Search (557 results, page 1 of 28)

0.091034316 = product of:
  0.18206863 = sum of:
    0.022008771 = weight(_text_:und in 3362) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022008771 = score(doc=3362,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12830718 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.217899 = idf(docFreq=13141, maxDocs=44421)
          0.05785077 = queryNorm
        0.17153187 = fieldWeight in 3362, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.217899 = idf(docFreq=13141, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3362)
    0.16005985 = weight(_text_:having in 3362) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.16005985 = score(doc=3362,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.34601447 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.05785077 = queryNorm
        0.4625814 = fieldWeight in 3362, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3362)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

It is discussed what is underlying the assumption of modality-specific processing systems and representations. Starting from the information processing approach relevant aspects of mental representations and their physiological realizations are discussed. Then 3 different forms of modality-specific systems are distinguished: as stimulus specific processing, as specific informational formats, and as modular part systems. Parallel to that 3 kinds of analogue systems are differentiated: as holding an analogue-relation, as having a specific informational format and as a set of specific processing constraints. These different aspects of the assumption of modality-specific systems are demonstrated in the example of visual and spatial information processing. It is concluded that postulating information-specific systems is not a superfluous assumption, but it is necessary, and even more likely it is inevitable consequence of an optimization of stimulus processing

0.06828035 = product of:
  0.1365607 = sum of:
    0.022232218 = weight(_text_:und in 818) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022232218 = score(doc=818,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.12830718 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.217899 = idf(docFreq=13141, maxDocs=44421)
          0.05785077 = queryNorm
        0.17327337 = fieldWeight in 818, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.217899 = idf(docFreq=13141, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=818)
    0.11432848 = weight(_text_:having in 818) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.11432848 = score(doc=818,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.34601447 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.05785077 = queryNorm
        0.3304153 = fieldWeight in 818, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=818)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

The social dynamics of alternative facts: why what you believe depends on who you know. Why should we care about having true beliefs? And why do demonstrably false beliefs persist and spread despite bad, even fatal, consequences for the people who hold them? Philosophers of science Cailin OConnor and James Weatherall argue that social factors, rather than individual psychology, are whats essential to understanding the spread and persistence of false beliefs. It might seem that theres an obvious reason that true beliefs matter: false beliefs will hurt you. But if thats right, then why is it (apparently) irrelevant to many people whether they believe true things or not? The Misinformation Age, written for a political era riven by fake news, alternative facts, and disputes over the validity of everything from climate change to the size of inauguration crowds, shows convincingly that what you believe depends on who you know. If social forces explain the persistence of false belief, we must understand how those forces work in order to fight misinformation effectively.

BK

05.20 Kommunikation und Gesellschaft

Classification

05.20 Kommunikation und Gesellschaft

0.045731388 = product of:
  0.18292555 = sum of:
    0.18292555 = weight(_text_:having in 1712) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.18292555 = score(doc=1712,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.34601447 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.05785077 = queryNorm
        0.52866447 = fieldWeight in 1712, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1712)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Presents evidence to suggest that the online world needs the bibliographic skills of librarians but that the term bibliographic control is likely to be associated specifically with libraries and liable to misinterpretation. Suggests that it may be time to start talking about information organization which may be described as having the following 4 aspects: making new information bearing entities known; acquiring such entities at certain points of accumulation; providing name, title and subject access to the entities; and providing for the physical location of copies. Urges librarians rapidly to adapt their skills to this increasing need for information organization

0.045731388 = product of:
  0.18292555 = sum of:
    0.18292555 = weight(_text_:having in 447) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.18292555 = score(doc=447,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.34601447 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.05785077 = queryNorm
        0.52866447 = fieldWeight in 447, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=447)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Considers cost and value issues of information, which are increasingly becoming the concern of a wide range of professions in addition to information and records managers. Explores a variety of ways of valuing information, 2 of which are based on its availability or proximity and the effect of possessing the information. Concludes that whilst putting a price or value on information is very difficult, there must be a value to it, as the effect of not having it can readily be observed

0.045731388 = product of:
  0.18292555 = sum of:
    0.18292555 = weight(_text_:having in 1333) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.18292555 = score(doc=1333,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.34601447 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.05785077 = queryNorm
        0.52866447 = fieldWeight in 1333, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1333)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Godert notes that, having survived a period where we were drowning in information, we seem to be in a period where we are happily surfing the Internet. This communication considers the social implications of this change in fundamental metaphors about our relationship to information. It is first proposed that, though a paradigm shift has not occured, the significance of the change should not be minimized. The similarities and differences between surfing and drowning are then considered. Questions suggested by these similarities and differences are offered for consideration

