Search (54 results, page 1 of 3)

  • × theme_ss:"Social tagging"
  1. Qin, C.; Liu, Y.; Mou, J.; Chen, J.: User adoption of a hybrid social tagging approach in an online knowledge community (2019) 0.06
    0.063451454 = product of:
      0.09517717 = sum of:
        0.032236047 = weight(_text_:management in 5492) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.032236047 = score(doc=5492,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17312427 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051362853 = queryNorm
            0.18620178 = fieldWeight in 5492, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5492)
        0.06294113 = sum of:
          0.02814634 = weight(_text_:system in 5492) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.02814634 = score(doc=5492,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16177002 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
                0.051362853 = queryNorm
              0.17398985 = fieldWeight in 5492, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5492)
          0.03479479 = weight(_text_:22 in 5492) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.03479479 = score(doc=5492,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.17986396 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.051362853 = queryNorm
              0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5492, 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=5492)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose Online knowledge communities make great contributions to global knowledge sharing and innovation. Resource tagging approaches have been widely adopted in such communities to describe, annotate and organize knowledge resources mainly through users' participation. However, it is unclear what causes the adoption of a particular resource tagging approach. The purpose of this paper is to identify factors that drive users to use a hybrid social tagging approach. Design/methodology/approach Technology acceptance model and social cognitive theory are adopted to support an integrated model proposed in this paper. Zhihu, one of the most popular online knowledge communities in China, is taken as the survey context. A survey was conducted with a questionnaire and collected data were analyzed through structural equation model. Findings A new hybrid social resource tagging approach was refined and described. The empirical results revealed that self-efficacy, perceived usefulness (PU) and perceived ease of use exert positive effect on users' attitude. Moreover, social influence, PU and attitude impact significantly on users' intention to use a hybrid social resource tagging approach. Originality/value Theoretically, this study enriches the type of resource tagging approaches and recognizes factors influencing user adoption to use it. Regarding the practical parts, the results provide online information system providers and designers with referential strategies to improve the performance of the current tagging approaches and promote them.
    Date
    20. 1.2015 18:30:22
    Source
    Aslib journal of information management. 71(2019) no.2, S.155-175
  2. Hammond, T.; Hannay, T.; Lund, B.; Flack, M.: Social bookmarking tools (II) : a case study - Connotea (2005) 0.05
    0.046605095 = product of:
      0.06990764 = sum of:
        0.055834472 = weight(_text_:management in 1189) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.055834472 = score(doc=1189,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.17312427 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051362853 = queryNorm
            0.32251096 = fieldWeight in 1189, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1189)
        0.01407317 = product of:
          0.02814634 = sum of:
            0.02814634 = weight(_text_:system in 1189) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.02814634 = score(doc=1189,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16177002 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051362853 = queryNorm
                0.17398985 = fieldWeight in 1189, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1189)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    
    Abstract
    Connotea is a free online reference management and social bookmarking service for scientists created by Nature Publishing Group. While somewhat experimental in nature, Connotea already has a large and growing number of users, and is a real, fully functioning service. The label 'experimental' is not meant to imply that the service is any way ephemeral or esoteric, rather that the concept of social bookmarking itself and the application of that concept to reference management are both recent developments. Connotea is under active development, and we are still in the process of discovering how people will use it. In addition to Connotea being a free and public service, the core code is freely available under an open source license. Connotea was conceived from the outset as an online, social tool. Seeing the possibilities that del.icio.us was opening up for its users in the area of general web linking, we realised that scholarly reference management was a similar problem space. Connotea was designed and developed late in 2004, and soft-launched at the end of December 2004. Usage has grown over the past several months, to the point where there is now enough data in the system for interesting second-order effects to emerge. This paper will start by giving an overview of Connotea, and will outline the key concepts and describe its main features. We will then take the reader on a brief guided tour, show some of the aforementioned second-order effects, and end with a discussion of Connotea's likely future direction.
