Search (175 results, page 1 of 9)

0.1679719 = product of:
  0.3359438 = sum of:
    0.08398595 = product of:
      0.25195783 = sum of:
        0.25195783 = weight(_text_:3a in 5955) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.25195783 = score(doc=5955,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.38426498 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045324896 = queryNorm
            0.65568775 = fieldWeight in 5955, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5955)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    0.25195783 = weight(_text_:2f in 5955) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.25195783 = score(doc=5955,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.38426498 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045324896 = queryNorm
        0.65568775 = fieldWeight in 5955, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5955)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Footnote

Rez. in: Philosophisch-ethische Rezensionen vom 09.11.2019 (Jürgen Czogalla), Unter: https://philosophisch-ethische-rezensionen.de/rezension/Goedert1.html. In: B.I.T. online 23(2020) H.3, S.345-347 (W. Sühl-Strohmenger) [Unter: https%3A%2F%2Fwww.b-i-t-online.de%2Fheft%2F2020-03-rezensionen.pdf&usg=AOvVaw0iY3f_zNcvEjeZ6inHVnOK]. In: Open Password Nr. 805 vom 14.08.2020 (H.-C. Hobohm) [Unter: https://www.password-online.de/?mailpoet_router&endpoint=view_in_browser&action=view&data=WzE0MywiOGI3NjZkZmNkZjQ1IiwwLDAsMTMxLDFd].

0.11997992 = product of:
  0.23995984 = sum of:
    0.05998996 = product of:
      0.17996988 = sum of:
        0.17996988 = weight(_text_:3a in 5895) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.17996988 = score(doc=5895,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.38426498 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045324896 = queryNorm
            0.46834838 = fieldWeight in 5895, 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=5895)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    0.17996988 = weight(_text_:2f in 5895) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.17996988 = score(doc=5895,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.38426498 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045324896 = queryNorm
        0.46834838 = fieldWeight in 5895, 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=5895)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Source

Politische Meinung. 381(2001) Nr.1, S.65-74 [https%3A%2F%2Fwww.dgfe.de%2Ffileadmin%2FOrdnerRedakteure%2FSektionen%2FSek02_AEW%2FKWF%2FPublikationen_Reihe_1989-2003%2FBand_17%2FBd_17_1994_355-406_A.pdf&usg=AOvVaw2KcbRsHy5UQ9QRIUyuOLNi]

0.11997992 = product of:
  0.23995984 = sum of:
    0.05998996 = product of:
      0.17996988 = sum of:
        0.17996988 = weight(_text_:3a in 76) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.17996988 = score(doc=76,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.38426498 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045324896 = queryNorm
            0.46834838 = fieldWeight in 76, 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=76)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    0.17996988 = weight(_text_:2f in 76) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.17996988 = score(doc=76,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.38426498 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045324896 = queryNorm
        0.46834838 = fieldWeight in 76, 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=76)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Source

http%3A%2F%2Fcogprints.org%2F1380%2F1%2FvdM_correlation.pdf&usg=AOvVaw0g7DvZbQPb2U7dYb49b9v_

0.047752857 = product of:
  0.095505714 = sum of:
    0.06480122 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1201) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06480122 = score(doc=1201,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.13710396 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045324896 = queryNorm
        0.47264296 = fieldWeight in 1201, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1201)
    0.030704489 = product of:
      0.061408978 = sum of:
        0.061408978 = weight(_text_:22 in 1201) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.061408978 = score(doc=1201,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15872006 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045324896 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 1201, 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=1201)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Date

15. 7.2002 14:22:55

LCSH

Information storage and retrieval systems / Social aspects

Subject

Information storage and retrieval systems / Social aspects

0.030610349 = product of:
  0.061220698 = sum of:
    0.036657106 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3558) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.036657106 = score(doc=3558,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13710396 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045324896 = queryNorm
        0.26736724 = fieldWeight in 3558, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3558)
    0.02456359 = product of:
      0.04912718 = sum of:
        0.04912718 = weight(_text_:22 in 3558) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04912718 = score(doc=3558,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15872006 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045324896 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 3558, 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=3558)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

The history of encyclopedias and wholly new forms of encyclopedias are briefly reviewed. The possibilities and problems that hypertext presents as a basis for new forms of encyclopedias are explored. The capabilities of current systems, both experimental and commercially available, are outlined, focusing on new possibilities for authoring and design and for reading the retrieval. Examples of applications already making use of hypertext are given.

