Search (542 results, page 1 of 28)

0.09781248 = product of:
  0.19562496 = sum of:
    0.19562496 = sum of:
      0.16137141 = weight(_text_:light in 5077) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.16137141 = score(doc=5077,freq=6.0), product of:
          0.2920221 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.7753086 = idf(docFreq=372, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050563898 = queryNorm
          0.55259997 = fieldWeight in 5077, product of:
            2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
              6.0 = termFreq=6.0
            5.7753086 = idf(docFreq=372, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5077)
      0.034253553 = weight(_text_:22 in 5077) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.034253553 = score(doc=5077,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17706616 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050563898 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5077, 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=5077)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

How does information lead to changes in human behavior? Why have current information theories been inadequate to shed light on this and related questions? Library and Information Science (LIS) has arrived at a crucial juncture in its relatively brief theoretical history. In addition to the cognitive and physical perspectives in our study of information, a new paradigm has been suggested; the affective paradigm. This new perspective offers keys to unlocking questions about the nature of the interaction of human and information. In recent years we have developed deeper knowledge and deeper specializations, drawing together and combining knowledge from multiple fields in order to advance our own knowledge. The relationship between information needs and information seeking has been well studied. The ways in which people use information is not as well understood because of the complex nature of human behavior. Drawing from other fields that study human behavior, however, muddies the traditional boundaries of LIS, creating some possible discomfort as we trespass into lesser known intellectual territory. Pushing our boundaries also forces questions of our self-identity as a discipline. What constitutes Library and Information Science, either in whole or in part, becomes more difficult to define and can lead to greater fragmentation. Alternatively, the incorporation of multiple perspectives may be the defining core of what constitutes LIS. The focus of this talk is to look at LIS from the outside in, from a multidisciplinary perspective, in order to shed light on questions of how information can lead to changes in human behavior. Drawing from other fields of study, the impact of information on human behavior will be explored in light of what other fields may have to offer.

Date

16. 3.2019 17:32:22

0.08919497 = product of:
  0.17838994 = sum of:
    0.17838994 = sum of:
      0.13043496 = weight(_text_:light in 1460) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.13043496 = score(doc=1460,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.2920221 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.7753086 = idf(docFreq=372, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050563898 = queryNorm
          0.44666123 = fieldWeight in 1460, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            5.7753086 = idf(docFreq=372, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1460)
      0.047954973 = weight(_text_:22 in 1460) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.047954973 = score(doc=1460,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17706616 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050563898 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 1460, 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=1460)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The paper examines whether subject headings in a bibliographic description could be used to direct users to relevant archival sources: a publication about a subject is likely to cite archival sources that are related to the subject. In the light of the data collected for the paper this approach might work in case of some keywords. However, there are also problems, like finding the optimal level the user should be directed to in the archival hierarchy, and the lack of information in archival persistent identifiers (PIDs).

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

0.07645283 = product of:
  0.15290566 = sum of:
    0.15290566 = sum of:
      0.11180139 = weight(_text_:light in 1468) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.11180139 = score(doc=1468,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.2920221 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.7753086 = idf(docFreq=372, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050563898 = queryNorm
          0.3828525 = fieldWeight in 1468, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            5.7753086 = idf(docFreq=372, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1468)
      0.04110426 = weight(_text_:22 in 1468) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04110426 = score(doc=1468,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17706616 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050563898 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1468, 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=1468)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

