Search (62 results, page 1 of 4)

  • × year_i:[2010 TO 2020}
  • × theme_ss:"Informationsmittel"
  1. Schumann, L.; Stock, W.G.: ¬Ein umfassendes ganzheitliches Modell für Evaluation und Akzeptanzanalysen von Informationsdiensten : Das Information Service Evaluation (ISE) Modell (2014) 0.03 
    0.027154082 = product of:
  0.067885205 = sum of:
    0.004767807 = weight(_text_:a in 1492) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.004767807 = score(doc=1492,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.089176424 = fieldWeight in 1492, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1492)
    0.0631174 = sum of:
      0.019141505 = weight(_text_:information in 1492) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.019141505 = score(doc=1492,freq=6.0), product of:
          0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046368346 = queryNorm
          0.23515764 = fieldWeight in 1492, product of:
            2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
              6.0 = termFreq=6.0
            1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1492)
      0.043975897 = weight(_text_:22 in 1492) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.043975897 = score(doc=1492,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.16237405 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046368346 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 1492, 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=1492)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    Informationsdienste werden heutzutage von großen Teilen der Bevölkerung im Berufs- wie im Privatleben genutzt. Es ist ein wichtiges informationswissenschaftliches Thema, Informationsdienste adäquat zu beschreiben und ihre Qualität zu bewerten. Unser Information Service Evaluation (ISE) Modell führt unterschiedliche Traditionen der Evaluations- sowie der Technologieakzeptanzforschung zusammen und besteht aus fünf Dimensionen: Qualität des Informationsdienstes, Nutzer, Informationsakzeptanz, Informationsumfeld und Zeit. Der Überblicks­artikel erläutert diese Dimension und bietet einen Einblick in ein flexibel handhabbares und umfassendes holistisches Modell der Beschreibung und Bewertung von Informationsdiensten.
    Date
    22. 9.2014 18:56:46
    Source
    Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 65(2014) H.4/5, S.239-246
    Type
    a
  2. Okoli, C.; Mehdi, M.; Mesgari, M.; Nielsen, F.A.; Lanamäki, A.: Wikipedia in the eyes of its beholders : a systematic review of scholarly research on Wikipedia readers and readership (2014) 0.03 
    0.025644375 = product of:
  0.064110935 = sum of:
    0.0100103095 = weight(_text_:a in 1540) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0100103095 = score(doc=1540,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.18723148 = fieldWeight in 1540, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1540)
    0.054100625 = sum of:
      0.016407004 = weight(_text_:information in 1540) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.016407004 = score(doc=1540,freq=6.0), product of:
          0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046368346 = queryNorm
          0.20156369 = fieldWeight in 1540, product of:
            2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
              6.0 = termFreq=6.0
            1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1540)
      0.037693623 = weight(_text_:22 in 1540) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.037693623 = score(doc=1540,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.16237405 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046368346 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1540, 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=1540)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    Hundreds of scholarly studies have investigated various aspects of Wikipedia. Although a number of literature reviews have provided overviews of this vast body of research, none has specifically focused on the readers of Wikipedia and issues concerning its readership. In this systematic literature review, we review 99 studies to synthesize current knowledge regarding the readership of Wikipedia and provide an analysis of research methods employed. The scholarly research has found that Wikipedia is popular not only for lighter topics such as entertainment but also for more serious topics such as health and legal information. Scholars, librarians, and students are common users, and Wikipedia provides a unique opportunity for educating students in digital literacy. We conclude with a summary of key findings, implications for researchers, and implications for the Wikipedia community.
