. time, location and status), the social context and the internal context (e.g. precipitating conditions, sagacity/perceptiveness and emotion). Originality/value The updated context model provides a further understanding of the role played by context during the different processes of serendipity. The framework for experiencing serendipity has been expanded, and this may be used to classify the categories of serendipity.

0.023909515 = product of:
  0.07172854 = sum of:
    0.07172854 = weight(_text_:systematic in 303) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07172854 = score(doc=303,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.28397155 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.715473 = idf(docFreq=395, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049684696 = queryNorm
        0.2525906 = fieldWeight in 303, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.715473 = idf(docFreq=395, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=303)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to examine the question of whether modern digital information technologies damage their users' cognitive capacities in some way, and to speculate on how librarians should adapt their services as a consequence of the controversy surrounding this question. Design/methodology/approach - The paper reviews some recent literature on this subject, combined with an examination of the role played by technology, librarians and government in determining the nature of our society's response to problematic aspects of the use of digital, internet-based applications in education. Findings - The paper finds that highly differentiated and highly polemical attitudes to this subject mean that librarians have to acknowledge the existence of important challenges to the apparent consensus about the way information technologies should be used in education in Western societies. This has important consequences for the approach to collection building (the balance between digital versus print provision), for library building design, and for the value which should be placed on systematic information literacy teaching. The existence of such an important debate should also embolden information professionals to make their own insights into these issues more widely known. Research limitations/implications - Some of the findings in this paper are amenable to further development through practitioner-oriented research; however, the bulk of the content used for this paper is derived from the literature on this topic, so there is no original research data presented to back up the assertions made by the author. It is simply an account of a debate which has to be acknowledged by librarians. Practical implications - The implications of the issues under discussion in the paper are presented in clear practical terms, and the consequences for library management made explicit. Social implications - The clash between two different theories of learning and information provision is debated and the links with issues of government policy are explored. The social connections between education and wealth generation are brought into this debate. Originality/value - The paper provides a useful, up-to-date briefing on recent controversial issues in education, information management and socio-economic policy making.

0.011219318 = product of:
  0.033657953 = sum of:
    0.033657953 = product of:
      0.06731591 = sum of:
        0.06731591 = weight(_text_:22 in 3341) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06731591 = score(doc=3341,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17398734 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049684696 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 3341, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3341)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

22. 1.2017 16:45:48

0.009519908 = product of:
  0.028559722 = sum of:
    0.028559722 = product of:
      0.057119444 = sum of:
        0.057119444 = weight(_text_:22 in 2658) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.057119444 = score(doc=2658,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.17398734 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049684696 = queryNorm
            0.32829654 = fieldWeight in 2658, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2658)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Dass eine erfolgreiche Suche nach im Unternehmen vorhandenen Informationen oftmals schwieriger zu bewerkstelligen ist als eine Suche im Internet, wird in der Privatwirtschaft zunehmend als Problem gesehen. Enterprise Search ist eine Strategie, diesem Problem zu begegnen. In einer Studie mit explorativem Charakter wurde der Frage nachgegangen, wie es um den Stand unternehmensweiten Suche in österreichischen Unternehmen bestellt ist. m Rahmen einer Onlinebefragung wurden dazu im März / April 2009 469 Unternehmen befragt. Es beteiligten sich 104 Unternehmen. Das entspricht einem Rücklauf von 22 %. Dieser Beitrag gibt Auskunft über Status quo der unternehmensweiten Informationsorganisation und -suche in Österreich und benennt unternehmens- bzw. personengebundene Faktoren, die darauf Einfluss haben. Im einzelnen werden Ergebnisse zu folgenden Aspekten präsentiert: Regelung der Informationsorganisation; Anreicherung unstrukturierter Informationen mit Metadaten; Probleme bei der Suche nach unternehmensinternen Informationen; täglicher Zeitaufwand für die Suche; vorhandene, wünschenswerte und benötigte Suchfunktionalitäten; Zufriedenheit mit der Suche und der Informationsorganisation Unternehmen.