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

0.068468735 = product of:
  0.13693747 = sum of:
    0.13693747 = sum of:
      0.11295999 = weight(_text_:light in 5305) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.11295999 = score(doc=5305,freq=6.0), product of:
          0.2920221 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.7753086 = idf(docFreq=372, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050563898 = queryNorm
          0.38682 = fieldWeight in 5305, product of:
            2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
              6.0 = termFreq=6.0
            5.7753086 = idf(docFreq=372, maxDocs=44218)
            0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=5305)
      0.023977486 = weight(_text_:22 in 5305) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.023977486 = score(doc=5305,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17706616 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050563898 = queryNorm
          0.1354154 = fieldWeight in 5305, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=5305)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Are art and science separated by an unbridgeable divide? Can they find common ground? In this new book, neuroscientist Eric R. Kandel, whose remarkable scientific career and deep interest in art give him a unique perspective, demonstrates how science can inform the way we experience a work of art and seek to understand its meaning. Kandel illustrates how reductionism?the distillation of larger scientific or aesthetic concepts into smaller, more tractable components?has been used by scientists and artists alike to pursue their respective truths. He draws on his Nobel Prize-winning work revealing the neurobiological underpinnings of learning and memory in sea slugs to shed light on the complex workings of the mental processes of higher animals. In Reductionism in Art and Brain Science, Kandel shows how this radically reductionist approach, applied to the most complex puzzle of our time?the brain?has been employed by modern artists who distill their subjective world into color, form, and light. Kandel demonstrates through bottom-up sensory and top-down cognitive functions how science can explore the complexities of human perception and help us to perceive, appreciate, and understand great works of art. At the heart of the book is an elegant elucidation of the contribution of reductionism to the evolution of modern art and its role in a monumental shift in artistic perspective. Reductionism steered the transition from figurative art to the first explorations of abstract art reflected in the works of Turner, Monet, Kandinsky, Schoenberg, and Mondrian. Kandel explains how, in the postwar era, Pollock, de Kooning, Rothko, Louis, Turrell, and Flavin used a reductionist approach to arrive at their abstract expressionism and how Katz, Warhol, Close, and Sandback built upon the advances of the New York School to reimagine figurative and minimal art. Featuring captivating drawings of the brain alongside full-color reproductions of modern art masterpieces, this book draws out the common concerns of science and art and how they illuminate each other.

Content

The emergence of a reductionist school of abstract art in New York -- The Beginning of a Scientific Approach to Art -- The Biology of the Beholder's Share: Visual Perception and Bottom-Up Processing in Art -- The Biology of Learning and Memory: Top-Down Processing in Art -- A Reductionist Approach to Art. Reductionism in the Emergence of Abstract Art -- Mondrian and the Radical Reduction of the Figurative Image -- The New York School of Painters -- How the Brain Processes and Perceives Abstract Images -- From Figuration to Color Abstraction -- Color and the Brain -- A Focus on Light -- A Reductionist Influence on Figuration -- The Emerging Dialogue Between Abstract Art and Science. Why Is Reductionism Successful in Art? -- A Return to the Two Cultures

Date

14. 6.2019 12:22:37

0.066924065 = product of:
  0.13384813 = sum of:
    0.13384813 = product of:
      0.40154436 = sum of:
        0.40154436 = weight(_text_:3a in 1826) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.40154436 = score(doc=1826,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.42868128 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050563898 = queryNorm
            0.93669677 = fieldWeight in 1826, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1826)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

http://www.google.de/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=5&ved=0CDQQFjAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fdigbib.ubka.uni-karlsruhe.de%2Fvolltexte%2Fdocuments%2F3131107&ei=HzFWVYvGMsiNsgGTyoFI&usg=AFQjCNE2FHUeR9oQTQlNC4TPedv4Mo3DaQ&sig2=Rlzpr7a3BLZZkqZCXXN_IA&bvm=bv.93564037,d.bGg&cad=rja

0.06371069 = product of:
  0.12742138 = sum of:
    0.12742138 = sum of:
      0.09316782 = weight(_text_:light in 3509) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.09316782 = score(doc=3509,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.2920221 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.7753086 = idf(docFreq=372, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050563898 = queryNorm
          0.31904373 = fieldWeight in 3509, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            5.7753086 = idf(docFreq=372, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3509)
      0.034253553 = weight(_text_:22 in 3509) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.034253553 = score(doc=3509,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17706616 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050563898 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 3509, 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=3509)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

