Search (46 results, page 2 of 3)

  • × theme_ss:"Social tagging"
  1. Munk, T.B.; Moerk, K.: Folksonomies, tagging communities, and tagging strategies : an empirical study (2007) 0.00 
    0.0018491952 = product of:
  0.022190342 = sum of:
    0.022190342 = weight(_text_:internet in 1091) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022190342 = score(doc=1091,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.09621047 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.032588977 = queryNorm
        0.23064373 = fieldWeight in 1091, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1091)
  0.083333336 = coord(1/12)
    Abstract
    The subject of this article is folksonomies on the Internet. One of the largest folksonomies on the Internet in terms of number of users and tagged websites is the computer program del.icio.us, where more than 100,000 people have tagged the websites that they and others find using their own keywords. How this is done in practice and the patterns to be found are the focus of this article. The empirical basis is the collection of 76,601 different keywords with a total frequency of 178,215 from 500 randomly chosen taggers on del.icio.us at the end of 2005. The keywords collected were then analyzed quantitatively statistically by uncovering their frequency and percentage distribution and through a statistical correspondence analysis in order to uncover possible patterns in the users' tags. Subsequently, a qualitative textual analysis of the tags was made in order to find out by analysis which tagging strategies are represented in the data material. This led to four conclusions. 1) the distribution of keywords follows classic power law; 2) distinct tagging communities are identifiable; 3) the most frequently used tags are situated on a general-specific axis; and 4) nine distinct tagging strategies are observed. These four conclusions are put into perspective collectively in respect of a number of more general and theoretical considerations concerning folksonomies and the classification systems of the future.
  2. Watters, C.; Nizam, N.: Knowledge organization on the Web : the emergent role of social classification (2012) 0.00 
    0.0018306099 = product of:
  0.021967318 = sum of:
    0.021967318 = weight(_text_:internet in 828) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021967318 = score(doc=828,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09621047 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.032588977 = queryNorm
        0.22832564 = fieldWeight in 828, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=828)
  0.083333336 = coord(1/12)
    Abstract
    There are close to a billion websites on the Internet with approximately 400 million users worldwide [www.internetworldstats.com]. People go to websites for a wide variety of different information tasks, from finding a restaurant to serious research. Many of the difficulties with searching the Web, as it is structured currently, can be attributed to increases to scale. The content of the Web is now so large that we only have a rough estimate of the number of sites and the range of information is extremely diverse, from blogs and photos to research articles and news videos.
  3. Bundza, M.: ¬The choice is yours! : researchers assign subject metadata to their own materials in institutional repositories (2014) 0.00 
    0.0018306099 = product of:
  0.021967318 = sum of:
    0.021967318 = weight(_text_:internet in 1968) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021967318 = score(doc=1968,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09621047 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.032588977 = queryNorm
        0.22832564 = fieldWeight in 1968, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1968)
  0.083333336 = coord(1/12)
    Abstract
    The Digital Commons platform for institutional repositories provides a three-tiered taxonomy of academic disciplines for each item submitted to the repository. Since faculty and departmental administrators across campuses are encouraged to submit materials to the institutional repository themselves, they must also assign disciplines or subject categories for their own work. The expandable drop-down menu of about 1,000 categories is easy to use, and facilitates the growth of the institutional repository and access to the materials through the Internet.
  4. Rafferty, P.: Tagging (2018) 0.00 
    0.0018306099 = product of:
  0.021967318 = sum of:
    0.021967318 = weight(_text_:internet in 4647) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021967318 = score(doc=4647,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09621047 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.032588977 = queryNorm
        0.22832564 = fieldWeight in 4647, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4647)
  0.083333336 = coord(1/12)
    Abstract