Date

7. 1.1996 22:47:52

0.028651714 = product of:
  0.05730343 = sum of:
    0.038880736 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2090) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.038880736 = score(doc=2090,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.13710396 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045324896 = queryNorm
        0.2835858 = fieldWeight in 2090, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2090)
    0.018422693 = product of:
      0.036845386 = sum of:
        0.036845386 = weight(_text_:22 in 2090) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.036845386 = score(doc=2090,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15872006 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045324896 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2090, 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=2090)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

In order to test how associated verbal and spatial stimuli are processed in memory, undergraduates studied a reference map as either an intact unit or as a series of individual features, and read a text containing facts related to map features. In Addition, the map was presented either before or after reading the text. Seeing the intact map prior to the text led to better recall of both map information and facts from the text. These results support a dual coding modell, where stimuli such as maps possess a retrieval advantage because they allow simultaneous representation in working memory. This advantage occurs because information from the map can be used to cue retrieval of associated verbal facts, without exceeding the processing constraints of the memorial system

Date

22. 7.2000 19:18:18

0.028651714 = product of:
  0.05730343 = sum of:
    0.038880736 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3675) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.038880736 = score(doc=3675,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.13710396 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045324896 = queryNorm
        0.2835858 = fieldWeight in 3675, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3675)
    0.018422693 = product of:
      0.036845386 = sum of:
        0.036845386 = weight(_text_:22 in 3675) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.036845386 = score(doc=3675,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15872006 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045324896 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3675, 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=3675)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

This article is about the mental coding processes involved in the flow of 'information' when the user is interacting with an 'enabling' information retrieval system. An 'enabling' IR system is designed to stimulate the user's grasping towards a higher understanding of the information need / problem / task that brought the user to the IR system. C. Shannon's (1949/1959) model of the flow of information and K.R. Popper's (1975) 3 worlds concept are used to diagram the flow of information between the user and system when the user receives a stimulating massage, with particluar emphasis on the decoding and encoding operations involved as the user processes the message. The key difference between the model of information flow proposed here and the linear transmission, receiver-oriented model now in use is that we assume that users of a truly interactive, 'enabling' IR system are primarily message senders, not passive receivers of the message, because they must create a new message back to the system, absed on a reconceptualization of their information need, while they are 'online' interacting with the system

Date

22. 5.1999 14:51:49

0.026784055 = product of:
  0.05356811 = sum of:
    0.03207497 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1296) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03207497 = score(doc=1296,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13710396 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045324896 = queryNorm
        0.23394634 = fieldWeight in 1296, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1296)
    0.02149314 = product of:
      0.04298628 = sum of:
        0.04298628 = weight(_text_:22 in 1296) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04298628 = score(doc=1296,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15872006 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045324896 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 1296, 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=1296)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

I analyze the text of an article that appeared in this journal in 2007 that published the results of a questionnaire in which a number of experts were asked to define the concepts of data, information, and knowledge. I apply standard information retrieval techniques to build a list of the most frequent terms in each set of definitions. I then apply information extraction techniques to analyze how the top terms are used in the definitions. As a result, I draw data-driven conclusions about the aggregate opinion of the experts. I contrast this with the original analysis of the data to provide readers with an alternative viewpoint on what the data tell us.

Date

16. 6.2014 19:22:57

0.022066789 = product of:
  0.088267155 = sum of:
    0.088267155 = product of:
      0.17653431 = sum of:
        0.17653431 = weight(_text_:lehrbuch in 18) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.17653431 = score(doc=18,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.3139294 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.926203 = idf(docFreq=117, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045324896 = queryNorm
            0.5623376 = fieldWeight in 18, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              6.926203 = idf(docFreq=117, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=18)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Footnote

