Search (53 results, page 1 of 3)

  • × theme_ss:"Inhaltsanalyse"
  1. Pejtersen, A.M.: Design of a classification scheme for fiction based on an analysis of actual user-librarian communication, and use of the scheme for control of librarians' search strategies (1980) 0.05 
    0.049139693 = product of:
  0.07370954 = sum of:
    0.039130855 = weight(_text_:science in 5835) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.039130855 = score(doc=5835,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13445559 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05104385 = queryNorm
        0.2910318 = fieldWeight in 5835, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=5835)
    0.034578685 = product of:
      0.06915737 = sum of:
        0.06915737 = weight(_text_:22 in 5835) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06915737 = score(doc=5835,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17874686 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05104385 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 5835, 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=5835)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Date
    5. 8.2006 13:22:44
    Source
    Theory and application of information research. Proc. of the 2nd Int. Research Forum on Information Science, 3.-6.8.1977, Copenhagen. Ed.: O. Harbo u, L. Kajberg
  2. Weinberg, B.H.: Why indexing fails the researcher (1988) 0.04 
    0.036394343 = product of:
  0.05459151 = sum of:
    0.027669692 = weight(_text_:science in 703) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.027669692 = score(doc=703,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.13445559 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05104385 = queryNorm
        0.20579056 = fieldWeight in 703, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=703)
    0.026921818 = product of:
      0.053843636 = sum of:
        0.053843636 = weight(_text_:index in 703) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.053843636 = score(doc=703,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.22304957 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05104385 = queryNorm
            0.24139762 = fieldWeight in 703, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=703)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    It is a truism in information science that indexing is associated with 'aboutness', and that index terms that accurately represent what a document is about will serve the needs of the user/searcher well. It is contended in this paper that indexing which is limited to the representation of aboutness serves the novice in a discipline adequately, but does not serve the scholar or researcher, who is concerned with highly specific aspects of or points-of-view on a subject. The linguistic analogs of 'aboutness' and 'aspects' are 'topic' and 'comment' respectively. Serial indexing services deal with topics at varyng levels of specificity, but neglect comment almost entirely. This may explain the underutilization of secondary information services by scholars, as has been repeatedly demonstrated in user studies. It may also account for the incomplete lists of bibliographic references in many research papers. Natural language searching of fulltext databases does not solve this problem, because the aspect of a topic of interest to researchers is often inexpressible in concrete terms. The thesis is illustrated with examples of indexing failures in research projects the author has conducted on a range of linguistic and library-information science topics. Finally, the question of whether indexing can be improved to meet the needs of researchers is examined
  3. Allen, B.; Reser, D.: Content analysis in library and information science research (1990) 0.03 
    0.029514339 = product of:
  0.08854301 = sum of:
    0.08854301 = weight(_text_:science in 7510) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08854301 = score(doc=7510,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.13445559 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05104385 = queryNorm
        0.6585298 = fieldWeight in 7510, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=7510)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Source
    Library and information science research. 12(1990) no.3, S.251-262
  4. White, M.D.; Marsh, E.E.: Content analysis : a flexible methodology (2006) 0.03 
    0.029483816 = product of:
  0.044225723 = sum of:
    0.023478512 = weight(_text_:science in 5589) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023478512 = score(doc=5589,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13445559 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05104385 = queryNorm
        0.17461908 = fieldWeight in 5589, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5589)
    0.02074721 = product of:
      0.04149442 = sum of:
        0.04149442 = weight(_text_:22 in 5589) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04149442 = score(doc=5589,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17874686 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05104385 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 5589, 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=5589)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    Content analysis is a highly flexible research method that has been widely used in library and information science (LIS) studies with varying research goals and objectives. The research method is applied in qualitative, quantitative, and sometimes mixed modes of research frameworks and employs a wide range of analytical techniques to generate findings and put them into context. This article characterizes content analysis as a systematic, rigorous approach to analyzing documents obtained or generated in the course of research. It briefly describes the steps involved in content analysis, differentiates between quantitative and qualitative content analysis, and shows that content analysis serves the purposes of both quantitative research and qualitative research. The authors draw on selected LIS studies that have used content analysis to illustrate the concepts addressed in the article. The article also serves as a gateway to methodological books and articles that provide more detail about aspects of content analysis discussed only briefly in the article.
    Source
    Library trends. 55(2006) no.1, S.22-45
  5. Raieli, R.: ¬The semantic hole : enthusiasm and caution around multimedia information retrieval (2012) 0.03 
    0.029344168 = product of:
  0.04401625 = sum of:
    0.019565428 = weight(_text_:science in 4888) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019565428 = score(doc=4888,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13445559 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05104385 = queryNorm
        0.1455159 = fieldWeight in 4888, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4888)
    0.024450822 = product of:
      0.048901644 = sum of:
        0.048901644 = weight(_text_:22 in 4888) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.048901644 = score(doc=4888,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.17874686 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05104385 = queryNorm
            0.27358043 = fieldWeight in 4888, 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=4888)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Date
    22. 1.2012 13:02:10
    Footnote
    Bezugnahme auf: Enser, P.G.B.: Visual image retrieval. In: Annual review of information science and technology. 42(2008), S.3-42.
    Source
    Knowledge organization. 39(2012) no.1, S.13-22
  6. Chubin, D.E.; Moitra, S.D.: Content analysis of references : adjunct or alternative to citation counting? (1975) 0.02 
    0.02086979 = product of:
  0.06260937 = sum of:
    0.06260937 = weight(_text_:science in 5647) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06260937 = score(doc=5647,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13445559 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05104385 = queryNorm
        0.4656509 = fieldWeight in 5647, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=5647)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Source
    Social studies of science. 5(1975), S.423-441
  7. Hicks, C.; Rush, J.; Strong, S.: Content analysis (1977) 0.02 
    0.02086979 = product of:
  0.06260937 = sum of:
    0.06260937 = weight(_text_:science in 7514) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06260937 = score(doc=7514,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13445559 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05104385 = queryNorm
        0.4656509 = fieldWeight in 7514, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=7514)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Source
    Encyclopedia of computer science and technology, vol.6
  8. Farrow, J.: Indexing as a cognitive process (1994) 0.02 
    0.02086979 = product of:
  0.06260937 = sum of:
    0.06260937 = weight(_text_:science in 1257) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06260937 = score(doc=1257,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13445559 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05104385 = queryNorm
        0.4656509 = fieldWeight in 1257, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=1257)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Source
    Encyclopedia of library and information science. Vol.53, [=Suppl.16]
  9. Kremer-Marietti, A.: Thematic analysis (1986) 0.02 
    0.02086979 = product of:
  0.06260937 = sum of:
    0.06260937 = weight(_text_:science in 1273) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06260937 = score(doc=1273,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13445559 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05104385 = queryNorm
        0.4656509 = fieldWeight in 1273, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=1273)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Source
    Encyclopedia of library and information science. Vol.41, [=Suppl.6]
  10. Baxendale, P.: Content analysis, specification and control (1966) 0.02 
    0.02086979 = product of:
  0.06260937 = sum of:
    0.06260937 = weight(_text_:science in 218) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06260937 = score(doc=218,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13445559 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05104385 = queryNorm
        0.4656509 = fieldWeight in 218, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=218)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Source
    Annual review of information science and technology. 1(1966), S.71-106
  11. Sharp, J.R.: Content analysis, specification, and control (1967) 0.02 
    0.02086979 = product of:
  0.06260937 = sum of:
    0.06260937 = weight(_text_:science in 226) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06260937 = score(doc=226,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13445559 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05104385 = queryNorm
        0.4656509 = fieldWeight in 226, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=226)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Source
    Annual review of information science and technology. 2(1967), S.87-122
  12. Taulbee, O.E.: Content analysis, specification, and control (1968) 0.02 
    0.02086979 = product of:
  0.06260937 = sum of:
    0.06260937 = weight(_text_:science in 232) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06260937 = score(doc=232,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13445559 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05104385 = queryNorm
        0.4656509 = fieldWeight in 232, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=232)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Source
    Annual review of information science and technology. 3(1968), S.105-136
  13. Fairthorne, R.A.: Content analysis, specification, and control (1969) 0.02 
    0.02086979 = product of:
  0.06260937 = sum of:
    0.06260937 = weight(_text_:science in 238) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06260937 = score(doc=238,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13445559 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05104385 = queryNorm
        0.4656509 = fieldWeight in 238, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=238)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Source
    Annual review of information science and technology. 4(1969), S.73-110
  14. Sauperl, A.: Subject determination during the cataloging process : the development of a system based on theoretical principles (2002) 0.02 
    0.017684463 = product of:
  0.05305339 = sum of:
    0.05305339 = sum of:
      0.03230618 = weight(_text_:index in 2293) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03230618 = score(doc=2293,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.22304957 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05104385 = queryNorm
          0.14483857 = fieldWeight in 2293, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=2293)
      0.02074721 = weight(_text_:22 in 2293) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.02074721 = score(doc=2293,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17874686 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05104385 = queryNorm
          0.116070345 = fieldWeight in 2293, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=2293)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Date
    27. 9.2005 14:22:19
    Footnote