    This article examines tagging as knowledge organization. Tagging is a kind of indexing, a process of labelling and categorizing information made to support resource discovery for users. Social tagging generally means the practice whereby internet users generate keywords to describe, categorise or comment on digital content. The value of tagging comes when social tags within a collection are aggregated and shared through a folksonomy. This article examines definitions of tagging and folksonomy, and discusses the functions, advantages and disadvantages of tagging systems in relation to knowledge organization before discussing studies that have compared tagging and conventional library-based knowledge organization systems. Approaches to disciplining tagging practice are examined and tagger motivation discussed. Finally, the article outlines current research fronts.
  5. Schillerwein, S.: ¬Der 'Business Case' für die Nutzung von Social Tagging in Intranets und internen Informationssystemen (2008) 0.00 
    0.0015690941 = product of:
  0.01882913 = sum of:
    0.01882913 = weight(_text_:internet in 2893) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01882913 = score(doc=2893,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09621047 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.032588977 = queryNorm
        0.1957077 = fieldWeight in 2893, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2893)
  0.083333336 = coord(1/12)
    Abstract
    Trendthemen, wie Social Tagging oder Web 2.0, bergen generell die Gefahr, dass Adaptionsentscheidungen auf Basis von im öffentlichen Internet vorgefundenen und den Medien lautstark thematisierten Erfolgsbeispielen getroffen werden. Für die interne Anwendung in einer Organisation ist dieses Vorgehen jedoch risikoreich. Deshalb sollte ein ausführlicher Business Case am Anfang jedes SocialTagging-Projekts stehen, der Nutzen- und Risikopotenziale realistisch einzuschätzen vermag. Der vorliegende Beitrag listet dazu exemplarisch die wichtigsten Aspekte für die Einschätzung des Wertbeitrags und der Stolpersteine für Social Tagging in Intranets und vergleichbaren internen Informationssystemen wie Mitarbeiterportalen, Dokumenten-Repositories und Knowledge Bases auf.
  6. Antin, J.; Earp, M.: With a little help from my friends : self-interested and prosocial behavior on MySpace Music (2010) 0.00 
    0.0015690941 = product of:
  0.01882913 = sum of:
    0.01882913 = weight(_text_:internet in 3458) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01882913 = score(doc=3458,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09621047 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.032588977 = queryNorm
        0.1957077 = fieldWeight in 3458, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3458)
  0.083333336 = coord(1/12)
    Theme
    Internet
  7. Vaidya, P.; Harinarayana, N.S.: ¬The comparative and analytical study of LibraryThing tags with Library of Congress Subject Headings (2016) 0.00 
    0.0015690941 = product of:
  0.01882913 = sum of:
    0.01882913 = weight(_text_:internet in 2492) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01882913 = score(doc=2492,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09621047 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.032588977 = queryNorm
        0.1957077 = fieldWeight in 2492, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2492)
  0.083333336 = coord(1/12)
    Abstract
    The internet in its Web 2.0 version has given an opportunity among users to be participative and the chance to enhance the existing system, which makes it dynamic and collaborative. The activity of social tagging among researchers to organize the digital resources is an interesting study among information professionals. The one way of organizing the resources for future retrieval through these user-generated terms makes an interesting analysis by comparing them with professionally created controlled vocabularies. Here in this study, an attempt has been made to compare Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH) terms with LibraryThing social tags. In this comparative analysis, the results show that social tags can be used to enhance the metadata for information retrieval. But still, the uncontrolled nature of social tags is a concern and creates uncertainty among researchers.
  8. Shirky, C.: Ontology is overrated : categories, links, and tags (2005) 0.00 
    0.0013075785 = product of:
  0.015690941 = sum of:
    0.015690941 = weight(_text_:internet in 1265) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015690941 = score(doc=1265,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09621047 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.032588977 = queryNorm
        0.16308975 = fieldWeight in 1265, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1265)
  0.083333336 = coord(1/12)
    Series
    Clay Shirky's writings about the Internet
  9. Heckner, M.: Tagging, rating, posting : studying forms of user contribution for web-based information management and information retrieval (2009) 0.00 
    0.0013075785 = product of:
  0.015690941 = sum of:
    0.015690941 = weight(_text_:internet in 2931) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015690941 = score(doc=2931,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09621047 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.032588977 = queryNorm