Date

22. 1.2016 19:00:02

0.008975455 = product of:
  0.026926363 = sum of:
    0.026926363 = product of:
      0.053852726 = sum of:
        0.053852726 = weight(_text_:22 in 1739) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.053852726 = score(doc=1739,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17398734 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049684696 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 1739, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1739)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Source

Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 66(2015) H.1, S.22-28

0.007933255 = product of:
  0.023799766 = sum of:
    0.023799766 = product of:
      0.04759953 = sum of:
        0.04759953 = weight(_text_:22 in 2657) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04759953 = score(doc=2657,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.17398734 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049684696 = queryNorm
            0.27358043 = fieldWeight in 2657, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2657)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Die Arbeit geht dem Status quo der unternehmensweiten Suche in österreichischen Großunternehmen nach und beleuchtet Faktoren, die darauf Einfluss haben. Aus der Analyse des Ist-Zustands wird der Bedarf an Enterprise-Search-Software abgeleitet und es werden Rahmenbedingungen für deren erfolgreiche Einführung skizziert. Die Untersuchung stützt sich auf eine im Jahr 2009 durchgeführte Onlinebefragung von 469 österreichischen Großunternehmen (Rücklauf 22 %) und daran anschließende Leitfadeninterviews mit zwölf Teilnehmern der Onlinebefragung. Der theoretische Teil verortet die Arbeit im Kontext des Informations- und Wissensmanagements. Der Fokus liegt auf dem Ansatz der Enterprise Search, ihrer Abgrenzung gegenüber der Suche im Internet und ihrem Leistungsspektrum. Im empirischen Teil wird zunächst aufgezeigt, wie die Unternehmen ihre Informationen organisieren und welche Probleme dabei auftreten. Es folgt eine Analyse des Status quo der Informati-onssuche im Unternehmen. Abschließend werden Bekanntheit und Einsatz von Enterprise-Search-Software in der Zielgruppe untersucht sowie für die Einführung dieser Software nötige Rahmenbedingungen benannt. Defizite machen die Befragten insbesondere im Hinblick auf die übergreifende Suche im Unternehmen und die Suche nach Kompetenzträgern aus. Hier werden Lücken im Wissensmanagement offenbar. 29 % der Respondenten der Onlinebefragung geben zu-dem an, dass es in ihren Unternehmen gelegentlich bis häufig zu Fehlentscheidungen infolge defizitärer Informationslagen kommt. Enterprise-Search-Software kommt in 17 % der Unternehmen, die sich an der Onlinebefragung beteiligten, zum Einsatz. Die durch Enterprise-Search-Software bewirkten Veränderungen werden grundsätzlich posi-tiv beurteilt. Alles in allem zeigen die Ergebnisse, dass Enterprise-Search-Strategien nur Erfolg haben können, wenn man sie in umfassende Maßnahmen des Informations- und Wissensmanagements einbettet.

Date

22. 1.2016 20:40:31

0.007853523 = product of:
  0.023560567 = sum of:
    0.023560567 = product of:
      0.047121134 = sum of:
        0.047121134 = weight(_text_:22 in 2543) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.047121134 = score(doc=2543,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17398734 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049684696 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2543, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2543)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Im vorliegenden Beitrag werden die Ergebnisse einer Analyse zusammengefasst, in der untersucht wurde, ob, und wenn ja welche Services für das Management von publikationsbezogenen Forschungsdaten gegenwärtig bei wissenschaftlichen Infrastrukturdienstleistern in den Sozial- und Wirtschaftswissenschaften bestehen. Die Analyse wurde Mithilfe von Desktop-Research sowie einer Online-Befragung, an der sich 22 von 46 angeschriebenen Institutionen beteiligten, durchgeführt. Untersucht wurden vor allem deutsche und europäische Forschungsdatenzentren, Bibliotheken und Archive. Insbesondere wurde untersucht, ob diese Organisationen extern erzeugte Forschungsdaten, den dazugehörigen Berechnungscode (Syntax) und ggf. genutzte (selbstgeschriebene) Software grundsätzlich speichern und hosten. Weitere Themenfelder waren Metadatenstandards, Persistente Identifikatoren, Verfügbarkeit von Schnittstellen (APIs) und Unterstützung von semantischen Technologien.