  3. Huang, S.-L.; Lin, S.-C.; Chan, Y.-C.: Investigating effectiveness and user acceptance of semantic social tagging for knowledge sharing (2012) 0.05
    0.0452892 = product of:
      0.0679338 = sum of:
        0.038683258 = weight(_text_:management in 2732) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.038683258 = score(doc=2732,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17312427 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051362853 = queryNorm
            0.22344214 = fieldWeight in 2732, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2732)
        0.029250536 = product of:
          0.058501072 = sum of:
            0.058501072 = weight(_text_:system in 2732) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.058501072 = score(doc=2732,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.16177002 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051362853 = queryNorm
                0.36163113 = fieldWeight in 2732, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2732)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    
    Abstract
    Social tagging systems enable users to assign arbitrary tags to various digital resources. However, they face vague-meaning problems when users retrieve or present resources with the keyword-based tags. In order to solve these problems, this study takes advantage of Semantic Web technology and the topological characteristics of knowledge maps to develop a system that comprises a semantic tagging mechanism and triple-pattern and visual searching mechanisms. A field experiment was conducted to evaluate the effectiveness and user acceptance of these mechanisms in a knowledge sharing context. The results show that the semantic social tagging system is more effective than a keyword-based system. The visualized knowledge map helps users capture an overview of the knowledge domain, reduce cognitive effort for the search, and obtain more enjoyment. Traditional keyword tagging with a keyword search still has the advantage of ease of use and the users had higher intention to use it. This study also proposes directions for future development of semantic social tagging systems.
    Source
    Information processing and management. 48(2012) no.4, S.599-617
  4. Kruk, S.R.; Kruk, E.; Stankiewicz, K.: Evaluation of semantic and social technologies for digital libraries (2009) 0.04
    0.03970675 = product of:
      0.059560128 = sum of:
        0.038683258 = weight(_text_:management in 3387) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.038683258 = score(doc=3387,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17312427 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051362853 = queryNorm
            0.22344214 = fieldWeight in 3387, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3387)
        0.020876871 = product of:
          0.041753743 = sum of:
            0.041753743 = weight(_text_:22 in 3387) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.041753743 = score(doc=3387,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17986396 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051362853 = 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)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    
    Abstract
    Libraries are the tools we use to learn and to answer our questions. The quality of our work depends, among others, on the quality of the tools we use. Recent research in digital libraries is focused, on one hand on improving the infrastructure of the digital library management systems (DLMS), and on the other on improving the metadata models used to annotate collections of objects maintained by DLMS. The latter includes, among others, the semantic web and social networking technologies. Recently, the semantic web and social networking technologies are being introduced to the digital libraries domain. The expected outcome is that the overall quality of information discovery in digital libraries can be improved by employing social and semantic technologies. In this chapter we present the results of an evaluation of social and semantic end-user information discovery services for the digital libraries.
    Date
    1. 8.2010 12:35:22
  5. Heckner, M.: Tagging, rating, posting : studying forms of user contribution for web-based information management and information retrieval (2009) 0.03
    0.03475901 = product of:
      0.052138515 = sum of:
        0.032236047 = weight(_text_:management in 2931) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.032236047 = score(doc=2931,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17312427 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051362853 = queryNorm
            0.18620178 = fieldWeight in 2931, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2931)
        0.01990247 = product of:
          0.03980494 = sum of:
            0.03980494 = weight(_text_:system in 2931) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03980494 = score(doc=2931,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.16177002 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051362853 = queryNorm
                0.24605882 = fieldWeight in 2931, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2931)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    
    Content
    The Web of User Contribution - Foundations and Principles of the Social Web - Social Tagging - Rating and Filtering of Digital Resources Empirical Analysisof User Contributions - The Functional and Linguistic Structure of Tags - A Comparative Analysis of Tags for Different Digital Resource Types - Exploring Relevance Assessments in Social IR Systems - Exploring User Contribution Within a Higher Education Scenario - Summary of Empirical Results and Implications for Designing Social Information Systems User Contribution for a Participative Information System - Social Information Architecture for an Online Help System
