Search (4 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × classification_ss:"54.08 Informatik in Beziehung zu Mensch und Gesellschaft"
  1. Kling, R.; Rosenbaum, H.; Sawyer, S.: Understanding and communicating social informatics : a framework for studying and teaching the human contexts of information and communication technologies (2005) 0.03
    0.025946397 = product of:
      0.07783919 = sum of:
        0.07783919 = sum of:
          0.058926824 = weight(_text_:page in 3312) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.058926824 = score(doc=3312,freq=6.0), product of:
              0.27565226 = queryWeight, product of:
                5.5854197 = idf(docFreq=450, maxDocs=44218)
                0.049352113 = queryNorm
              0.21377233 = fieldWeight in 3312, product of:
                2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                  6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                5.5854197 = idf(docFreq=450, maxDocs=44218)
                0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=3312)
          0.018912364 = weight(_text_:22 in 3312) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.018912364 = score(doc=3312,freq=4.0), product of:
              0.1728227 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.049352113 = queryNorm
              0.109432176 = fieldWeight in 3312, product of:
                2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                  4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=3312)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Classification
    303.48/33 22
    DDC
    303.48/33 22
    Footnote
    The opening chapter provides a 10-page introduction to social informatics and identifies three high-level subdomains of the field: the normative, analytical, and critical orientations. Chapter 2 then narrows the focus to the social, technical, and institutional nature and consequences of ICTs, and provides a well-chosen review and analysis of social informatics research, mostly case studies of system implementations gone wrong. The recurring finding in these cases is that the social and institutional context of the system implementation was not sufficiently accounted for. In light of these concrete examples, the value and applicability of a social informatics perspective becomes clear. The chapters are organized exceptionally well, with bullet points and tables summarizing core ideas. One particularly good example of the organization of ideas is a table comparing designer-centric and social design views on the task of designing ICTs for workplaces (p. 42). Included are the different views of work, intended goals, design assumptions, and technological choices inherent in each design philosophy. Readers can immediately grasp how a social informatics perspective, as opposed to the more traditional designer-centric perspective, would result in significant differences in the design of workplace ICTs. The chapter titled, "Social Informatics for Designers, Developers, and Implementers of ICT Based Systems," provides an extremely focused introduction to the importance of social informatics for system builders, with more examples of large-scale system breakdowns resulting from failure to account for context, such as the 1988 destruction of a civilian passenger jet in the Persian Gulf by the USS Vincennes. However, many of the chapter subheadings have promising titles such as "ICTs Rarely Cause Social Transformations" (p. 28), and though the findings of several studies that reach this conclusion are reviewed, this section is but a page in length and no dissenting findings are mentioned; this seems insufficient support for such a substantial claim. Throughout the book, conclusions from different studies are effectively juxtaposed and summarized to create a sense of a cohesive body of social informatics research findings, which are expressed in a very accessible manner. At the same time, the findings are discussed in relation to their applicability to diverse audiences outside the social informatics field: system designers and developers, ICT policy analysts, teachers of technical curricula, and ICT professionals. Anticipating and addressing the concerns of such a diverse group of audiences outside the field of social informatics is an admirable but overly ambitious goal to achieve in a 153-page book (not counting the excellent glossary, references, and appendices). For example, the chapter on social informatics for ICT policy analysts includes approximately twenty pages of ICT policy history in the U.S. and Europe, which seems a luxury in such a small volume. Though it is unquestionably relevant material, it does not fit well with the rest of the book and might be more effective as a stand-alone chapter for an information policy course, perhaps used in tandem with the introduction.