    Date
    18.11.2014 13:22:03
    Series
    Advances in information science
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 65(2014) no.12, S.2381-2403
    Type
    a
  3. Martínez-Ávila, D.; Chaves Guimarães, J.A.; Pinho, F.A.; Fox, M.J.: ¬The representation of ethics and knowledge organization in the WoS and LISTA databases (2015) 0.02 
    0.024440078 = product of:
  0.061100192 = sum of:
    0.0100103095 = weight(_text_:a in 2358) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0100103095 = score(doc=2358,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.18723148 = fieldWeight in 2358, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2358)
    0.051089883 = sum of:
      0.013396261 = weight(_text_:information in 2358) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.013396261 = score(doc=2358,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046368346 = queryNorm
          0.16457605 = fieldWeight in 2358, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2358)
      0.037693623 = weight(_text_:22 in 2358) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.037693623 = score(doc=2358,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.16237405 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046368346 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2358, 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=2358)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    A naïve user seeking introductory information on a topic may perceive a domain as it is shown by the search results in a database; however, inconsistencies in indexing can misrepresent the full picture of the domain by including irrelevant documents or omitting relevant ones, sometimes inexplicably. A bibliometric analysis was conducted on the domain of ethics in knowledge organization in the World of Science (WoS) and Library, Information Science & Technology Abstracts (LISTA) databases to discern how it is being presented by search results in those databases and to attempt to determine why inconsistencies occurred.
    Date
    17. 2.2018 16:50:22
    Type
    a
  4. Cho, H.; Chen, M.-H.; Chung, S.: Testing an integrative theoretical model of knowledge-sharing behavior in the context of Wikipedia (2010) 0.02 
    0.022870608 = product of:
  0.05717652 = sum of:
    0.0100103095 = weight(_text_:a in 3460) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0100103095 = score(doc=3460,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.18723148 = fieldWeight in 3460, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3460)
    0.04716621 = sum of:
      0.009472587 = weight(_text_:information in 3460) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.009472587 = score(doc=3460,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046368346 = queryNorm
          0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 3460, 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=3460)
      0.037693623 = weight(_text_:22 in 3460) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.037693623 = score(doc=3460,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.16237405 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046368346 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3460, 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=3460)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    This study explores how and why people participate in collaborative knowledge-building practices in the context of Wikipedia. Based on a survey of 223 Wikipedians, this study examines the relationship between motivations, internal cognitive beliefs, social-relational factors, and knowledge-sharing intentions. Results from structural equation modeling (SEM) analysis reveal that attitudes, knowledge self-efficacy, and a basic norm of generalized reciprocity have significant and direct relationships with knowledge-sharing intentions. Altruism (an intrinsic motivator) is positively related to attitudes toward knowledge sharing, whereas reputation (an extrinsic motivator) is not a significant predictor of attitude. The study also reveals that a social-relational factor, namely, a sense of belonging, is related to knowledge-sharing intentions indirectly through different motivational and social factors such as altruism, subjective norms, knowledge self-efficacy, and generalized reciprocity. Implications for future research and practice are discussed.
    Date
    1. 6.2010 10:13:22
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 61(2010) no.6, S.1198-1212
    Type
    a
  5. Bhavnani, S.K.; Peck, F.A.: Scatter matters : regularities and implications for the scatter of healthcare information on the Web (2010) 0.01 
    0.010315939 = product of:
  0.025789846 = sum of:
    0.010812371 = weight(_text_:a in 3433) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010812371 = score(doc=3433,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.20223314 = fieldWeight in 3433, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3433)
    0.014977476 = product of:
      0.029954951 = sum of:
        0.029954951 = weight(_text_:information in 3433) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029954951 = score(doc=3433,freq=20.0), product of:
            0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.36800325 = fieldWeight in 3433, product of:
              4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