        0.16308975 = fieldWeight in 2931, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2931)
  0.083333336 = coord(1/12)
    Theme
    Internet
  10. Nov, O.; Naaman, M.; Ye, C.: Analysis of participation in an online photo-sharing community : a multidimensional perspective (2010) 0.00 
    0.0013075785 = product of:
  0.015690941 = sum of:
    0.015690941 = weight(_text_:internet in 3424) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015690941 = score(doc=3424,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09621047 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.032588977 = queryNorm
        0.16308975 = fieldWeight in 3424, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3424)
  0.083333336 = coord(1/12)
    Theme
    Internet
  11. Huang, C.; Fu, T.; Chen, H.: Text-based video content classification for online video-sharing sites (2010) 0.00 
    0.0013075785 = product of:
  0.015690941 = sum of:
    0.015690941 = weight(_text_:internet in 3452) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015690941 = score(doc=3452,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09621047 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.032588977 = queryNorm
        0.16308975 = fieldWeight in 3452, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3452)
  0.083333336 = coord(1/12)
    Theme
    Internet
  12. Bar-Ilan, J.; Zhitomirsky-Geffet, M.; Miller, Y.; Shoham, S.: ¬The effects of background information and social interaction on image tagging (2010) 0.00 
    0.0013075785 = product of:
  0.015690941 = sum of:
    0.015690941 = weight(_text_:internet in 3453) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015690941 = score(doc=3453,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09621047 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.032588977 = queryNorm
        0.16308975 = fieldWeight in 3453, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3453)
  0.083333336 = coord(1/12)
    Theme
    Internet
  13. Niemann, C.: Intelligenz im Chaos : erste Schritte zur Analyse des Kreativen Potenzials eines Tagging-Systems (2010) 0.00 
    0.0013075785 = product of:
  0.015690941 = sum of:
    0.015690941 = weight(_text_:internet in 4375) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015690941 = score(doc=4375,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09621047 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.032588977 = queryNorm
        0.16308975 = fieldWeight in 4375, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4375)
  0.083333336 = coord(1/12)
    Abstract
    Die Auszeichnung digitaler Medien durch Tagging ist zur festen Größe für das Wissensmanagement im Internet avanciert. Im Kontext des zunehmenden information overload' stehen wissenschaftliche Bibliotheken vor der Aufgabe, die große Flut digital publizierter Artikel und Werke möglichst inhaltlich erschlossen verfügbar zu machen. Die Frage ist, ob durch den Einsatz von Tagging-Systemen die kollaborative Intelligenz der NutzerInnen für die Sacherschließung eingesetzt werden kann, während diese von einer intuitiven und individuellen Wissensorganisation profitieren. Die große Freiheit bei der Vergabe von Deskriptoren durch die NutzerInnen eines Tagging-Systems ist nämlich ein ambivalentes Phänomen: Kundennähe und kreatives Potenzial stehen der großen Menge völlig unkontrollierter Meta-Informationen gegenüber, deren inhaltliche Qualität und Aussagekraft noch unklar ist. Bisherige Forschungsbemühungen konzentrieren sich hauptsächlich auf die automatische Hierarchisierung bzw. Relationierung der Tag-Daten (etwa mittels Ähnlichkeitsalgorithmen) oder auf die Analyse des (Miss-)Erfolgs, den die NutzerInnen bei einer Suchanfrage subjektiv erfahren. Aus der Sicht stark strukturierter Wissensorganisation, wie sie Experten z. B. durch die Anwendung von Klassifikationen realisieren, handelt es sich bei den zunächst unvermittelt nebeneinander stehenden Tags allerdings kurz gesagt um Chaos. Dass in diesem Chaos aber auch Struktur und wertvolles Wissen als Gemeinschaftsprodukt erzeugt werden kann, ist eine der zentralen Thesen dieses Artikels.
  14. Catarino, M.E.; Baptista, A.A.: Relating folksonomies with Dublin Core (2008) 0.00 
    0.001300887 = product of:
  0.015610643 = sum of:
    0.015610643 = product of:
      0.031221285 = sum of:
        0.031221285 = weight(_text_:22 in 2652) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.031221285 = score(doc=2652,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.11412105 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032588977 = queryNorm
            0.27358043 = fieldWeight in 2652, 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=2652)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.083333336 = coord(1/12)
    Pages
    S.14-22
    Source
    Metadata for semantic and social applications : proceedings of the International Conference on Dublin Core and Metadata Applications, Berlin, 22 - 26 September 2008, DC 2008: Berlin, Germany / ed. by Jane Greenberg and Wolfgang Klas