Rez. in: Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis 56(2005) H.2, S.121 (K. Weber): "Rainer Kuhlen ist Professor für Informationswissenschaft an der Universität Konstanz und Lehrbeauftragter am Institut für Bibliothekswissenschaft der HumboldtUniversität zu Berlin. Seine "Informationsethik" ist als Lehrbuch konzipiert; dies ist schon allein daran ersichtlich, dass jedes Kapitel mit "Kontrollfragen" schließt, die Studierenden ermöglichen sollen, zu prüfen, ob der bisher thematisierte Stoff erfasst wurde. Der Text selbst ist in verschiedenen Schriftgrößen gesetzt. Es finden sich kleiner gesetzte Passagen, die der Autor als besonders wichtig und als Kondensat der bis dahin gebotenen Ausführungen anzusehen scheint. Dies mag für ein Selbststudium hilfreich sein, sofern man beim Autor studiert. Ob dies aber für alle Studierenden der Informationswissenschaft oder angrenzender Fächer gilt, kann man bezweifeln. Das Feld der Informationsethik ist stark in Bewegung, das Feld ist recht heterogen. Es ist zwar legitim und wünschenswert, den Versuch der Kanonisierung in der Lehre zu unternehmen, doch scheint dies noch verfrüht. Kuhlen selbst verweist mehrfach darauf, dass die Debatte der Informationsethik im Fluss ist; daher kann der Ausweis vermeintlich wichtiger und weniger wichtiger Aussagen gerade dann fehlleiten, wenn gleichzeitig der Anspruch der Allgemeingültigkeit und Vollständigkeit erhoben wird - und dieser Anspruch steckt überall in Kuhlens Buch. Die Stärke des Buchs liegt darin, dass es eine Fülle von Informationen zur Informationsethik und der darin behandelten Fragen bietet - es werden die großen Probleme angesprochen. Hier an Details zu mäkeln würde dem Anspruch des Buchs nicht gerecht werden; nimmt man die Konzeption als Lehrbuch ernst, so muss das Hauptziel sein, den Studierenden einen breiten Einblick in die jeweiligen Problemlagen zu verschaffen. Dies leistet das Buch ohne Zweifel.
Jedoch zeigt es gleichzeitig eine erhebliche Schwäche, die auch für die Konzeption als Lehrbuch sehr problematisch ist. In den ersten beiden Kapiteln versucht der Autor, sehr gerafft existierende ethische Ansätze aufzuzeigen und ihren Zusammenhang zur Informationsethik zu skizzieren bzw. Menschenrechtskonzeptionen für die Ziele der Informationsethik nutzbar zu machen. Liest man jedoch weiter, so tauchen die angeführten ethischen Positionen nur noch vereinzelt, unsystematisch und kaum reflektiert auf. Im Wesentlichen erschöpfen sich die Kapitel 3 bis 8 darin, Sachverhalte aufzuzeigen, Konfliktlinien nachzuzeichnen und Argumentationen verschiedenster Interessengruppierungen darzustellen - reine Deskription also. Gleichzeitig werden in den hervorgehobenen Passagen gleichsam apodiktisch und ohne Begründung ethische Postulate formuliert: So und so ist es eben, so und so soll es sein. Dies fällt weit hinter den aktuellen Stand der Diskussion allein im deutschsprachigen Bereich zurück, wie sich an vielen Beispielen deutlich machen lässt: 1) Zwar geht Kuhlen in Kap. 5 auf Beate Rösslers Texte zur Privatheit ein, aber deutet nicht einmal an, wie umfassend sie und viele andere Autoren mit Rückgriff auf Argumente der politischen Philosophie den Anspruch auf Privatheit normativ begründet. z) Obwohl Helmut Spinner mit"Die Wissensordnung" 1994 und "Die Architektur der Informationsgesellschaft" 1998 ausführlich eine (normative) Antwort gegeben hat, wie mit Informationen in einer rechtsstaatlichen Demokratie umgegangen werden sollte, um Rechte und Freiheiten der Bürger zu erhalten und Konflikte zu lösen, geht Kuhlen darauf nicht ein. Dabei ist das Zonen-Konzept Spinners zumindest ein Ausgangspunkt für normative Überlegungen. 3) Auch wenn es problematisch ist, in einer Rezension für sich selbst Partei zu ergreifen, sei der Hinweis erlaubt, dass der Rezensent seit geraumer Zeit versucht, die Konzepte der verschiedenen liberalen Strömungen der politischen Philosophie für die Grundlegung einer Informationsethik - bspw. in Bezug auf die Wahrung von Bürgerrechten und den Digital Divide -fruchtbar zu machen. 4) Allenfalls kursorisch werden die mehr als wichtigen Beiträge von Rafael Capurro, Thomas Hausmanninger und vielen weiteren Autoren in den ICIE-Bänden und anderen Publikationen genannt. Zuletzt: Im internationalen Kontext ist die Forschung viel weiter, als dies Kuhlen darlegt. So ist die Debatte um den Digital Divide weit über das Problem der mangelnden technischen Infrastruktur hinausgegangen - ein Blick bspw. in Mark Warschauers Texte wäre sehr erhellend. Weiterhin, die Liste ist beileibe unvollständig, fehlt die gesamte Auseinandersetzung um die Postmoderne, die wichtigen Beiträge aus den USA werden nur angeschnitten, Luciano Floridi oder Manuel Castells werden bloß kurz zitiert - als Laie könnte man den (mehr als falschen) Eindruck gewinnen, dass Rainer Kuhlen die Informationsethik erfunden hätte. Problematisch ist dabei nicht die gekränkte Eitelkeit der übergangenen Autoren (obwohl intellektuelle Redlichkeit sowie informationswissenschaftliche Ansprüche fordern, auf andere Ansätze hinzuweisen); vielmehr erweckt Kuhlen den Eindruck, dass es gar nicht notwendig sei, normative Aussagen zu begründen oder deutlich zu machen, dass elaborierte Begründungen existieren und bedeutsam für die Ausarbeitung einer Informationsethik sind. Studierende, die Kuhlens Buch nutzen, müssen fast zwangsläufig den Eindruck bekommen, dass es in ethischen Diskursen nur darauf ankommt, wer etwas behauptet, statt darauf, wie das Gesagte begründet wird. Fazit: Rainer Kuhlens "Informationsethik" liefert eine Fülle von Informationen. Aber weder als Lehrbuch noch als Beitrag zur systematischen Debatte der Informationsethik kann es wirklich überzeugen, dazu ist es zu sehr von Auslassungen geprägt."