                20.0 = termFreq=20.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3433)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    Despite the development of huge healthcare Web sites and powerful search engines, many searchers end their searches prematurely with incomplete information. Recent studies suggest that users often retrieve incomplete information because of the complex scatter of relevant facts about a topic across Web pages. However, little is understood about regularities underlying such information scatter. To probe regularities within the scatter of facts across Web pages, this article presents the results of two analyses: (a) a cluster analysis of Web pages that reveals the existence of three page clusters that vary in information density and (b) a content analysis that suggests the role each of the above-mentioned page clusters play in providing comprehensive information. These results provide implications for the design of Web sites, search tools, and training to help users find comprehensive information about a topic and for a hypothesis describing the underlying mechanisms causing the scatter. We conclude by briefly discussing how the analysis of information scatter, at the granularity of facts, complements existing theories of information-seeking behavior.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 61(2010) no.4, S.659-676
    Type
    a
  6. Hartmann, B.: Ab ins MoMA : zum virtuellen Museumsgang (2011) 0.01 
    0.009173402 = product of:
  0.022933504 = sum of:
    0.004086692 = weight(_text_:a in 1821) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.004086692 = score(doc=1821,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.07643694 = fieldWeight in 1821, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1821)
    0.018846812 = product of:
      0.037693623 = sum of:
        0.037693623 = weight(_text_:22 in 1821) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.037693623 = score(doc=1821,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16237405 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1821, 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=1821)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Date
    3. 5.1997 8:44:22
    Type
    a
  7. McNamara, M.; Arnold, C.; Sarma, K.; Aberle, D.; Garon, E.; Bui, A.A.T.: Patient portal preferences : perspectives on imaging information (2015) 0.01 
    0.008644725 = product of:
  0.021611813 = sum of:
    0.0100103095 = weight(_text_:a in 2134) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0100103095 = score(doc=2134,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.18723148 = fieldWeight in 2134, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2134)
    0.011601503 = product of:
      0.023203006 = sum of:
        0.023203006 = weight(_text_:information in 2134) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023203006 = score(doc=2134,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.2850541 = fieldWeight in 2134, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2134)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    Patient portals have the potential to provide content that is specifically tailored to a patient's information needs based on diagnoses and other factors. In this work, we conducted a survey of 41 lung cancer patients at an outpatient lung cancer clinic at the medical center of the University of California, Los Angeles, to gain insight into these perceived information needs and opinions on the design of a portal to fulfill them. We found that patients requested access to information related to diagnosis and imaging, with more than half of the patients reporting that they did not anticipate an increase in anxiety due to access to medical record information via a portal. We also found that patient educational background did not lead to a significant difference in desires for explanations of reports and definitions of terms.
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 66(2015) no.8, S.1606-1615
    Type
    a
  8. Luyt, B.; Ally, Y.; Low, N.H.; Ismail, N.B.: Librarian perception of Wikipedia : threats or opportunities for librarianship? (2010) 0.01 
    0.007471291 = product of:
  0.018678227 = sum of:
    0.009010308 = weight(_text_:a in 5076) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009010308 = score(doc=5076,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.1685276 = fieldWeight in 5076, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5076)
    0.009667919 = product of:
      0.019335838 = sum of:
        0.019335838 = weight(_text_:information in 5076) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.019335838 = score(doc=5076,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.23754507 = fieldWeight in 5076, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5076)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    The rapid rise of Wikipedia as an information source has placed the traditional role of librarians as information gatekeepers and guardians under scrutiny with much of the professional literature suggesting that librarians are polarized over the issue of whether Wikipedia is a useful reference tool. This qualitative study examines the perceptions and behaviours of National Library Board (NLB) of Singapore librarians with regards to information seeking and usage of Wikipedia. It finds that instead of polarized attitudes, most librarians, although cautious about using Wikipedia in their professional capacity, hold a range of generally positive attitudes towards the online encyclopaedia, believing that it has a valid role to play in the information seeking of patrons today. This is heartening because it suggests the existence within the librarian population of attitudes that can be tapped to engage constructively with Wikipedia. Three of these in particular are briefly discussed at the end of the article: Wikipedia's ability to appeal to the socalled "digital natives," its role as a source of non-Western information, and its potential to enable a revitalization of the role of librarians as public intellectuals contributing to a democratic information commons.