  6. Hsu, M.-H.; Chen, H.-H.: Efficient and effective prediction of social tags to enhance Web search (2011) 0.03
    0.030872812 = product of:
      0.046309218 = sum of:
        0.032236047 = weight(_text_:management in 4625) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.032236047 = score(doc=4625,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17312427 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051362853 = queryNorm
            0.18620178 = fieldWeight in 4625, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4625)
        0.01407317 = product of:
          0.02814634 = sum of:
            0.02814634 = weight(_text_:system in 4625) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.02814634 = score(doc=4625,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16177002 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051362853 = queryNorm
                0.17398985 = fieldWeight in 4625, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4625)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    
    Abstract
    As the web has grown into an integral part of daily life, social annotation has become a popular manner for web users to manage resources. This method of management has many potential applications, but it is limited in applicability by the cold-start problem, especially for new resources on the web. In this article, we study automatic tag prediction for web pages comprehensively and utilize the predicted tags to improve search performance. First, we explore the stabilizing phenomenon of tag usage in a social bookmarking system. Then, we propose a two-stage tag prediction approach, which is efficient and is effective in making use of early annotations from users. In the first stage, content-based ranking, candidate tags are selected and ranked to generate an initial tag list. In the second stage, random-walk re-ranking, we adopt a random-walk model that utilizes tag co-occurrence information to re-rank the initial list. The experimental results show that our algorithm effectively proposes appropriate tags for target web pages. In addition, we present a framework to incorporate tag prediction in a general web search. The experimental results of the web search validate the hypothesis that the proposed framework significantly enhances the typical retrieval model.
  7. Heckner, M.; Mühlbacher, S.; Wolff, C.: Tagging tagging : a classification model for user keywords in scientific bibliography management systems (2007) 0.02
    0.02469825 = product of:
      0.037047375 = sum of:
        0.025788838 = weight(_text_:management in 533) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.025788838 = score(doc=533,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17312427 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051362853 = queryNorm
            0.14896142 = fieldWeight in 533, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=533)
        0.011258536 = product of:
          0.022517072 = sum of:
            0.022517072 = weight(_text_:system in 533) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.022517072 = score(doc=533,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16177002 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051362853 = queryNorm
                0.13919188 = fieldWeight in 533, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=533)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    
    Abstract
    Recently, a growing amount of systems that allow personal content annotation (tagging) are being created, ranging from personal sites for organising bookmarks (del.icio.us), photos (flickr.com) or videos (video.google.com, youtube.com) to systems for managing bibliographies for scientific research projects (citeulike.org, connotea.org). Simultaneously, a debate on the pro and cons of allowing users to add personal keywords to digital content has arisen. One recurrent point-of-discussion is whether tagging can solve the well-known vocabulary problem: In order to support successful retrieval in complex environments, it is necessary to index an object with a variety of aliases (cf. Furnas 1987). In this spirit, social tagging enhances the pool of rigid, traditional keywording by adding user-created retrieval vocabularies. Furthermore, tagging goes beyond simple personal content-based keywords by providing meta-keywords like funny or interesting that "identify qualities or characteristics" (Golder and Huberman 2006, Kipp and Campbell 2006, Kipp 2007, Feinberg 2006, Kroski 2005). Contrarily, tagging systems are claimed to lead to semantic difficulties that may hinder the precision and recall of tagging systems (e.g. the polysemy problem, cf. Marlow 2006, Lakoff 2005, Golder and Huberman 2006). Empirical research on social tagging is still rare and mostly from a computer linguistics or librarian point-of-view (Voß 2007) which focus either on the automatic statistical analyses of large data sets, or intellectually inspect single cases of tag usage: Some scientists studied the evolution of tag vocabularies and tag distribution in specific systems (Golder and Huberman 2006, Hammond 2005). Others concentrate on tagging behaviour and tagger characteristics in collaborative systems. (Hammond 2005, Kipp and Campbell 2007, Feinberg 2006, Sen 2006). However, little research has been conducted on the functional and linguistic characteristics of tags.1 An analysis of these patterns could show differences between user wording and conventional keywording. In order to provide a reasonable basis for comparison, a classification system for existing tags is needed.
