Search (3 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × type_ss:"el"
  • × author_ss:"Bates, M.J."
  1. Bates, M.J.: Defining the information disciplines in encyclopedia development (2007) 0.01 
    0.005470565 = product of:
  0.041029237 = sum of:
    0.032484557 = weight(_text_:informationswissenschaft in 3400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.032484557 = score(doc=3400,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13053758 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028978055 = queryNorm
        0.24885213 = fieldWeight in 3400, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3400)
    0.008544678 = product of:
      0.017089356 = sum of:
        0.017089356 = weight(_text_:information in 3400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017089356 = score(doc=3400,freq=24.0), product of:
            0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.028978055 = queryNorm
            0.3359395 = fieldWeight in 3400, product of:
              4.8989797 = tf(freq=24.0), with freq of:
                24.0 = termFreq=24.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3400)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.13333334 = coord(2/15)
    Abstract
    Introduction. Dramatic changes in society and in the information disciplines and professions constituted the basis for a re-conceptualization of the content of the Encyclopedia of Library and Information Sciences. Method. Marcia J. Bates and Mary Niles Maack, Editors of the forthcoming Third Edition, working with a fifty-person Editorial Advisory Board, developed the new, projected contents list for the encyclopedia, based upon principles developed in the re-conceptualization. Analysis. Drawing on Bates' "Invisible Substrate of Information Science" article, and other sources, the information disciplines are seen as consisting of the "disciplines of the cultural record" and the "information sciences." These disciplines are all concerned with the collection, organization and access to information, across the entire traditional spectrum of disciplines, such as the humanities and natural and social sciences. Results. The disciplines covered in the encyclopedia are library and information science, archival science, records management, information systems, informatics, knowledge management, museum studies, bibliography, document and genre studies, and social studies of information. A variety of cognate disciplines are briefly covered as well. Conclusions. The information disciplines are coming into their own in the 21st century. They are increasingly prominent in universities and in society generally, and, possibly with the help of the encyclopedia, may come increasingly to be seen as a set of related disciplines traversing a spectrum of their own.
    Field
    Informationswissenschaft
    Source
    Information Research. 12(2007) no.4, paper colis29
  2. Bates, M.J.: ¬The nature of browsing (2019) 0.00 
    3.255793E-4 = product of:
  0.0048836893 = sum of:
    0.0048836893 = product of:
      0.009767379 = sum of:
        0.009767379 = weight(_text_:information in 2265) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.009767379 = score(doc=2265,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.028978055 = queryNorm
            0.1920054 = fieldWeight in 2265, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2265)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.06666667 = coord(1/15)
    Abstract
    The recent article by McKay et al. on browsing (2019) provides a valuable addition to the empirical literature of information science on this topic, and I read the descriptions of the various browsing cases with interest. However, the authors refer to my article on browsing (Bates, 2007) in ways that do not make sense to me and which do not at all conform to what I actually said.
    Content
    Bezug (Letter to the editor) zu: McKay, D., Chang, S.,, Smith, W., Buchanan, G.: The things we talk about when we talk about browsing: an empirical typology of library browsing behavior. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology (2019).
  3. Bates, M.J.: Improving user access to library catalog and portal information (2004) 0.00 
    2.6310782E-4 = product of:
  0.0039466172 = sum of:
    0.0039466172 = product of:
      0.0078932345 = sum of:
        0.0078932345 = weight(_text_:information in 2593) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0078932345 = score(doc=2593,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.028978055 = queryNorm
            0.1551638 = fieldWeight in 2593, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2593)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.06666667 = coord(1/15)

Years