0.0067315903 = product of:
  0.02019477 = sum of:
    0.02019477 = product of:
      0.04038954 = sum of:
        0.04038954 = weight(_text_:22 in 4954) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04038954 = score(doc=4954,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17398734 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049684696 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4954, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4954)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

16. 3.2019 14:33:22

0.0067315903 = product of:
  0.02019477 = sum of:
    0.02019477 = product of:
      0.04038954 = sum of:
        0.04038954 = weight(_text_:22 in 3069) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04038954 = score(doc=3069,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17398734 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049684696 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3069, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3069)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

28. 7.2016 16:22:54

0.006346605 = product of:
  0.019039813 = sum of:
    0.019039813 = product of:
      0.038079627 = sum of:
        0.038079627 = weight(_text_:22 in 166) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.038079627 = score(doc=166,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.17398734 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049684696 = queryNorm
            0.21886435 = fieldWeight in 166, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=166)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

29. 5.2012 14:20:22

Source

¬Die Kraft der digitalen Unordnung: 32. Arbeits- und Fortbildungstagung der ASpB e. V., Sektion 5 im Deutschen Bibliotheksverband, 22.-25. September 2009 in der Universität Karlsruhe. Hrsg: Jadwiga Warmbrunn u.a

0.005609659 = product of:
  0.016828977 = sum of:
    0.016828977 = product of:
      0.033657953 = sum of:
        0.033657953 = weight(_text_:22 in 3997) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.033657953 = score(doc=3997,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17398734 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049684696 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 3997, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3997)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The aim of this study was to measure the efficiency of the system by which scientists worldwide communicate results to each other, providing one measure of the degree to which the system, including all media, functions well. A randomly selected and representative sample of 246 active research scientists worldwide was surveyed. The main measure was the reported rate of "late finds": scientific literature that would have been useful to scientists' projects if it had been found at the beginning of these projects. The main result was that 46% of the sample reported late finds (±6.25%, p0.05). Among respondents from European Union countries or other countries classified as "high income" by the World Bank, 42% reported late finds. Among respondents from low- and middle-income countries, 56% reported late finds. The 42% rate in high-income countries in 2009 can be compared with results of earlier surveys by Martyn (1964a, b, 1987). These earlier surveys found a rate of 22% late finds in 1963-1964 and a rate of 27% in 1985-1986. Respondents were also queried about search habits, but this study failed to support any explanations for this increase in the rate of late finds. This study also permits a crude estimate of the cost in time and money of the increase in late finds.

0.005609659 = product of:
  0.016828977 = sum of:
    0.016828977 = product of:
      0.033657953 = sum of:
        0.033657953 = weight(_text_:22 in 667) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.033657953 = score(doc=667,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17398734 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049684696 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 667, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=667)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

22. 3.2013 19:41:17

0.005609659 = product of:
  0.016828977 = sum of:
    0.016828977 = product of:
      0.033657953 = sum of:
        0.033657953 = weight(_text_:22 in 2643) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.033657953 = score(doc=2643,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17398734 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049684696 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2643, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2643)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

22. 1.2016 12:24:05

0.005609659 = product of:
  0.016828977 = sum of:
    0.016828977 = product of:
      0.033657953 = sum of:
        0.033657953 = weight(_text_:22 in 3340) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.033657953 = score(doc=3340,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17398734 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049684696 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 3340, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3340)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Source

Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 68(2017) no.1, S.22-35