  8. Wei, W.; Ram, S.: Utilizing sozial bookmarking tag space for Web content discovery : a social network analysis approach (2010) 0.02
    0.02469825 = product of:
      0.037047375 = sum of:
        0.025788838 = weight(_text_:management in 1) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.025788838 = score(doc=1,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17312427 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051362853 = queryNorm
            0.14896142 = fieldWeight in 1, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1)
        0.011258536 = product of:
          0.022517072 = sum of:
            0.022517072 = weight(_text_:system in 1) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.022517072 = score(doc=1,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16177002 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051362853 = queryNorm
                0.13919188 = fieldWeight in 1, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    
    Abstract
    Social bookmarking has gained popularity since the advent of Web 2.0. Keywords known as tags are created to annotate web content, and the resulting tag space composed of the tags, the resources, and the users arises as a new platform for web content discovery. Useful and interesting web resources can be located through searching and browsing based on tags, as well as following the user-user connections formed in the social bookmarking community. However, the effectiveness of tag-based search is limited due to the lack of explicitly represented semantics in the tag space. In addition, social connections between users are underused for web content discovery because of the inadequate social functions. In this research, we propose a comprehensive framework to reorganize the flat tag space into a hierarchical faceted model. We also studied the structure and properties of various networks emerging from the tag space for the purpose of more efficient web content discovery. The major research approach used in this research is social network analysis (SNA), together with methodologies employed in design science research. The contribution of our research includes: (i) a faceted model to categorize social bookmarking tags; (ii) a relationship ontology to represent the semantics of relationships between tags; (iii) heuristics to reorganize the flat tag space into a hierarchical faceted model using analysis of tag-tag co-occurrence networks; (iv) an implemented prototype system as proof-of-concept to validate the feasibility of the reorganization approach; (v) a set of evaluations of the social functions of the current networking features of social bookmarking and a series of recommendations as to how to improve the social functions to facilitate web content discovery.
    Content
    A Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of the COMMITTEE ON BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY WITH A MAJOR IN MANAGEMENT In the Graduate College THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA. Vgl.: http://hdl.handle.net/10150/195123. Vgl. auch: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Utilizing-social-bookmarking-tag-space-for-web-a-Ram-Wei/da9e7e5ee771008b741af7176d3f0d67128d1dca.
  9. Kuchler, T.; Pawlowski, J.M.; Zimmermann, V.: Social Tagging and Open Content : a concept for the future of e-learning and knowledge management? (2008) 0.02
    0.018235464 = product of:
      0.05470639 = sum of:
        0.05470639 = weight(_text_:management in 2892) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05470639 = score(doc=2892,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.17312427 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051362853 = queryNorm
            0.31599492 = fieldWeight in 2892, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2892)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Open Content is a promising concept for e-learning and knowledge management. It can improve sharing and re-using educational resources and create new business opportunities. However, in contrast to open source software, these opportunities have not yet been adopted by a wide community. This article discusses barriers and opportunities. The Content Explosion Model shows how content can be re-used and adapted to increase sharing and distributing Open Content. Social tagging is discussed, on the basis of an implementation example (SLIDESTAR), as a means of fostering content exchange on a content community platform.