0.040014964 = product of:
  0.16005985 = sum of:
    0.16005985 = weight(_text_:having in 714) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.16005985 = score(doc=714,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.34601447 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.05785077 = queryNorm
        0.4625814 = fieldWeight in 714, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=714)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

The escalating economic importance of information and the increasing integration of cultural spheres into the economic system are identified as key factors in the conception of information as a commodity, rather than a public good. This is now having a significant impact on government policy and on libraries, with prominent professional representatives advocating an entrepreneurial model of librarianship which contradicts traditional ideas of free and equal access to information. Such a model threatens the future of the library as a vital sphere of democratic culture. Discusses the broader trends exemplifying the current trajectory of advanced capitalism so as to proved a context for the critical interpretation of issues within librarianship

0.040014964 = product of:
  0.16005985 = sum of:
    0.16005985 = weight(_text_:having in 1232) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.16005985 = score(doc=1232,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.34601447 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.05785077 = queryNorm
        0.4625814 = fieldWeight in 1232, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1232)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

This article addresses the question "what is information?" by comparing the meaning of the term "information" and epistemological assumptions of three theories in library and information science: the "Shannon-Weaver model," Brookes' interpretation of Popper's World 3, and the Data-Information-Knowledge-Wisdom model. It shows that the term "information" in these theories refers to empirical entities or events and is conceptualized as having causal powers upon human minds. It is argued that the epistemological assumptions have led to the negligence of the cultural and social aspects of the constitution of information (i.e., how something is considered to be and not to be information) and the unquestioned nature of science in research methodologies.

0.034298543 = product of:
  0.13719417 = sum of:
    0.13719417 = weight(_text_:having in 4872) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.13719417 = score(doc=4872,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.34601447 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.05785077 = queryNorm
        0.39649835 = fieldWeight in 4872, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4872)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

As part of ongoing investigation of information seeking behaviour of end users in electronic environments, a comparison was made of those users having expertise in a topic area and those with expertise in online searching. Computer scientists and online search specialists conducted assigned searches in a HyperCard database on the topic of hypertext. Both groups of experts were able to conduct successful searches and outperformed a novice control group. Search specialists took slightly less time tahn the domain experts, modified queries by adding terms found in the text, and tended to focus on query formulation. Domain experts focused on the text and used their domain knowledge for further question answering

0.034298543 = product of:
  0.13719417 = sum of:
    0.13719417 = weight(_text_:having in 1909) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.13719417 = score(doc=1909,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.34601447 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.05785077 = queryNorm
        0.39649835 = fieldWeight in 1909, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1909)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

The emergence of Knowledge Management (KM) over the last decade has triggered the question how or even whether this new management discipline can be distinguished from the established field of Information Management (IM). In this paper we critically examine this demarcation issue from two angles. First we will investigate to what extent the difference between IM and KM can be anchored an a conceptual distinction between their respective objects: information and knowledge. After having shown that this widely adopted strategy promises little success, we will shift our attention to an examination of the fundamental objectives or guiding principles behind both disciplines. Seen from this angle we argue that KM in order to foster organizational learning, innovation and strategy flexibility, should adopt a postmodern epistemological perspective that is geared to the management of incommensurability and difference within and between organizations.

0.02858212 = product of:
  0.11432848 = sum of:
    0.11432848 = weight(_text_:having in 3748) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.11432848 = score(doc=3748,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.34601447 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.05785077 = queryNorm
        0.3304153 = fieldWeight in 3748, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=3748)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Content