In light of ongoing debates about ontological vs. epistemological approaches to knowledge organization (KO), this paper examines E. C. Richardson's treatment of ontology and epistemology in his theory of classification. According to Richardson, there is a natural order of things in the world accessible to human cognition, which may be expressed in two classificatory orders: evolutionary classification, which ranges classes of things from the most simple to the most complex, and logical classification, which ranges classes of things in the inverse order, from the most complex to the most simple. Evolutionary classification reflects ontological order and logical classification reflects epistemological order: both are faces of a single natural order. Such a view requires adherence to a representationalist, or, in Hjorland's (2008) terms, positivist understanding of epistemology, wherein human knowledge faithfully mirrors the structure of the external world. Richardson's harmonization of ontology and epistemology will find little favor among proponents of the currently fashionable pragmatist approach to KO. Nevertheless, it constitutes an early version of what Gnoli (2004) terms a naturalistic epistemology, which, once deepened and clarified, offers the best prospects for an explicit expression of both the ontological and epistemological dimensions of knowledge within a single classification of general scope.

Pages

S.15-22

0.06371069 = product of:
  0.12742138 = sum of:
    0.12742138 = sum of:
      0.09316782 = weight(_text_:light in 4191) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.09316782 = score(doc=4191,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.2920221 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.7753086 = idf(docFreq=372, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050563898 = queryNorm
          0.31904373 = fieldWeight in 4191, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            5.7753086 = idf(docFreq=372, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4191)
      0.034253553 = weight(_text_:22 in 4191) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.034253553 = score(doc=4191,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17706616 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050563898 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4191, 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=4191)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The production of scientific knowledge has evolved from a process of inquiry largely based on the activities of individual scientists to one grounded in the collaborative efforts of specialized research teams. This shift brings to light a new question: how the composition of scientific teams affects their production of knowledge. This study employs data from 1,415 experiments conducted at the National High Magnetic Field Laboratory (NHMFL) between 2005 and 2008 to identify and select a sample of 89 teams and examine whether team diversity and network characteristics affect productivity. The study examines how the diversity of science teams along several variables affects overall team productivity. Results indicate several diversity measures associated with network position and team productivity. Teams with mixed institutional associations were more central to the overall network compared with teams that primarily comprised NHMFL's own scientists. Team cohesion was positively related to productivity. The study indicates that high productivity in teams is associated with high disciplinary diversity and low seniority diversity of team membership. Finally, an increase in the share of senior members negatively affects productivity, and teams with members in central structural positions perform better than other teams.

Date

22. 1.2011 13:19:42

0.06371069 = product of:
  0.12742138 = sum of:
    0.12742138 = sum of:
      0.09316782 = weight(_text_:light in 633) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.09316782 = score(doc=633,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.2920221 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.7753086 = idf(docFreq=372, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050563898 = queryNorm
          0.31904373 = fieldWeight in 633, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            5.7753086 = idf(docFreq=372, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=633)
      0.034253553 = weight(_text_:22 in 633) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.034253553 = score(doc=633,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17706616 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050563898 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 633, 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=633)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Considering the characteristics of hypertext systems and problems such as cognitive overload and the disorientation of users, this project studies subject hypertext documents that have undergone conceptual structuring using facets for content representation and improvement of information retrieval during navigation. The main objective was to assess the possibility of the application of topic map technology for automating the compatibilization process of these structures. For this purpose, two dissertations from the UFMG Information Science Post-Graduation Program were adopted as samples. Both dissertations had been duly analyzed and structured on the MHTX (Hypertextual Map) prototype database. The faceted structures of both dissertations, which had been represented in conceptual maps, were then converted into topic maps. It was then possible to use the merge property of the topic maps to promote the semantic interrelationship between the maps and, consequently, between the hypertextual information resources proper. The merge results were then analyzed in the light of theories dealing with the compatibilization of languages developed within the realm of information technology and librarianship from the 1960s on. The main goals accomplished were: (a) the detailed conceptualization of the merge process of the topic maps, considering the possible compatibilization levels and the applicability of this technology in the integration of faceted structures; and (b) the production of a detailed sequence of steps that may be used in the implementation of topic maps based on faceted structures.

