Search (66 results, page 4 of 4)

  • × author_ss:"Stock, W.G."
  1. Stock, M.; Stock, W.G.: Was ist Informationswissenschaft? (2012) 0.00
    5.04483E-4 = product of:
      0.0070627616 = sum of:
        0.0070627616 = weight(_text_:information in 3326) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0070627616 = score(doc=3326,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 3326, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3326)
      0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    
    Content
    Wie kann man "Informationswissenschaft" abgrenzen? Was ist Informationswissenschaft? Wie kann man diese noch recht junge wissenschaftliche Disziplin definieren? Für die Beschreibung und Abgrenzung von Informationswissenschaft werden wir einige Anläufe machen und folgende Fragestellungen abarbeiten: Welches sind die wesentlichen Bestimmungsstücke und Aufgaben der Informationswissenschaft? Welche Rolle spielen Wissen und Information? Wie hat sich unsere Wissenschaft entwickelt? Haben die informationswissenschaftlichen Teildisziplinen unterschiedliche Geschichten? Mit welchen anderen Wissenschaftsdisziplinen ist die Informationswissenschaft eng verknüpft?
  2. Gremm, J.; Barth, J.; Fietkiewicz, K.J.; Stock, W.G.: Transitioning towards knowledge society : Qatar as a case study (2018) 0.00
    5.04483E-4 = product of:
      0.0070627616 = sum of:
        0.0070627616 = weight(_text_:information in 4251) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0070627616 = score(doc=4251,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 4251, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4251)
      0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    
    Abstract
    The book offers a critical evaluation of Qatar's path from oil- and gas-based industries to a knowledge-based economy. This book gives basic information about the region and the country, including the geographic and demographic data, the culture, the politics and the economy, the health care conditions and the education system. It introduces the concepts of knowledge society and knowledge-based development and adds factual details about Qatar by interpreting indicators of the development status.
  3. Stock, W.G.; Schlögl, C.: Practitioners and academics as authors and readers : the case of LIS journals (2008) 0.00
    4.993087E-4 = product of:
      0.0069903214 = sum of:
        0.0069903214 = weight(_text_:information in 2343) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0069903214 = score(doc=2343,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.1343758 = fieldWeight in 2343, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2343)
      0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose - The aim of this paper is to explore the relationship between practitioners and academics in scholarly communication in library and information science (LIS) journals. Design/methodology/approach - The research is based on a reader survey, a citation analysis and an editor survey. The reader survey identifies both differences in journal rankings between practitioners and academics and the contribution of practitioners to LIS journals. The editor survey provides the proportions of practitioners and academics for the journals. The citation analysis shows the disparities in information exchange between the journals mainly preferred by practitioners and those more favoured by academics. Furthermore, it is possible to explore if practitioner journals differ from academic journals in the citation indicators and in other data collected in the editor survey. Findings - It is found that: practitioners play an active role both as readers and as authors of articles in LIS journals; there is only a low level of information exchange between practitioner and academic journals; the placement of advertisements, the size of the editorial board, requirements concerning an extensive bibliography, the number and the half-life of the references show a clear distinction between practitioner and academic journals. Interestingly, the impact factor did not turn out to be a good indicator to differentiate a practitioner from an academic journal. Research limitations/implications - This research is only exploratory because it is based on separate studies previously conducted. Further research is also needed to explore the relationship between practitioners and academics more deeply. Originality/value - The value of this paper lies in bringing together the findings from complementary studies (reader survey, editor survey and citation analysis) and identifying hypotheses for future research, especially with regards to the roles of and interactions between LIS practitioners and academics in scholarly communication.
  4. Stock, W.G.: Informationelle Städte im 21. Jahrhundert (2011) 0.00
    4.32414E-4 = product of:
      0.0060537956 = sum of:
        0.0060537956 = weight(_text_:information in 4511) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0060537956 = score(doc=4511,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 4511, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4511)
      0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    
    Source
    Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 62(2011) H.2/3, S.71-94
  5. Bredemeier, W.; Stock, W.G.: Informationskompetenz europäischer Volkswirtschaften (2000) 0.00
    3.6034497E-4 = product of:
      0.0050448296 = sum of:
        0.0050448296 = weight(_text_:information in 5492) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0050448296 = score(doc=5492,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 5492, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5492)
      0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    
    Theme
    Information Resources Management
  6. Stock, W.G.: Informationelle Städte und Informationswissenschaft (2011) 0.00
    3.6034497E-4 = product of:
      0.0050448296 = sum of:
        0.0050448296 = weight(_text_:information in 4510) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0050448296 = score(doc=4510,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 4510, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4510)
      0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    
    Source
    Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 62(2011) H.2/3, S.65-67

Years

Languages

  • d 48
  • e 17

Types

  • a 55
  • m 11
  • r 1
  • x 1
  • More… Less…

Classifications