  10. DeZelar-Tiedman, V.: Doing the LibraryThing(TM) in an academic library catalog (2008) 0.02
    0.016784301 = product of:
      0.0503529 = sum of:
        0.0503529 = sum of:
          0.022517072 = weight(_text_:system in 2666) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.022517072 = score(doc=2666,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16177002 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
                0.051362853 = queryNorm
              0.13919188 = fieldWeight in 2666, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
                0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2666)
          0.02783583 = weight(_text_:22 in 2666) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.02783583 = score(doc=2666,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.17986396 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.051362853 = queryNorm
              0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 2666, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2666)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Many libraries and other cultural institutions are incorporating Web 2.0 features and enhanced metadata into their catalogs (Trant 2006). These value-added elements include those typically found in commercial and social networking sites, such as book jacket images, reviews, and usergenerated tags. One such site that libraries are exploring as a model is LibraryThing (www.librarything.com) LibraryThing is a social networking site that allows users to "catalog" their own book collections. Members can add tags and reviews to records for books, as well as engage in online discussions. In addition to its service for individuals, LibraryThing offers a feebased service to libraries, where institutions can add LibraryThing tags, recommendations, and other features to their online catalog records. This poster will present data analyzing the quality and quantity of the metadata that a large academic library would expect to gain if utilizing such a service, focusing on the overlap between titles found in the library's catalog and in LibraryThing's database, and on a comparison between the controlled subject headings in the former and the user-generated tags in the latter. During February through April 2008, a random sample of 383 titles from the University of Minnesota Libraries catalog was searched in LibraryThing. Eighty works, or 21 percent of the sample, had corresponding records available in LibraryThing. Golder and Huberman (2006) outline the advantages and disadvantages of using controlled vocabulary for subject access to information resources versus the growing trend of tags supplied by users or by content creators. Using the 80 matched records from the sample, comparisons were made between the user-supplied tags in LibraryThing (social tags) and the subject headings in the library catalog records (controlled vocabulary system). In the library records, terms from all 6XX MARC fields were used. To make a more meaningful comparison, controlled subject terms were broken down into facets according to their headings and subheadings, and each unique facet counted separately. A total of 227 subject terms were applied to the 80 catalog records, an average of 2.84 per record. In LibraryThing, 698 tags were applied to the same 80 titles, an average of 8.73 per title. The poster will further explore the relationships between the terms applied in each source, and identify where overlaps and complementary levels of access occur.
    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
  11. Vander Wal, T.: Welcome to the Matrix! (2008) 0.02
    0.016784301 = product of:
      0.0503529 = sum of:
        0.0503529 = sum of:
          0.022517072 = weight(_text_:system in 2881) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.022517072 = score(doc=2881,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16177002 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
                0.051362853 = queryNorm
              0.13919188 = fieldWeight in 2881, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
                0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2881)
          0.02783583 = weight(_text_:22 in 2881) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.02783583 = score(doc=2881,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.17986396 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.051362853 = queryNorm
              0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 2881, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2881)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    My keynote at the workshop "Social Tagging in Knowledge Organization" was a great opportunity to make and share new experiences. For the first time ever, I sat in my office at home and gave a live web video presentation to a conference audience elsewhere on the globe. At the same time, it was also an opportunity to premier my conceptual model "Matrix of Perception" to an interdisciplinary audience of researchers and practitioners with a variety of backgrounds - reaching from philosophy, psychology, pedagogy and computation to library science and economics. The interdisciplinary approach of the conference is also mirrored in the structure of this volume, with articles on the theoretical background, the empirical analysis and the potential applications of tagging, for instance in university libraries, e-learning, or e-commerce. As an introduction to the topic of "social tagging" I would like to draw your attention to some foundation concepts of the phenomenon I have racked my brain with for the last few month. One thing I have seen missing in recent research and system development is a focus on the variety of user perspectives in social tagging. Different people perceive tagging in complex variegated ways and use this form of knowledge organization for a variety of purposes. My analytical interest lies in understanding the personas and patterns in tagging systems and in being able to label their different perceptions. To come up with a concise picture of user expectations, needs and activities, I have broken down the perspectives on tagging into two different categories, namely "faces" and "depth". When put together, they form the "Matrix of Perception" - a nuanced view of stakeholders and their respective levels of participation.