Date

22. 2.2013 11:39:23

0.06371069 = product of:
  0.12742138 = sum of:
    0.12742138 = sum of:
      0.09316782 = weight(_text_:light in 2845) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.09316782 = score(doc=2845,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.2920221 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.7753086 = idf(docFreq=372, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050563898 = queryNorm
          0.31904373 = fieldWeight in 2845, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            5.7753086 = idf(docFreq=372, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2845)
      0.034253553 = weight(_text_:22 in 2845) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.034253553 = score(doc=2845,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17706616 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050563898 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2845, 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=2845)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The music information retrieval (MIR) community has long understood the role of evaluation as a critical component for successful information retrieval systems. Over the past several years, it has also become evident that user-centered evaluation based on realistic tasks is essential for creating systems that are commercially marketable. Although user-oriented research has been increasing, the MIR field is still lacking in holistic, user-centered approaches to evaluating music services beyond measuring the performance of search or classification algorithms. In light of this need, we conducted a user study exploring how users evaluate their overall experience with existing popular commercial music services, asking about their interactions with the system as well as situational and personal characteristics. In this paper, we present a qualitative heuristic evaluation of commercial music services based on Jakob Nielsen's 10 usability heuristics for user interface design, and also discuss 8 additional criteria that may be used for the holistic evaluation of user experience in MIR systems. Finally, we recommend areas of future user research raised by trends and patterns that surfaced from this user study.

Date

17. 3.2016 19:22:15

0.05096855 = product of:
  0.1019371 = sum of:
    0.1019371 = sum of:
      0.07453426 = weight(_text_:light in 1450) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.07453426 = score(doc=1450,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.2920221 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.7753086 = idf(docFreq=372, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050563898 = queryNorm
          0.255235 = fieldWeight in 1450, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            5.7753086 = idf(docFreq=372, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1450)
      0.027402842 = weight(_text_:22 in 1450) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.027402842 = score(doc=1450,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17706616 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050563898 = 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)

Abstract

LIS genre studies have suggested that representing the genre of a resource could provide better knowledge representation, organization and retrieval (e.g., Andersen, 2008; Crowston & Kwasnik, 2003). Beghtol (2001) argues that genre analysis could be a useful tool for creating a "framework of analysis for a domain ... [to] structure and interpret texts, events, ideas, decisions, explanations and every other human activity in that domain" (p. 19). Although some studies of user-generated tagging vocabularies have found a preponderance of content-related tags (e.g., Munk & Mork, 2007), Lamere's (2008) study of the most frequently applied tags at Last.fm found that tags representing musical genres were favored by taggers. Studies of user-generated genre tags suggest that, unlike traditional indexing, which generally assigns a single genre, users' assignments of genre-related tags provide better representation of the fuzziness at the boundaries of genre categories (Inskip, 2009). In this way, user-generated genre tags are more in line with Bakhtin's (Bakhtin & Medvedev, 1928/1985) conceptualization of genre as an "aggregate of the means for seeing and conceptualizin reality" (p. 137). For Bakhtin (1986), genres are kinds of practice characterized by their "addressivity" (p. 95): Different genres correspond to different "conceptions of the addressee" and are "determined by that area of human activity and everyday life to which the given utterance is related" (p.95). Miller (1984) argues that genre refers to a "conventional category of discourse based in large-scale typification of rhetorical action; as action, it acquires meaning from situation and from the social context in which that situation arose" (p. 163). Genre is part of a social context that produces, reproduces, modifies and ultimately represents a particular text, but how to reunite genre and situation (or text and context) in systems of knowledge organization has not been addressed. Based on Devitt's (1993) argument suggesting that "our construction of genre is what helps us to construct a situation" (p. 577), one way to represent genre as "typified rhetorical actions based in recurrent situations" (Miller, 1984, p. 159) would be to employ genre tags generated by a particular group or community of users. This study suggests application of social network analysis to detect communities (Newman, 2006) of genre taggers and argues that communities of genre taggers can better define the nature and constitution of a discourse community while simultaneously shedding light on multifaceted representations of the resource genres.