    This document will be particularly useful to subject cataloguing teachers and trainers who could use the model to design case descriptions and exercises. We believe it is an accurate description of the reality of subject cataloguing today. But now that we know how things are dope, the next interesting question may be: Is that the best way? Is there a better, more efficient, way to do things? We can only hope that Dr. Sauperl will soon provide her own view of methods and techniques that could improve the flow of work or address the cataloguers' concern as to the lack of feedback an their work. Her several excellent suggestions for further research in this area all build an bits and pieces of what is done already, and stay well away from what could be done by the various actors in the area, from the designers of controlled vocabularies and authority files to those who use these tools an a daily basis to index, classify, or search for information."
  15. Pejtersen, A.M.: Design of a computer-aided user-system dialogue based on an analysis of users' search behaviour (1984) 0.02 
    0.015652342 = product of:
  0.046957023 = sum of:
    0.046957023 = weight(_text_:science in 1044) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.046957023 = score(doc=1044,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13445559 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05104385 = queryNorm
        0.34923816 = fieldWeight in 1044, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1044)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Source
    Social science information studies. 4(1984), S.167-183
  16. Belkin, N.J.: ¬The problem of 'matching' in information retrieval (1980) 0.02 
    0.015652342 = product of:
  0.046957023 = sum of:
    0.046957023 = weight(_text_:science in 1329) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.046957023 = score(doc=1329,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13445559 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05104385 = queryNorm
        0.34923816 = fieldWeight in 1329, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1329)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Source
    Theory and application of information research. Proc. of the 2nd Int. Research Forum on Information Science, 3.-6.8.1977, Copenhagen. Ed.: O. Harbo u. L. Kajberg
  17. Pejtersen, A.M.: Implications of users' value perception for the design of knowledge based bibliographic retrieval systems (1985) 0.02 
    0.015652342 = product of:
  0.046957023 = sum of:
    0.046957023 = weight(_text_:science in 2088) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.046957023 = score(doc=2088,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13445559 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05104385 = queryNorm
        0.34923816 = fieldWeight in 2088, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=2088)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Source
    2nd Symposium on Empirical Foundations of Information and Software Science, 3.-5.10.84, Atlanta
  18. Farrow, J.: All in the mind : concept analysis in indexing (1995) 0.01 
    0.014358303 = product of:
  0.043074906 = sum of:
    0.043074906 = product of:
      0.08614981 = sum of:
        0.08614981 = weight(_text_:index in 2926) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08614981 = score(doc=2926,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.22304957 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05104385 = queryNorm
            0.3862362 = fieldWeight in 2926, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2926)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    The indexing process consists of the comprehension of the document to be indexed, followed by the production of a set of index terms. Differences between academic indexing and back-of-the-book indexing are discussed. Text comprehension is a branch of human information processing, and it is argued that the model of text comprehension and production debeloped by van Dijk and Kintsch can form the basis for a cognitive process model of indexing. Strategies for testing such a model are suggested
  19. Chu, C.M.; O'Brien, A.: Subject analysis : the critical first stage in indexing (1993) 0.01 
    0.013555327 = product of:
  0.04066598 = sum of:
    0.04066598 = weight(_text_:science in 6472) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04066598 = score(doc=6472,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.13445559 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05104385 = queryNorm
        0.30244917 = fieldWeight in 6472, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=6472)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    Studies of indexing neglect the first stage of the process, that is, subject analysis. In this study, novice indexers were asked to analyse three short, popular journal articles; to express the general subject as well as the primary and secondary topics in natural laguage statements; to state what influenced the analysis and to comment on the ease or difficulty of this process. The factors which influenced the process were: the subject discipline concerned, factual vs. subjective nature of the text, complexity of the subject, clarity of text, possible support offered by bibliographic apparatus such as title, etc. The findings showed that with the social science and science texts, the general subject could be determined with ease, while this was more difficult with the humanities text. Clear evidence emerged of the importance of bibliographical apparatus in defining the general subject. There was varying difficulty in determining the primary and secondarx topics
    Source
    Journal of information science. 19(1993), S.439-454
  20. Fremery, W. De; Buckland, M.K.: Context, relevance, and labor (2022) 0.01 
    0.013555327 = product of:
  0.04066598 = sum of:
    0.04066598 = weight(_text_:science in 4240) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04066598 = score(doc=4240,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.13445559 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05104385 = queryNorm
        0.30244917 = fieldWeight in 4240, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4240)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    Since information science concerns the transmission of records, it concerns context. The transmission of documents ensures their arrival in new contexts. Documents and their copies are spread across times and places. The amount of labor required to discover and retrieve relevant documents is also formulated by context. Thus, any serious consideration of communication and of information technologies quickly leads to a concern with context, relevance, and labor. Information scientists have developed many theories of context, relevance, and labor but not a framework for organizing them and describing their relationship with one another. We propose the words context and relevance can be used to articulate a useful framework for considering the diversity of approaches to context and relevance in information science, as well as their relations with each other and with labor.
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 73(2022) no.9, S.1268-1278

Authors

Years

Languages

  • e 51
  • d 2
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 50
  • m 3
  • el 2
  • More… Less…

Themes