    Date
    22. 6.2009 9:15:45
  12. Tennis, J.T.: Measured time : imposing a temporal metric to classificatory structures 0.02
    0.015043489 = product of:
      0.045130465 = sum of:
        0.045130465 = weight(_text_:management in 3529) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.045130465 = score(doc=3529,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17312427 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051362853 = queryNorm
            0.2606825 = fieldWeight in 3529, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3529)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Describes three units of time helpful for understanding and evaluating classificatory structures: long time (versions and states of classification schemes), short time (the act of indexing as repeated ritual or form), and micro-time (where stages of the interpretation process of indexing are separated out and inventoried). Concludes with a short discussion of how time and the impermanence of classification also conjures up an artistic conceptualization of indexing, and briefly uses that to question the seemingly dominant understanding of classification practice as outcome of scientific management and assembly line thought.
  13. Komus, A.; Wauch, F.: Wikimanagement : was Unternehmen von Social-Software und Web 2.0 lernen können (2008) 0.01
    0.014889194 = product of:
      0.04466758 = sum of:
        0.04466758 = weight(_text_:management in 508) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04466758 = score(doc=508,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.17312427 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051362853 = queryNorm
            0.25800878 = fieldWeight in 508, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=508)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Content
    Inhalt: I. Wie funktionieren Social Software-Angebote? II. Welchen Erklärungsbeitrag leisten bestehende Organisationsansätze und welche Schlüsse muss die Organisationslehre aus den Erfahrungen ziehen? III. Welches sind die Erfolgsfaktoren von Social Software und wie lassen sich Technologie und Erfolgsfaktoren in das Management übertragen und in Unternehmen nutzen?
    RSWK
    Management / Soziale Software / Leitbild
    Subject
    Management / Soziale Software / Leitbild
  14. Wang, J.; Clements, M.; Yang, J.; Vries, A.P. de; Reinders, M.J.T.: Personalization of tagging systems (2010) 0.01
    0.01289442 = product of:
      0.038683258 = sum of:
        0.038683258 = weight(_text_:management in 4229) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.038683258 = score(doc=4229,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17312427 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051362853 = queryNorm
            0.22344214 = fieldWeight in 4229, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4229)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Source
    Information processing and management. 46(2010) no.1, S.58-70
  15. Konkova, E.; Göker, A.; Butterworth, R.; MacFarlane, A.: Social tagging: exploring the image, the tags, and the game (2014) 0.01
    0.01289442 = product of:
      0.038683258 = sum of:
        0.038683258 = weight(_text_:management in 1370) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.038683258 = score(doc=1370,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17312427 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051362853 = queryNorm
            0.22344214 = fieldWeight in 1370, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1370)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Large image collections on the Web need to be organized for effective retrieval. Metadata has a key role in image retrieval but rely on professionally assigned tags which is not a viable option. Current content-based image retrieval systems have not demonstrated sufficient utility on large-scale image sources on the web, and are usually used as a supplement to existing text-based image retrieval systems. We present two social tagging alternatives in the form of photo-sharing networks and image labeling games. Here we analyze these applications to evaluate their usefulness from the semantic point of view, investigating the management of social tagging for indexing. The findings of the study have shown that social tagging can generate a sizeable number of tags that can be classified as in terpretive for an image, and that tagging behaviour has a manageable and adjustable nature depending on tagging guidelines.
  16. Raban, D.R.; Ronen, I.; Guy, I.: Acting or reacting? : Preferential attachment in a people-tagging system (2011) 0.01
    0.011258537 = product of:
      0.03377561 = sum of:
        0.03377561 = product of:
          0.06755122 = sum of:
            0.06755122 = weight(_text_:system in 4371) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.06755122 = score(doc=4371,freq=8.0), product of:
                0.16177002 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.051362853 = queryNorm
                0.41757566 = fieldWeight in 4371, product of:
                  2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                    8.0 = termFreq=8.0
                  3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4371)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Social technologies tend to attract research on social structure or interaction. In this paper we analyze the individual use of a social technology, specifically an enterprise people-tagging application. We focus on active participants of the system and distinguish between users who initiate activity and those who respond to activity. This distinction is situated within the preferential attachment theory in order to examine which type of participant contributes more to the process of tagging. We analyze the usage of the people-tagging application in a snapshot representing 3 years of activity, focusing on self-tagging compared to tagging by and of others. The main findings are: (1) People who tag themselves are the most productive contributors to the system. (2) Preferential attachment saturation is reached at 12-14 tags per user. (3) The nature of participation is more significant than the number of participants for system growth. The paper concludes with theoretical and practical implications.