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

0.05096855 = product of:
  0.1019371 = sum of:
    0.1019371 = sum of:
      0.07453426 = weight(_text_:light in 2596) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.07453426 = score(doc=2596,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.2920221 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.7753086 = idf(docFreq=372, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050563898 = queryNorm
          0.255235 = fieldWeight in 2596, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            5.7753086 = idf(docFreq=372, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2596)
      0.027402842 = weight(_text_:22 in 2596) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.027402842 = score(doc=2596,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17706616 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050563898 = queryNorm
          0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 2596, 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=2596)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Purpose In contrast to the interest of describing and managing the social processes of knowing, information science and information and knowledge management research have put less emphasis on discussing how particular information becomes usable and how it is used in different contexts and situations. The purpose of this paper is to address this major gap, and introduce and discuss the applicability of the notion of situational appropriation of information for shedding light on this particular process in the context of daily information work practices of professionals. Design/methodology/approach The study is based on the analysis of 25 qualitative interviews of archives, library and museum professionals conducted in two Nordic countries. Findings The study presents examples of how individuals appropriate different tangible and intangible assets as information on the basis of the situation in hand. Research limitations/implications The study proposes a new conceptual tool for articulating and conducting research on the process how information becomes useful in the situation in hand. Practical implications The situational appropriation of information perspective redefines the role of information management to incorporate a comprehensive awareness of the situations when information is useful and is being used. A better understanding how information becomes useful in diverse situations helps to discern the active role of contextual and situational effects and to exploit and take them into account as a part of the management of information and knowledge processes. Originality/value In contrast to orthodoxies of information science and information and knowledge management research, the notion of situational appropriation of information represents an alternative approach to the conceptualisation of information utilisation. It helps to frame particular types of instances of information use that are not necessarily addressed within the objectivistic, information seeker or learning oriented paradigms of information and knowledge management.

Date

20. 1.2015 18:30:22

0.040342852 = product of:
  0.080685705 = sum of:
    0.080685705 = product of:
      0.16137141 = sum of:
        0.16137141 = weight(_text_:light in 4493) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.16137141 = score(doc=4493,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.2920221 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.7753086 = idf(docFreq=372, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050563898 = queryNorm
            0.55259997 = fieldWeight in 4493, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              5.7753086 = idf(docFreq=372, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4493)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Purpose - Classification is an important process in making sense of the world, and has a pronounced social dimension. This paper aims to compare folksonomy, a new social classification system currently being developed on the web, with conventional taxonomy in the light of theoretical sociological and anthropological approaches. The co-existence of these two types of classification system raises the questions: Will and should taxonomies be hybridized with folksonomies? What can each of these systems contribute to information-searching processes, and how can the sociology of knowledge provide an answer to these questions? This paper aims also to address these issues. Design/methodology/approach - This paper is situated at the meeting point of the sociology of knowledge, epistemology and information science and aims at examining systems of classification in the light of both classical theory and current late-modern sociological and anthropological approaches. Findings - Using theoretical approaches current in the sociology of science and knowledge, the paper envisages two divergent possible outcomes. Originality/value - While concentrating on classifications systems, this paper addresses the more general social issue of what we know and how it is known. The concept of hybrid knowledge is suggested in order to illuminate the epistemological basis of late-modern knowledge being constructed by hybridizing contradictory modern knowledge categories, such as the subjective with the objective and the social with the natural. Integrating tree-like taxonomies with folksonomies or, in other words, generating a naturalized structural order of objective relations with social, subjective classification systems, can create a vast range of hybrid knowledge.

0.040154435 = product of:
  0.08030887 = sum of:
    0.08030887 = product of:
      0.24092661 = sum of:
        0.24092661 = weight(_text_:3a in 400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.24092661 = score(doc=400,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.42868128 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050563898 = queryNorm
            0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 400, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=400)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

Vgl.: https%3A%2F%2Faclanthology.org%2FD19-5317.pdf&usg=AOvVaw0ZZFyq5wWTtNTvNkrvjlGA.