RSWK

Informationsethik / Lehrbuch

Subject

Informationsethik / Lehrbuch

0.021233775 = product of:
  0.0849351 = sum of:
    0.0849351 = product of:
      0.1698702 = sum of:
        0.1698702 = weight(_text_:lehrbuch in 1667) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.1698702 = score(doc=1667,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.3139294 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.926203 = idf(docFreq=117, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045324896 = queryNorm
            0.54110956 = fieldWeight in 1667, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              6.926203 = idf(docFreq=117, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1667)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

RSWK

Entwicklungspsychologie / Lehrbuch

Subject

Entwicklungspsychologie / Lehrbuch

0.021020368 = product of:
  0.08408147 = sum of:
    0.08408147 = product of:
      0.16816294 = sum of:
        0.16816294 = weight(_text_:lehrbuch in 878) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.16816294 = score(doc=878,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.3139294 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.926203 = idf(docFreq=117, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045324896 = queryNorm
            0.5356712 = fieldWeight in 878, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              6.926203 = idf(docFreq=117, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=878)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Kognitive Modellierung ist ein Teilgebiet der Kognitiven Psychologie und der Künstlichen Intelligenz. Ziel dieser Forschungsrichtung ist es, Strukturen und Prozesse menschlichen Denkens mit formalen Methoden zu beschreiben. Dieses innovative Lehrbuch führt in die logischen und algorithmischen Konzepte ein, die den Grundlagen der Kognitiven Modellierung zugrunde liegen

0.019131469 = product of:
  0.038262937 = sum of:
    0.022910692 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 5839) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022910692 = score(doc=5839,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13710396 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045324896 = queryNorm
        0.16710453 = fieldWeight in 5839, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5839)
    0.0153522445 = product of:
      0.030704489 = sum of:
        0.030704489 = weight(_text_:22 in 5839) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.030704489 = score(doc=5839,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15872006 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045324896 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5839, 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=5839)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Purpose In The Invisible Substrate of Information Science, a landmark article about the discipline of information science, Marcia J. Bates wrote that ".we are always looking for the red thread of information in the social texture of people's lives" (1999a, p. 1048). To sharpen our understanding of information science and to elaborate Bates' idea, the work at hand answers the question: Just what does the red thread of information entail? Design/methodology/approach Through a close reading of Bates' oeuvre and by applying concepts from the reference literature of information science, nine composite entities that qualify as the red thread of information are identified, elaborated, and related to existing concepts in the information science literature. In the spirit of a scientist-poet (White, 1999), several playful metaphors related to the color red are employed. Findings Bates' red thread of information entails: terms, genres, literatures, classification systems, scholarly communication, information retrieval, information experience, information institutions, and information policy. This same constellation of phenomena can be found in resonant visions of information science, namely, domain analysis (Hjørland, 2002), ethnography of infrastructure (Star, 1999), and social epistemology (Shera, 1968). Research limitations/implications With the vital vermilion filament in clear view, newcomers can more easily engage the material, conceptual, and social machinery of information science, and specialists are reminded of what constitutes information science as a whole. Future researchers and scientist-poets may wish to supplement the nine composite entities with additional, emergent information phenomena. Originality/value Though the explication of information science that follows is relatively orthodox and time-bound, the paper offers an imaginative, accessible, yet technically precise way of understanding the field.