  17. Santini, M.: Zero, single, or multi? : genre of web pages through the users' perspective (2008) 0.01
    0.010745349 = product of:
      0.032236047 = sum of:
        0.032236047 = weight(_text_:management in 2059) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.032236047 = score(doc=2059,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17312427 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051362853 = queryNorm
            0.18620178 = fieldWeight in 2059, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2059)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Source
    Information processing and management. 44(2008) no.2, S.702-737
  18. Hänger, C.: Knowledge management in the digital age : the possibilities of user generated content (2009) 0.01
    0.010745349 = product of:
      0.032236047 = sum of:
        0.032236047 = weight(_text_:management in 2813) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.032236047 = score(doc=2813,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17312427 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051362853 = queryNorm
            0.18620178 = fieldWeight in 2813, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2813)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
  19. Yi, K.: ¬A semantic similarity approach to predicting Library of Congress subject headings for social tags (2010) 0.01
    0.010745349 = product of:
      0.032236047 = sum of:
        0.032236047 = weight(_text_:management in 3707) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.032236047 = score(doc=3707,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17312427 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051362853 = queryNorm
            0.18620178 = fieldWeight in 3707, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3707)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Social tagging or collaborative tagging has become a new trend in the organization, management, and discovery of digital information. The rapid growth of shared information mostly controlled by social tags poses a new challenge for social tag-based information organization and retrieval. A plausible approach for this challenge is linking social tags to a controlled vocabulary. As an introductory step for this approach, this study investigates ways of predicting relevant subject headings for resources from social tags assigned to the resources. The prediction of subject headings was measured by five different similarity measures: tf-idf, cosine-based similarity (CoS), Jaccard similarity (or Jaccard coefficient; JS), Mutual information (MI), and information radius (IRad). Their results were compared to those by professionals. The results show that a CoS measure based on top five social tags was most effective. Inclusions of more social tags only aggravate the performance. The performance of JS is comparable to the performance of CoS while tf-idf is comparable with up to 70% less than the best performance. MI and IRad have inferior performance compared to the other methods. This study demonstrates the application of the similarity measuring techniques to the prediction of correct Library of Congress subject headings.
  20. Rorissa, A.: ¬A comparative study of Flickr tags and index terms in a general image collection (2010) 0.01
    0.010745349 = product of:
      0.032236047 = sum of:
        0.032236047 = weight(_text_:management in 4100) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.032236047 = score(doc=4100,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17312427 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051362853 = queryNorm
            0.18620178 = fieldWeight in 4100, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4100)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Web 2.0 and social/collaborative tagging have altered the traditional roles of indexer and user. Traditional indexing tools and systems assume the top-down approach to indexing in which a trained professional is responsible for assigning index terms to information sources with a potential user in mind. However, in today's Web, end users create, organize, index, and search for images and other information sources through social tagging and other collaborative activities. One of the impediments to user-centered indexing had been the cost of soliciting user-generated index terms or tags. Social tagging of images such as those on Flickr, an online photo management and sharing application, presents an opportunity that can be seized by designers of indexing tools and systems to bridge the semantic gap between indexer terms and user vocabularies. Empirical research on the differences and similarities between user-generated tags and index terms based on controlled vocabularies has the potential to inform future design of image indexing tools and systems. Toward this end, a random sample of Flickr images and the tags assigned to them were content analyzed and compared with another sample of index terms from a general image collection using established frameworks for image attributes and contents. The results show that there is a fundamental difference between the types of tags and types of index terms used. In light of this, implications for research into and design of user-centered image indexing tools and systems are discussed.

Years

Languages

  • e 42
  • d 12

Types

  • a 46
  • el 8
  • m 3
  • b 2
  • s 1
  • x 1
  • More… Less…