    Type
    a
  9. Luyt, B.: Wikipedia, collective memory, and the Vietnam war (2016) 0.01 
    0.0073902505 = product of:
  0.018475626 = sum of:
    0.010661141 = weight(_text_:a in 3054) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010661141 = score(doc=3054,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.19940455 = fieldWeight in 3054, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3054)
    0.007814486 = product of:
      0.015628971 = sum of:
        0.015628971 = weight(_text_:information in 3054) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.015628971 = score(doc=3054,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.1920054 = fieldWeight in 3054, 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=3054)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    Wikipedia is increasingly an important source of information for many. Hence, it is important to develop an understanding of how it is situated within society and the wider roles it is called onto perform. This article argues that one of these roles is as a depository of collective memory. Building on the work of Pentzold, I present a case study of the English Wikipedia article on the Vietnam War to demonstrate that the article, or more accurately, its talk pages, provide a forum for the contestation of collective memory. I further argue that this function is one that should be supported by libraries as they position themselves within a rapidly changing digital world.
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 67(2016) no.8, S.1956-1961
    Type
    a
  10. Sharma, N.; Butler, B.S.; Irwin, J.; Spallek, H.: Emphasizing social features in information portals : effects on new member engagement (2011) 0.01 
    0.00690148 = product of:
  0.017253699 = sum of:
    0.0068111527 = weight(_text_:a in 4916) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0068111527 = score(doc=4916,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.12739488 = fieldWeight in 4916, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4916)
    0.010442546 = product of:
      0.020885091 = sum of:
        0.020885091 = weight(_text_:information in 4916) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020885091 = score(doc=4916,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.256578 = fieldWeight in 4916, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4916)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    Many information portals are adding social features with hopes of enhancing the overall user experience. Invitations to join and welcome pages that highlight these social features are expected to encourage use and participation. While this approach is widespread and seems plausible, the effect of providing and highlighting social features remains to be tested. We studied the effects of emphasizing social features on users' response to invitations, their decisions to join, their willingness to provide profile information, and their engagement with the portal's social features. The results of a quasi-experiment found no significant effect of social emphasis in invitations on receivers' responsiveness. However, users receiving invitations highlighting social benefits were less likely to join the portal and provide profile information. Social emphasis in the initial welcome page for the site also was found to have a significant effect on whether individuals joined the portal, how much profile information they provided and shared, and how much they engaged with social features on the site. Unexpectedly, users who were welcomed in a social manner were less likely to join and provided less profile information; they also were less likely to engage with social features of the portal. This suggests that even in online contexts where social activity is an increasingly common feature, highlighting the presence of social features may not always be the optimal presentation strategy.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 62(2011) no.11, S.2106-2120
    Type
    a
  11. Vanopstal, K.; Stichele, R.Vander; Laureys, G.; Buysschaert, J.: PubMed searches by Dutch-speaking nursing students : the impact of language and system experience (2012) 0.01 
    0.0064942986 = product of:
  0.016235746 = sum of:
    0.008341924 = weight(_text_:a in 369) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008341924 = score(doc=369,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.15602624 = fieldWeight in 369, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=369)
    0.007893822 = product of:
      0.015787644 = sum of:
        0.015787644 = weight(_text_:information in 369) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.015787644 = score(doc=369,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.19395474 = fieldWeight in 369, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=369)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    This study analyzes the search behavior of Dutch-speaking nursing students with a nonnative knowledge of English who searched for information in MEDLINE/PubMed about a specific theme in nursing. We examine whether and to what extent their search efficiency is affected by their language skills. Our task-oriented approach focuses on three stages of the information retrieval process: need articulation, query formulation, and relevance judgment. The test participants completed a pretest questionnaire, which gave us information about their overall experience with the search system and their self-reported computer and language skills. The students were briefly introduced to the use of PubMed and MeSH (medical subject headings) before they conducted their keyword-driven subject search. We assessed the search results in terms of recall and precision, and also analyzed the search process. After the search task, a satisfaction survey and a language test were completed. We conclude that language skills have an impact on the search results. We hypothesize that language support might improve the efficiency of searches conducted by Dutch-speaking users of PubMed.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 63(2012) no.8, S.1538-1552