"This letter considers some main arguments in Professor Bates' article (2008), which is part of our former debate (Bates, 2005,2006; Hjoerland, 2007). Bates (2008) does not write much to restate or enlarge on her theoretical position but is mostly arguing about what she claims Hjorland (2007) ignored or misinterpreted in her two articles. Bates (2008, p. 842) wrote that my arguments did not reflect "a standard of coherence, consistency, and logic that is expected of an argument presented in a scientific journal." My argumentation below will refute this statement. This controversy is whether information should be understood as a subjective phenomenon (alone), as an objective phenomenon (alone), or as a combined objective and a subjective phenomenon ("having it both ways"). Bates (2006) defined "information" (sometimes, e.g., termed "information 1," p. 1042) as an objective phenomenon and "information 2" as a subjective phenomenon. However, sometimes the term "information" is also used as a synonym for "information 2," e.g., "the term information is understood to refer to one or both senses" (p. 1042). Thus, Professor Bates is not consistent in using the terminology that she herself introduces, and confusion in this controversy may be caused by Professor Bates' ambiguity in her use of the term "information." Bates (2006, p. 1033) defined information as an objective phenomenon by joining a definition by Edwin Parker: "Information is the pattern of organization of matter and energy." The argument in Hjoerland (2007) is, by contrast, that information should be understood as a subjective phenomenon all the way down: That neither the objective definition of information nor "having it both ways" is fruitful. This is expressed, for example, by joining Karpatschof's (2000) definition of information as a physical signal relative to a certain release mechanism, which implies that information is not something objective that can be understood independently of an observer or independently of other kinds of mechanism that are programmed to be sensitive to specific attributes of a signal: There are many differences in the world, and each of them is potentially informative in given situations. Regarding Parker's definition, "patterns of organization of matter and energy" are no more than that until they inform somebody about something. When they inform somebody about something, they may be considered information. The following quote is part of the argumentation in Bates (2008): "He contrasts my definition of information as 'observer-independent' with his position that information is 'situational' and adds a list of respected names on the situational side (Hjoerland, 2007, p. 1448). What this sentence, and much of the remainder of his argument, ignores is the fact that my approach accounts for both an observer-independent and a contextual, situational sense of information." Yes, it is correct that I mostly concentrated on refuting Bates' objective definition of information. It is as if Bates expects an overall appraisal of her work rather than providing a specific analysis of the points on which there are disagreements. I see Bates' "having it both ways": a symptom of inconsistence in argumentation.
Bates (2008, p. 843) further writes about her definition of information: "This is the objectivist foundation, the rock bottom minimum of the meaning of information; it informs both articles throughout." This is exactly the focus of my disagreement. If we take a word in a language, it is understood as both being a "pattern of organization of matter and energy" (e.g., a sound) and carrying meaning. But the relation between the physical sign and its meaning is considered an arbitrary relation in linguistics. Any physical material has the potential of carrying any meaning and to inform somebody. The physical stuff in itself is not information until it is used as a sign. An important issue in this debate is whether Bates' examples demonstrate the usefulness of her own position as opposed to mine. Her example about information seeking concerning navigation and how "the very layout of the ship and the design of the bridge promoted the smooth flow of information from the exterior of the ship to the crew and among the crewmembers" (Bates, 2006, pp. 1042-1043) does not justify Bates' definition of information as an objective phenomenon. The design is made for a purpose, and this purpose determines how information should be defined in this context. Bates' view on "curatorial sciences" (2006, p. 1043) is close to Hjorland's suggestions (2000) about "memory institutions," which is based on the subjective understanding of information. However, she does not relate to this proposal, and she does not argue how the objective understanding of information is related to this example. I therefore conclude that Bates' practical examples do not support her objective definition of information, nor do they support her "having it both ways." Finally, I exemplify the consequences of my understanding of information by showing how an archaeologist and a geologist might represent the same stone differently in information systems. Bates (2008, p. 843) writes about this example: "This position is completely consistent with mine." However, this "consistency" was not recognized by Bates until I published my objections and, therefore, this is an indication that my criticism was needed. I certainly share Professor Bates (2008) advice to read her original articles: They contain much important stuff. I just recommend that the reader ignore the parts that argue about information being an objective phenomenon."

0.02858212 = product of:
  0.11432848 = sum of:
    0.11432848 = weight(_text_:having in 241) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.11432848 = score(doc=241,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.34601447 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.05785077 = queryNorm
        0.3304153 = fieldWeight in 241, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.981156 = idf(docFreq=304, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=241)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to formulate an analytical framework for the information concept based on the semiotic theory. Design/methodology/approach The paper is motivated by the apparent controversy that still surrounds the information concept. Information, being a key concept within LIS, suffers from being anchored in various incompatible theories. The paper suggests that information is signs, and it demonstrates how the concept of information can be understood within C.S. Peirce's phenomenologically rooted semiotic. Hence, from there, certain ontological conditions as well epistemological consequences of the information concept can be deduced. Findings The paper argues that an understanding of information, as either objective or subjective/discursive, leads to either objective reductionism and signal processing, that fails to explain how information becomes meaningful at all, or conversely, information is understood only relative to subjective/discursive intentions, agendas, etc. To overcome the limitations of defining information as either objective or subjective/discursive, a semiotic analysis shows that information understood as signs is consistently sensitive to both objective and subjective/discursive features of information. It is consequently argued that information as concept should be defined in relation to ontological conditions having certain epistemological consequences. Originality/value The paper presents an analytical framework, derived from semiotics, that adds to the developments of the philosophical dimensions of information within LIS.