  15. Harrer, A.; Lohmann, S.: Potenziale von Tagging als partizipative Methode für Lehrportale und E-Learning-Kurse (2008) 0.00 
    0.0012878124 = product of:
  0.015453748 = sum of:
    0.015453748 = product of:
      0.030907497 = sum of:
        0.030907497 = weight(_text_:22 in 2889) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.030907497 = score(doc=2889,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11412105 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032588977 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2889, 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=2889)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.083333336 = coord(1/12)
    Date
    21. 6.2009 12:22:44
  16. Kruk, S.R.; Kruk, E.; Stankiewicz, K.: Evaluation of semantic and social technologies for digital libraries (2009) 0.00 
    0.0011038391 = product of:
  0.01324607 = sum of:
    0.01324607 = product of:
      0.02649214 = sum of:
        0.02649214 = weight(_text_:22 in 3387) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02649214 = score(doc=3387,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11412105 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032588977 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3387, 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=3387)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.083333336 = coord(1/12)
    Date
    1. 8.2010 12:35:22
  17. Rolla, P.J.: User tags versus Subject headings : can user-supplied data improve subject access to library collections? (2009) 0.00 
    0.0011038391 = product of:
  0.01324607 = sum of:
    0.01324607 = product of:
      0.02649214 = sum of:
        0.02649214 = weight(_text_:22 in 3601) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02649214 = score(doc=3601,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11412105 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032588977 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3601, 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=3601)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.083333336 = coord(1/12)
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  18. Strader, C.R.: Author-assigned keywords versus Library of Congress Subject Headings : implications for the cataloging of electronic theses and dissertations (2009) 0.00 
    0.0011038391 = product of:
  0.01324607 = sum of:
    0.01324607 = product of:
      0.02649214 = sum of:
        0.02649214 = weight(_text_:22 in 3602) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02649214 = score(doc=3602,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11412105 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032588977 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3602, 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=3602)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.083333336 = coord(1/12)
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  19. Heckner, M.; Mühlbacher, S.; Wolff, C.: Tagging tagging : a classification model for user keywords in scientific bibliography management systems (2007) 0.00 
    0.0010460628 = product of:
  0.012552753 = sum of:
    0.012552753 = weight(_text_:internet in 533) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012552753 = score(doc=533,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09621047 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.032588977 = queryNorm
        0.1304718 = fieldWeight in 533, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=533)
  0.083333336 = coord(1/12)
    Abstract
    Therefore our main research questions are as follows: - Is it possible to discover regular patterns in tag usage and to establish a stable category model? - Does a specific tagging language comparable to internet slang or chatspeak evolve? - How do social tags differ from traditional (author / expert) keywords? - To what degree are social tags taken from or findable in the full text of the tagged resource? - Do tags in a research literature context go beyond simple content description (e.g. tags indicating time or task-related information, cf. Kipp et al. 2006)?
  20. Danowski, P.: Authority files and Web 2.0 : Wikipedia and the PND. An Example (2007) 0.00 
    9.19866E-4 = product of:
  0.011038392 = sum of:
    0.011038392 = product of:
      0.022076784 = sum of:
        0.022076784 = weight(_text_:22 in 1291) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.022076784 = score(doc=1291,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11412105 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032588977 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1291, 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=1291)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.083333336 = coord(1/12)
    Content
    Vortrag anlässlich des Workshops: "Extending the multilingual capacity of The European Library in the EDL project Stockholm, Swedish National Library, 22-23 November 2007".

Authors

Years

Languages

  • e 27
  • d 19

Types

  • a 38
  • m 5
  • el 3
  • b 2
  • s 2
  • More… Less…

Themes

Subjects

Classifications