    Type
    a
  12. Jemielniak, D.; Aibar, E.: Bridging the gap between wikipedia and academia (2016) 0.01 
    0.006474727 = product of:
  0.016186817 = sum of:
    0.010661141 = weight(_text_:a in 3022) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010661141 = score(doc=3022,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.19940455 = fieldWeight in 3022, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3022)
    0.005525676 = product of:
      0.011051352 = sum of:
        0.011051352 = weight(_text_:information in 3022) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011051352 = score(doc=3022,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 3022, 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=3022)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    In this opinion piece, we would like to present a short literature review of perceptions and reservations towards Wikipedia in academia, address the common questions about overall reliability of Wikipedia entries, review the actual practices of Wikipedia usage in academia, and conclude with possible scenarios for a peaceful coexistence. Because Wikipedia is a regular topic of JASIST publications (Lim, 2009; Meseguer-Artola, Aibar, Lladós, Minguillón, & Lerga, 2015; Mesgari, Okoli, Mehdi, Nielsen, & Lanamäki, 2015; Okoli, Mehdi, Mesgari, Nielsen, & Lanamäki, 2014), we hope to start a useful discussion with the right audience.
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 67(2016) no.7, S.1773-1776
    Type
    a
  13. Teplitskiy, M.; Lu, G.; Duede, E.: Amplifying the impact of open access : Wikipedia and the diffusion of science (2017) 0.01 
    0.006334501 = product of:
  0.015836252 = sum of:
    0.009138121 = weight(_text_:a in 3782) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009138121 = score(doc=3782,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.1709182 = fieldWeight in 3782, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3782)
    0.0066981306 = product of:
      0.013396261 = sum of:
        0.013396261 = weight(_text_:information in 3782) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.013396261 = score(doc=3782,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.16457605 = fieldWeight in 3782, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3782)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    With the rise of Wikipedia as a first-stop source for scientific information, it is important to understand whether Wikipedia draws upon the research that scientists value most. Here we identify the 250 most heavily used journals in each of 26 research fields (4,721 journals, 19.4M articles) indexed by the Scopus database, and test whether topic, academic status, and accessibility make articles from these journals more or less likely to be referenced on Wikipedia. We find that a journal's academic status (impact factor) and accessibility (open access policy) both strongly increase the probability of it being referenced on Wikipedia. Controlling for field and impact factor, the odds that an open access journal is referenced on the English Wikipedia are 47% higher compared to paywall journals. These findings provide evidence is that a major consequence of open access policies is to significantly amplify the diffusion of science, through an intermediary like Wikipedia, to a broad audience.
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 68(2017) no.9, S.2116-2127
    Type
    a
  14. Luyt, B.; Tan, D.: Improving Wikipedia's credibility : references and citations in a sample of history articles (2010) 0.01 
    0.0063194023 = product of:
  0.015798505 = sum of:
    0.01021673 = weight(_text_:a in 3437) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01021673 = score(doc=3437,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.19109234 = fieldWeight in 3437, product of:
          4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
            18.0 = termFreq=18.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3437)
    0.0055817757 = product of:
      0.011163551 = sum of:
        0.011163551 = weight(_text_:information in 3437) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011163551 = score(doc=3437,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 3437, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3437)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    This study evaluates how well the authors of Wikipedia history articles adhere to the site's policy of assuring verifiability through citations. It does so by examining the references and citations of a subset of country histories. The findings paint a dismal picture. Not only are many claims not verified through citations, those that are suffer from the choice of references used. Many of these are from only a few US government Websites or news media and few are to academic journal material. Given these results, one response would be to declare Wikipedia unsuitable for serious reference work. But another option emerges when we jettison technological determinism and look at Wikipedia as a product of a wider social context. Key to this context is a world in which information is bottled up as commodities requiring payment for access. Equally important is the problematic assumption that texts are undifferentiated bearers of knowledge. Those involved in instructional programs can draw attention to the social nature of texts to counter these assumptions and by so doing create an awareness for a new generation of Wikipedians and Wikipedia users of the need to evaluate texts (and hence citations) in light of the social context of their production and use.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 61(2010) no.4, S.715-722
    Type
    a
  15. Ofek, N.; Rokach, L.: ¬A classifier to determine which Wikipedia biographies will be accepted (2015) 0.01 