0.021783035 = product of:
  0.08713214 = sum of:
    0.08713214 = weight(_text_:und in 604) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08713214 = score(doc=604,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.12830718 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.217899 = idf(docFreq=13141, maxDocs=44421)
          0.05785077 = queryNorm
        0.67909014 = fieldWeight in 604, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.217899 = idf(docFreq=13141, maxDocs=44421)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=604)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Footnote

Erwiderung auf: Jochum, U.: Bibliothek, Buch und Information

Source

Bibliothek: Forschung und Praxis. 16(1992) H.2, S.264-266

0.021783035 = product of:
  0.08713214 = sum of:
    0.08713214 = weight(_text_:und in 1273) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08713214 = score(doc=1273,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.12830718 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.217899 = idf(docFreq=13141, maxDocs=44421)
          0.05785077 = queryNorm
        0.67909014 = fieldWeight in 1273, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.217899 = idf(docFreq=13141, maxDocs=44421)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=1273)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Footnote

Erwiderung darauf: Umstätter, W.: Schrift, Information, Interpretation und Wissen

Source

Bibliothek: Forschung und Praxis. 15(1991) H.3, S.390-

0.021324394 = product of:
  0.08529758 = sum of:
    0.08529758 = weight(_text_:und in 1143) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08529758 = score(doc=1143,freq=92.0), product of:
        0.12830718 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.217899 = idf(docFreq=13141, maxDocs=44421)
          0.05785077 = queryNorm
        0.66479194 = fieldWeight in 1143, product of:
          9.591663 = tf(freq=92.0), with freq of:
            92.0 = termFreq=92.0
          2.217899 = idf(docFreq=13141, maxDocs=44421)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1143)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Dieses Jahrbuch des Instituts für Deutsche Sprache ist dem Jahr der Geisteswissenschaften gewidmet und beleuchtet aus interdisziplinärer Perspektive das Zusammenwirken von cultural und linguistic turn. Die Beiträge aus Linguistik, Kultur- und Kognitionswissenschaft sowie Literatur- und Geschichtswissenschaft zielen darauf ab, die kulturwissenschaftlichen Traditionen der Sprachwissenschaft zu vergegenwärtigen und gleichzeitig den Anschluss der Linguistik an die modernen Forschungsrichtungen der Kulturwissenschaft zu dokumentieren: Hermeneutik, Rhetorik und Lexikographie, Kognitionstheorie und Diskursanalyse werden aus sprachwissenschaftlicher Perspektive diskutiert. Darüber hinaus beleuchten die Beiträge die Folgen des linguistic turn in den Nachbarwissenschaften exemplarisch anhand der Literaturwissenschaft und der Historiographie. Insgesamt präsentiert der Band das Spektrum von Grundlagen, Theorien und Methoden sowie anwendungsbezogene Beispiele einer kulturwissenschaftlichen Linguistik.

BK

17.10 Sprache in Beziehung zu anderen Bereichen der Wissenschaft und Kultur
18.00 Einzelne Sprachen und Literaturen allgemein

Classification

ES 360: Kultur- und Sozialwissenschaften / Allgemeine und vergleichende Sprach- und Literaturwissenschaft. Indogermanistik. Außereuropäische Sprachen und Literaturen / Spezialbereiche der allgemeinen Sprachwissenschaft
ER 300: Kongressberichte, Sammelwerke (verschiedener Autoren) / Allgemeine und vergleichende Sprach- und Literaturwissenschaft. Indogermanistik. Außereuropäische Sprachen und Literaturen / Allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft
ER 940: Sprechen und Denken, Kompetenz und Performanz, Pragmatik / Allgemeine und vergleichende Sprach- und Literaturwissenschaft. Indogermanistik. Außereuropäische Sprachen und Literaturen / Allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft
ES 110: Sprache und Kultur / Allgemeine und vergleichende Sprach- und Literaturwissenschaft. Indogermanistik. Außereuropäische Sprachen und Literaturen / Spezialbereiche der allgemeinen Sprachwissenschaft
17.10 Sprache in Beziehung zu anderen Bereichen der Wissenschaft und Kultur
18.00 Einzelne Sprachen und Literaturen allgemein