0.039527763 = product of:
  0.079055525 = sum of:
    0.079055525 = product of:
      0.15811105 = sum of:
        0.15811105 = weight(_text_:light in 3159) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.15811105 = score(doc=3159,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.2920221 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.7753086 = idf(docFreq=372, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050563898 = queryNorm
            0.5414352 = fieldWeight in 3159, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              5.7753086 = idf(docFreq=372, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3159)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Purpose - Library and information science (LIS) and the digital humanities are both interested in studying recorded information and often share institutional frameworks. The purpose of this paper is to go beyond outlining these similarities by examining the perceived and real strengths and weaknesses of both disciplines. Design/methodology/approach - Epistemologies and methods of both disciplines are analysed, principally in the light of the growing importance of data-intensive research, taking into consideration that there is a tension about the academic status of these disciplines. Findings - Epistemologies and methods of both disciplines are analysed, principally in the light of the growing importance of data-intensive research, taking into consideration that there is a tension about the academic status of these disciplines. Originality/value - The paper intends to be an add-on to the recent discussions and the evolving body of knowledge about the relationship of these disciplines with the hope of indicating a possible new direction in the development of LIS.

0.03726713 = product of:
  0.07453426 = sum of:
    0.07453426 = product of:
      0.14906852 = sum of:
        0.14906852 = weight(_text_:light in 2791) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.14906852 = score(doc=2791,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.2920221 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.7753086 = idf(docFreq=372, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050563898 = queryNorm
            0.51047 = fieldWeight in 2791, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.7753086 = idf(docFreq=372, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2791)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The paper presents a case for the revival of Colon Classification (CC). It traces the status of CC in brief and discusses its features. The author brings to light attempts made at providing a base for continuous improvements in the scheme and bringing it back to life. Measures for the revival of CC are suggested.

0.03726713 = product of:
  0.07453426 = sum of:
    0.07453426 = product of:
      0.14906852 = sum of:
        0.14906852 = weight(_text_:light in 2944) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.14906852 = score(doc=2944,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.2920221 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.7753086 = idf(docFreq=372, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050563898 = queryNorm
            0.51047 = fieldWeight in 2944, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.7753086 = idf(docFreq=372, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2944)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This issue of Jlis.it is focused on RDA, Resource Description and Access. In light of increasing international acceptance of this new cataloging content standard, the editors of Jlis.it wish to capture the background of how RDA came to be and the implications of its implementation at this time. This special issue offers a wide overview on the new guidelines from their making to their spreading around the world.

