Search (9 results, page 1 of 1)

0.064758785 = product of:
  0.097138174 = sum of:
    0.07432476 = weight(_text_:objects in 1451) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07432476 = score(doc=1451,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.25313336 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.315071 = idf(docFreq=590, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047625583 = queryNorm
        0.29361898 = fieldWeight in 1451, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.315071 = idf(docFreq=590, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1451)
    0.022813417 = product of:
      0.045626834 = sum of:
        0.045626834 = weight(_text_:22 in 1451) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.045626834 = score(doc=1451,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.16677667 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047625583 = queryNorm
            0.27358043 = fieldWeight in 1451, 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=1451)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Previous studies of user-generated vocabularies (e.g., Golder & Huberman, 2006; Munk & Mork, 2007b; Yoon, 2009) have proposed that a primary source of tag agreement across users is due to wide-spread use of tags at the basic level of abstraction. However, an investigation of levels of abstraction in user-generated tagging vocabularies did not support this notion. This study analyzed approximately 8000 tags generated by 40 subjects. Analysis of 7617 tags assigned to 36 online resources representing four content categories (TOOL, FRUIT, CLOTHING, VEHICLE) and three resource genres (news article, blog, ecommerce) did not find statistically significant preferences in the assignment of tags at the superordinate, subordinate or basic levels of abstraction. Within the framework of Heidegger's (1953/1996) notion of handiness , observed variations in the preferred level of abstraction are both natural and phenomenological in that perception and understanding -- and thus the meaning of "things" -- arise out of the individual's contextualized experiences of engaging with objects. Operationalization of superordinate, subordinate and basic levels of abstraction using Heidegger's notion of handiness may be able to account for differences in the everyday experiences and activities of taggers, thereby leading to a better understanding of user-generated tagging vocabularies.

Date

5. 9.2014 16:22:27

Source

Knowledge organization in the 21st century: between historical patterns and future prospects. Proceedings of the Thirteenth International ISKO Conference 19-22 May 2014, Kraków, Poland. Ed.: Wieslaw Babik

0.0297299 = product of:
  0.0891897 = sum of:
    0.0891897 = weight(_text_:objects in 3290) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0891897 = score(doc=3290,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.25313336 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.315071 = idf(docFreq=590, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047625583 = queryNorm
        0.35234275 = fieldWeight in 3290, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.315071 = idf(docFreq=590, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3290)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Social tagging is one of the major phenomena transforming the World Wide Web from a static platform into an actively shared information space. This paper addresses various aspects of social tagging, including different views on the nature of social tagging, how to make use of social tags, and how to bridge social tagging with other Web functionalities; it discusses the use of facets to facilitate browsing and searching of tagging data; and it presents an analogy between bibliometrics and tagometrics, arguing that established bibliometric methodologies can be applied to analyze tagging behavior on the Web. Based on the Upper Tag Ontology (UTO), a Web crawler was built to harvest tag data from Delicious, Flickr, and YouTube in September 2007. In total, 1.8 million objects, including bookmarks, photos, and videos, 3.1 million taggers, and 12.1 million tags were collected and analyzed. Some tagging patterns and variations are identified and discussed.

0.0297299 = product of:
  0.0891897 = sum of:
    0.0891897 = weight(_text_:objects in 2108) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0891897 = score(doc=2108,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.25313336 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.315071 = idf(docFreq=590, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047625583 = queryNorm
        0.35234275 = fieldWeight in 2108, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.315071 = idf(docFreq=590, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2108)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Studies of user-generated tagging vocabularies (e.g., Yoon 2009) suggest that tag agreement across users is due to wide-spread use of basic level category terms. This study investigated whether differences in the superordinate, subordinate or basic level of abstraction were influenced by resource content. Analysis of 7617 tags assigned by 40 participants to 36 online resources representing four content categories (i.e., TOOL, FRUIT, CLOTHING, VEHICLE) found significant differences in the frequency of occurrence of subordinate and basic level tags assigned to resources in the FRUIT content category and of superordinate and basic level tags assigned to resources in the CLOTHING content category. This study suggests that variation in the level of abstraction of content related tags is natural in that perception and understanding arise out of the individual's contextualized experiences of engaging with objects.

0.02477492 = product of:
  0.07432476 = sum of:
    0.07432476 = weight(_text_:objects in 40) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07432476 = score(doc=40,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.25313336 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.315071 = idf(docFreq=590, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047625583 = queryNorm
        0.29361898 = fieldWeight in 40, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.315071 = idf(docFreq=590, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=40)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

0.02477492 = product of:
  0.07432476 = sum of:
    0.07432476 = weight(_text_:objects in 859) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07432476 = score(doc=859,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.25313336 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.315071 = idf(docFreq=590, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047625583 = queryNorm
        0.29361898 = fieldWeight in 859, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.315071 = idf(docFreq=590, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=859)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

0.007528044 = product of:
  0.022584131 = sum of:
    0.022584131 = product of:
      0.045168262 = sum of:
        0.045168262 = weight(_text_:22 in 119) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.045168262 = score(doc=119,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16677667 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047625583 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 119, 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=119)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Pages

S.16-22

0.006452609 = product of:
  0.019357827 = sum of:
    0.019357827 = product of:
      0.038715653 = sum of:
        0.038715653 = weight(_text_:22 in 2945) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.038715653 = score(doc=2945,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16677667 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047625583 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2945, 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=2945)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Argues that Beghtol's (2003) use of the terms "naive classification" and "professional classification" is valid because they are nominal definitions and that the distinction between these two types of classification points up the need for researchers in knowledge organization to broaden their scope beyond traditional classification systems intended for information retrieval. Argues that work by Beghtol (2003), Kwasnik (1999) and Bailey (1994) offer direction for the development of a classification of classifications based on the pragmatic dimensions of extant classification systems. Bezugnahme auf: Beghtol, C.: Naïve classification systems and the global information society. In: Knowledge organization and the global information society: Proceedings of the 8th International ISKO Conference 13-16 July 2004, London, UK. Ed.: I.C. McIlwaine. Würzburg: Ergon Verlag 2004. S.19-22. (Advances in knowledge organization; vol.9)

0.006452609 = product of:
  0.019357827 = sum of:
    0.019357827 = product of:
      0.038715653 = sum of:
        0.038715653 = weight(_text_:22 in 302) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.038715653 = score(doc=302,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16677667 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047625583 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 302, 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=302)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

10. 9.2000 17:38:22

0.0043017394 = product of:
  0.012905218 = sum of:
    0.012905218 = product of:
      0.025810435 = sum of:
        0.025810435 = weight(_text_:22 in 1450) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.025810435 = score(doc=1450,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16677667 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047625583 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 1450, 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=1450)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Source

Knowledge organization in the 21st century: between historical patterns and future prospects. Proceedings of the Thirteenth International ISKO Conference 19-22 May 2014, Kraków, Poland. Ed.: Wieslaw Babik