    0.006219466 = product of:
  0.015548665 = sum of:
    0.010812371 = weight(_text_:a in 1610) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010812371 = score(doc=1610,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.20223314 = fieldWeight in 1610, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1610)
    0.0047362936 = product of:
      0.009472587 = sum of:
        0.009472587 = weight(_text_:information in 1610) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.009472587 = score(doc=1610,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 1610, 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=1610)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    Wikipedia, like other encyclopedias, includes biographies of notable people. However, because it is jointly written by many contributors, it is subject to constant manipulation by contributors attempting to add biographies of non-notable people. Over time, Wikipedia has developed inclusion criteria for notable people (e.g., receiving a significant award) based on which newly contributed biographies are evaluated. In this paper we present and analyze a set of simple indicators that can be used to predict which article will eventually be accepted. These indicators do not refer to the content itself, but to meta-content features (such as the number of categories that the biography is associated with) and to author-based features (such as if it is a first-time author). By training a classifier on these features, we successfully reached a high predictive performance (area under the receiver operating characteristic [ROC] curve [AUC] of 0.97) even though we overlooked the actual biography text.
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 66(2015) no.1, S.213-218
    Type
    a
  16. Zielinski, K.; Nielek, R.; Wierzbicki, A.; Jatowt, A.: Computing controversy : formal model and algorithms for detecting controversy on Wikipedia and in search queries (2018) 0.01 
    0.0060856803 = product of:
  0.015214201 = sum of:
    0.009632425 = weight(_text_:a in 5093) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009632425 = score(doc=5093,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.18016359 = fieldWeight in 5093, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5093)
    0.0055817757 = product of:
      0.011163551 = sum of:
        0.011163551 = weight(_text_:information in 5093) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011163551 = score(doc=5093,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 5093, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5093)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    Controversy is a complex concept that has been attracting attention of scholars from diverse fields. In the era of Internet and social media, detecting controversy and controversial concepts by the means of automatic methods is especially important. Web searchers could be alerted when the contents they consume are controversial or when they attempt to acquire information on disputed topics. Presenting users with the indications and explanations of the controversy should offer them chance to see the "wider picture" rather than letting them obtain one-sided views. In this work we first introduce a formal model of controversy as the basis of computational approaches to detecting controversial concepts. Then we propose a classification based method for automatic detection of controversial articles and categories in Wikipedia. Next, we demonstrate how to use the obtained results for the estimation of the controversy level of search queries. The proposed method can be incorporated into search engines as a component responsible for detection of queries related to controversial topics. The method is independent of the search engine's retrieval and search results recommendation algorithms, and is therefore unaffected by a possible filter bubble. Our approach can be also applied in Wikipedia or other knowledge bases for supporting the detection of controversy and content maintenance. Finally, we believe that our results could be useful for social science researchers for understanding the complex nature of controversy and in fostering their studies.
    Source
    Information processing and management. 54(2018) no.1, S.14-36
    Type
    a
  17. Konieczny, P.: Teaching with Wikipedia in a 21st-century classroom : perceptions of Wikipedia and its educational benefits (2016) 0.01 
    0.005948606 = product of:
  0.014871514 = sum of:
    0.008173384 = weight(_text_:a in 3007) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008173384 = score(doc=3007,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 3007, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3007)
    0.0066981306 = product of:
      0.013396261 = sum of:
        0.013396261 = weight(_text_:information in 3007) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.013396261 = score(doc=3007,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.16457605 = fieldWeight in 3007, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3007)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    This article explores the current perception of Wikipedia in academia, focusing on both the reasons for its unpopularity among some and the reasons for its growing acceptance among others. First, the reasons that Wikipedia is still struggling to gain acceptance among many academics and higher education professionals are identified. These include common misconceptions about Wikipedia, doubts about its quality, uneasiness with the challenge that it poses to the traditional peer-review system, and a lack of career-enhancing motivations related to using Wikipedia. Second, the benefits of teaching with Wikipedia for educators, students, and the wider society, as discussed in the current teaching literature, are explored. Finally, the article presents an argument for using Wikipedia in a variety of ways to help students develop critical and academic writing skills.