Date

30. 4.2020 21:03:22

0.018328553 = product of:
  0.07331421 = sum of:
    0.07331421 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 6401) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07331421 = score(doc=6401,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13710396 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045324896 = queryNorm
        0.5347345 = fieldWeight in 6401, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=6401)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

0.017369082 = product of:
  0.06947633 = sum of:
    0.06947633 = product of:
      0.13895266 = sum of:
        0.13895266 = weight(_text_:22 in 4042) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.13895266 = score(doc=4042,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.15872006 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045324896 = queryNorm
            0.8754574 = fieldWeight in 4042, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=4042)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

22. 7.2000 19:01:22

0.016200306 = product of:
  0.06480122 = sum of:
    0.06480122 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 7) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06480122 = score(doc=7,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.13710396 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045324896 = queryNorm
        0.47264296 = fieldWeight in 7, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=7)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

LCSH

Information storage and retrieval systems

Subject

Information storage and retrieval systems

0.016037485 = product of:
  0.06414994 = sum of:
    0.06414994 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3101) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06414994 = score(doc=3101,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13710396 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045324896 = queryNorm
        0.46789268 = fieldWeight in 3101, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=3101)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

0.016037485 = product of:
  0.06414994 = sum of:
    0.06414994 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 543) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06414994 = score(doc=543,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13710396 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045324896 = queryNorm
        0.46789268 = fieldWeight in 543, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=543)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Interactive information seeking, behaviour and retrieval. Eds.: Ruthven, I. u. D. Kelly

0.015872994 = product of:
  0.06349198 = sum of:
    0.06349198 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 5595) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06349198 = score(doc=5595,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.13710396 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045324896 = queryNorm
        0.46309367 = fieldWeight in 5595, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5595)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Presents a comparison of the benefits and limits of 2 different approaches to users of information systems: the cognitivst point of view which tries to perfect man-machine interfaces by using the 'user model' concept; and the marketing point of view, basically entrepreneurial and commercial. Suggests that research should go beyond the mere structure of information retrieval systems and focus on the analysis of the social and professional practices in which information retrieval tasks are embedded

0.015872994 = product of:
  0.06349198 = sum of:
    0.06349198 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2972) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06349198 = score(doc=2972,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.13710396 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045324896 = queryNorm
        0.46309367 = fieldWeight in 2972, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2972)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Cognitive research into information science started at the International Workshop on the Cognitive viewpoint, Ghent, Belgium, 1977, where it was made clear that the task of research is to improve information flow, specifically through creating models of users' knowledge compatible with the conceptual frameworks used by information retrieval systems. Divides users' knowledge into knowledge of the world, of the information retrieval system, of the task and of the domain. Cognitivism as a research direction in information science explains how the cognitive processes and objects might influence information retrieval and representation

0.013888869 = product of:
  0.055555478 = sum of:
    0.055555478 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1853) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.055555478 = score(doc=1853,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.13710396 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045324896 = queryNorm
        0.40520695 = fieldWeight in 1853, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1853)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Scholars have uncovered abundant data about the history of the term "information," as well as some of its many combined phrases (e.g., "information science," "information retrieval," and "information technology"). Many other compounds that involve "information" seem, however, not to have a known origin yet. In this article, further information about the phrase "information storage and retrieval" is provided. Knowing the history of terms and their associated concepts is an important prescription against poor terminological phrasing and theoretical confusion.