  2. Human perspectives in the Internet society : culture, psychology and gender; International Conference on Human Perspectives in the Internet Society <1, 2004, Cádiz> (2004) 0.02
    0.017644595 = product of:
      0.052933782 = sum of:
        0.052933782 = sum of:
          0.03402142 = weight(_text_:page in 91) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.03402142 = score(doc=91,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.27565226 = queryWeight, product of:
                5.5854197 = idf(docFreq=450, maxDocs=44218)
                0.049352113 = queryNorm
              0.123421505 = fieldWeight in 91, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                5.5854197 = idf(docFreq=450, maxDocs=44218)
                0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=91)
          0.018912364 = weight(_text_:22 in 91) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.018912364 = score(doc=91,freq=4.0), product of:
              0.1728227 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.049352113 = queryNorm
              0.109432176 = fieldWeight in 91, product of:
                2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                  4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=91)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Classification
    303.48/33 22 (LoC)
    DDC
    303.48/33 22 (LoC)
    Footnote
    The editorial and peer review processes appear to be slightly spotty in application. All of the 55 papers are in English but a few of them are in such need of basic editing that they are almost incomprehensible in sections. Consider, for example, the following: "So, the meaning of region where we are studying on, should be discovered and then affect on the final plan" (p. 346). The collection shows a strong array of methodological approaches including quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods studies; however, a few of the research efforts exhibit fundamental design flaws. Consider, for example, the study that "set[s] out to show that nurses as care-givers find it difficult to transfer any previously acquired technological skills into their work based on technology needs (p. 187). After studying 39 female and 6 male nurses, this study finds, not surprisingly, exactly what it "set out" to find. Rather than noting the limitations of sample size and data gathering techniques, the paper firmly concludes that nurses can be technologists "only in areas of technology that support their primary role as carers" (p. 188). Finally, some of the papers do not report on original research but are competent, if brief, summaries of theories or concepts that are covered in equal depth elsewhere. For example, a three-page summary of "the major personality and learning theories" (p. 3) is useful but lacks the intellectual depth or insight needed to contribute substantially to the field. These problems with composition, methodological rigor, and theoretical depth are not uncommon in papers designed for a broadly defined conference theme. The authors may have been writing for an in-person audience and anticipating thoughtful postpresentation discussions; they probably had no idea of the heavy price tag put on their work. The editors, however, might have kept that $256 in mind and exercised a heavier editorial hand. Perhaps the publisher could have paid for a careful subject indexing of the work as a substantive addition to the author index provided. The complexity of the subject domains included in the volume certainly merits careful indexing.
  3. Rogers, R.: Information politics on the Web (2004) 0.01
    0.007852051 = product of:
      0.023556152 = sum of:
        0.023556152 = weight(_text_:query in 442) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023556152 = score(doc=442,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.22937049 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.6476326 = idf(docFreq=1151, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049352113 = queryNorm
            0.10269914 = fieldWeight in 442, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.6476326 = idf(docFreq=1151, maxDocs=44218)
              0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=442)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Footnote
    Chapter 2 examines the politics of information retrieval in the context of collaborative filtering techniques. Rogers begins by discussing the underpinnings of modern search engine design by examining medieval practices of knowledge seeking, following up with a critique of the collaborative filtering techniques. Rogers's major contention is that collaborative filtering rids us of user idiosyncrasies as search query strings, preferences, and recommendations are shared among users and without much care for the differences among them, both in terms of their innate characteristics and also their search goals. To illustrate Rogers' critiques of collaborative filtering, he describes an information searching experiment that he conducted with students at University of Vienna and University of Amsterdam. Students were asked to search for information on Viagra. As one can imagine, depending on a number of issues, not the least of which is what sources did one extract information from, a student would find different accounts of reality about Viagra, everything from a medical drug to a black-market drug ideal for underground trade. Rogers described how information on the Web differed from official accounts for certain events. The information on the Web served as an alternative reality. Chapter 3 describes the Web as a dynamic debate-mapping tool, a political instrument. Rogers introduces the "Issue Barometer," an information instrument that measures the social pressure on a topic being debated by analyzing data available from the Web. Measures used by the Issue Barometer include temperature of the issue (cold to hot), activity level of the debate (mild to intense), and territorialization (one country to many countries). The Issues Barometer is applied to an illustrative case of the public debate surrounding food safety in the Netherlands in 2001. Chapter 4 introduces "The Web Issue Index," which provides an indication of leading societal issues discussed on the Web. The empirical research on the Web Issues Index was conducted on the Genoa G8 Summit in 1999 and the anti-globalization movement. Rogers focus here was to examine the changing nature of prominent issues over time, i.e., how issues gained and lost attention and traction over time.
  4. Boczkowski, P.; Mitchelstein, E.: ¬The digital environment : How we live, learn, work, and play now (2021) 0.00
    0.004457687 = product of:
      0.013373061 = sum of:
        0.013373061 = product of:
          0.026746122 = sum of:
            0.026746122 = weight(_text_:22 in 1003) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.026746122 = score(doc=1003,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1728227 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049352113 = queryNorm
                0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 1003, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1003)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Date
    22. 6.2023 18:25:18

Types