    Series
    Advances in information science
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 67(2016) no.7, S.1523-1534
    Type
    a
  18. Spree, U.: Wörterbücher und Enzyklopädien (2013) 0.01 
    0.00588199 = product of:
  0.014704974 = sum of:
    0.0068111527 = weight(_text_:a in 734) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0068111527 = score(doc=734,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.12739488 = fieldWeight in 734, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=734)
    0.007893822 = product of:
      0.015787644 = sum of:
        0.015787644 = weight(_text_:information in 734) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.015787644 = score(doc=734,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.19395474 = fieldWeight in 734, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=734)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Source
    Grundlagen der praktischen Information und Dokumentation. Handbuch zur Einführung in die Informationswissenschaft und -praxis. 6., völlig neu gefaßte Ausgabe. Hrsg. von R. Kuhlen, W. Semar u. D. Strauch. Begründet von Klaus Laisiepen, Ernst Lutterbeck, Karl-Heinrich Meyer-Uhlenried
    Type
    a
  19. Leydesdorff, L.; Hammarfelt, B.: ¬The structure of the Arts & Humanities Citation Index : a mapping on the basis of aggregated citations among 1,157 journals (2011) 0.01 
    0.0058368337 = product of:
  0.014592084 = sum of:
    0.009010308 = weight(_text_:a in 4941) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009010308 = score(doc=4941,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.1685276 = fieldWeight in 4941, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4941)
    0.0055817757 = product of:
      0.011163551 = sum of:
        0.011163551 = weight(_text_:information in 4941) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011163551 = score(doc=4941,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 4941, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4941)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    Using the Arts & Humanities Citation Index (A&HCI) 2008, we apply mapping techniques previously developed for mapping journal structures in the Science and Social Sciences Citation Indices. Citation relations among the 110,718 records were aggregated at the level of 1,157 journals specific to the A&HCI, and the journal structures are questioned on whether a cognitive structure can be reconstructed and visualized. Both cosine-normalization (bottom up) and factor analysis (top down) suggest a division into approximately 12 subsets. The relations among these subsets are explored using various visualization techniques. However, we were not able to retrieve this structure using the Institute for Scientific Information Subject Categories, including the 25 categories that are specific to the A&HCI. We discuss options for validation such as against the categories of the Humanities Indicators of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, the panel structure of the European Reference Index for the Humanities, and compare our results with the curriculum organization of the Humanities Section of the College of Letters and Sciences of the University of California at Los Angeles as an example of institutional organization.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 62(2011) no.12, S.2414-2426
    Type
    a
  20. Knäusl, H.: Information Behavior : Informationssuche in der Wikipedia (2015) 0.01 
    0.005751905 = product of:
  0.014379762 = sum of:
    0.005448922 = weight(_text_:a in 1737) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.005448922 = score(doc=1737,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.10191591 = fieldWeight in 1737, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1737)
    0.0089308405 = product of:
      0.017861681 = sum of:
        0.017861681 = weight(_text_:information in 1737) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017861681 = score(doc=1737,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.21943474 = fieldWeight in 1737, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1737)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Source
    Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 66(2015) H.1, S.10-16
    Type
    a

Authors

Languages

  • d 37
  • e 25

Types

  • a 54
  • m 6
  • el 5
  • i 1
  • More… Less…

Themes

Subjects

Classifications