0.03645768 = product of:
  0.07291536 = sum of:
    0.07291536 = product of:
      0.14583072 = sum of:
        0.14583072 = weight(_text_:light in 1536) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.14583072 = score(doc=1536,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.2920221 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.7753086 = idf(docFreq=372, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050563898 = queryNorm
            0.49938247 = fieldWeight in 1536, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              5.7753086 = idf(docFreq=372, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1536)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Multiword expressions (MWEs) are lexical items that can be decomposed into single words and display lexical, syntactic, semantic, pragmatic and/or statistical idiosyncrasy (Sag et al., 2002; Kim, 2008; Calzolari et al., 2002). The proper treatment of multiword expressions such as rock 'n' roll and make a decision is essential for many natural language processing (NLP) applications like information extraction and retrieval, terminology extraction and machine translation, and it is important to identify multiword expressions in context. For example, in machine translation we must know that MWEs form one semantic unit, hence their parts should not be translated separately. For this, multiword expressions should be identified first in the text to be translated. The chief aim of this thesis is to develop machine learning-based approaches for the automatic detection of different types of multiword expressions in English and Hungarian natural language texts. In our investigations, we pay attention to the characteristics of different types of multiword expressions such as nominal compounds, multiword named entities and light verb constructions, and we apply novel methods to identify MWEs in raw texts. In the thesis it will be demonstrated that nominal compounds and multiword amed entities may require a similar approach for their automatic detection as they behave in the same way from a linguistic point of view. Furthermore, it will be shown that the automatic detection of light verb constructions can be carried out using two effective machine learning-based approaches.
In this thesis, we focused on the automatic detection of multiword expressions in natural language texts. On the basis of the main contributions, we can argue that: - Supervised machine learning methods can be successfully applied for the automatic detection of different types of multiword expressions in natural language texts. - Machine learning-based multiword expression detection can be successfully carried out for English as well as for Hungarian. - Our supervised machine learning-based model was successfully applied to the automatic detection of nominal compounds from English raw texts. - We developed a Wikipedia-based dictionary labeling method to automatically detect English nominal compounds. - A prior knowledge of nominal compounds can enhance Named Entity Recognition, while previously identified named entities can assist the nominal compound identification process. - The machine learning-based method can also provide acceptable results when it was trained on an automatically generated silver standard corpus. - As named entities form one semantic unit and may consist of more than one word and function as a noun, we can treat them in a similar way to nominal compounds. - Our sequence labelling-based tool can be successfully applied for identifying verbal light verb constructions in two typologically different languages, namely English and Hungarian. - Domain adaptation techniques may help diminish the distance between domains in the automatic detection of light verb constructions. - Our syntax-based method can be successfully applied for the full-coverage identification of light verb constructions. As a first step, a data-driven candidate extraction method can be utilized. After, a machine learning approach that makes use of an extended and rich feature set selects LVCs among extracted candidates. - When a precise syntactic parser is available for the actual domain, the full-coverage identification can be performed better. In other cases, the usage of the sequence labeling method is recommended.

0.033462033 = product of:
  0.066924065 = sum of:
    0.066924065 = product of:
      0.20077218 = sum of:
        0.20077218 = weight(_text_:3a in 4997) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.20077218 = score(doc=4997,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.42868128 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050563898 = queryNorm
            0.46834838 = fieldWeight in 4997, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4997)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

PhD Dissertation at International Doctorate School in Information and Communication Technology. Vgl.: https%3A%2F%2Fcore.ac.uk%2Fdownload%2Fpdf%2F150083013.pdf&usg=AOvVaw2n-qisNagpyT0lli_6QbAQ.

0.03260874 = product of:
  0.06521748 = sum of:
    0.06521748 = product of:
      0.13043496 = sum of:
        0.13043496 = weight(_text_:light in 3286) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.13043496 = score(doc=3286,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.2920221 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.7753086 = idf(docFreq=372, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050563898 = queryNorm
            0.44666123 = fieldWeight in 3286, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.7753086 = idf(docFreq=372, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3286)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The Value-Added Model, as developed by Robert Taylor in his 1986 monograph Value-Added Processes in Information Systems, has been highly influential in the field of library and information science. Yet despite its impact on the broader LIS field, the potential of the Value-Added Model has gone largely unexplored by knowledge organization (KO) researchers. Unraveling the history behind the Model's development highlights the significant contributions made by studying the work practices of professional indexers. In light of its foundation on KO praxis, this paper reexamines Taylor's Model as a robust framework for evaluating knowledge organization systems.

0.03260874 = product of:
  0.06521748 = sum of:
    0.06521748 = product of:
      0.13043496 = sum of:
        0.13043496 = weight(_text_:light in 3569) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.13043496 = score(doc=3569,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.2920221 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.7753086 = idf(docFreq=372, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050563898 = queryNorm
            0.44666123 = fieldWeight in 3569, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.7753086 = idf(docFreq=372, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3569)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Cataloging and classification education has been a recurring topic in the library and information science literature since the creation of the first library school toward the end of the nineteenth century. This article examines the literature of the past 20 years, in an era of major changes in the way documents and information transit from their creators to their ultimate users. It concludes by suggesting several aspects of classification education that need to be investigated further, in light of these new circumstances.