RVK

ES 360: Kultur- und Sozialwissenschaften / Allgemeine und vergleichende Sprach- und Literaturwissenschaft. Indogermanistik. Außereuropäische Sprachen und Literaturen / Spezialbereiche der allgemeinen Sprachwissenschaft
ER 300: Kongressberichte, Sammelwerke (verschiedener Autoren) / Allgemeine und vergleichende Sprach- und Literaturwissenschaft. Indogermanistik. Außereuropäische Sprachen und Literaturen / Allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft
ER 940: Sprechen und Denken, Kompetenz und Performanz, Pragmatik / Allgemeine und vergleichende Sprach- und Literaturwissenschaft. Indogermanistik. Außereuropäische Sprachen und Literaturen / Allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft
ES 110: Sprache und Kultur / Allgemeine und vergleichende Sprach- und Literaturwissenschaft. Indogermanistik. Außereuropäische Sprachen und Literaturen / Spezialbereiche der allgemeinen Sprachwissenschaft

0.019253664 = product of:
  0.077014655 = sum of:
    0.077014655 = weight(_text_:und in 567) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.077014655 = score(doc=567,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.12830718 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.217899 = idf(docFreq=13141, maxDocs=44421)
          0.05785077 = queryNorm
        0.60023654 = fieldWeight in 567, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          2.217899 = idf(docFreq=13141, maxDocs=44421)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=567)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Über den Nutzen von Modellen und Fachbegriffen; Kommunikationstheoretische Grundbegriffe: Information und Kommunikation; Kommunikationstheoretische Modelle; Neuere Entwicklungen in der Kommunikationstheorie; Begriffe und Modelle der Massenkommunikationstheorie; Modelle, Begriffe, Theorien - eine Schlußbemerkung

Source

Medien und Journalismus: eine Einführung. Bd.1. Hrsg.: O. Jarren

0.019253664 = product of:
  0.077014655 = sum of:
    0.077014655 = weight(_text_:und in 588) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.077014655 = score(doc=588,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.12830718 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.217899 = idf(docFreq=13141, maxDocs=44421)
          0.05785077 = queryNorm
        0.60023654 = fieldWeight in 588, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          2.217899 = idf(docFreq=13141, maxDocs=44421)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=588)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Content

Die Wissensklufthypothese: eine Kurzskizze - Sozialstruktur - Wissen und Wissensklüfte - Informationsfluß - Multimediale Technologie und Konzepte - Hypertext und Hypermedia - Cyberspace und Virtuelle Realität (VR) - Medienpsychologisches 'Know How' als Navigationshilfe

Source

Mediale Klassengesellschaft? Politische und soziale Folgen der Medienentwicklung. Hrsg.: M. Jäckel a.a

0.019253664 = product of:
  0.077014655 = sum of:
    0.077014655 = weight(_text_:und in 607) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.077014655 = score(doc=607,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.12830718 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.217899 = idf(docFreq=13141, maxDocs=44421)
          0.05785077 = queryNorm
        0.60023654 = fieldWeight in 607, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          2.217899 = idf(docFreq=13141, maxDocs=44421)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=607)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Series

Philosophie und Geschichte der Wissenschaften; Bd.18

Source

Wirklichkeit und Wissen: Realismus, Antirealismus und Wirklichkeits-Konzeptionen in Philosophie und Wissenschaften. Hrsg.: H.J. Sandkühler

0.019060155 = product of:
  0.07624062 = sum of:
    0.07624062 = weight(_text_:und in 2289) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07624062 = score(doc=2289,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.12830718 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.217899 = idf(docFreq=13141, maxDocs=44421)
          0.05785077 = queryNorm
        0.5942039 = fieldWeight in 2289, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.217899 = idf(docFreq=13141, maxDocs=44421)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=2289)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Footnote

Erwiderung auf 'Janich, P.: Informationsbegriff und methodisch-kulturalistische Philosophie' in demselben Heft (S.169-182)

Source

Ethik und Sozialwissenschaften. 9(1998) H.2, S.225-227

0.019060155 = product of:
  0.07624062 = sum of:
    0.07624062 = weight(_text_:und in 2294) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07624062 = score(doc=2294,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.12830718 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.217899 = idf(docFreq=13141, maxDocs=44421)
          0.05785077 = queryNorm
        0.5942039 = fieldWeight in 2294, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.217899 = idf(docFreq=13141, maxDocs=44421)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=2294)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Footnote

Erwiderung auf 'Janich, P.: Informationsbegriff und methodisch-kulturalistische Philosophie' in demselben Heft (S.169-182)

Source

Ethik und Sozialwissenschaften. 9(1998) H.2, S.235-237

0.019060155 = product of:
  0.07624062 = sum of:
    0.07624062 = weight(_text_:und in 2295) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07624062 = score(doc=2295,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.12830718 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.217899 = idf(docFreq=13141, maxDocs=44421)
          0.05785077 = queryNorm
        0.5942039 = fieldWeight in 2295, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.217899 = idf(docFreq=13141, maxDocs=44421)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=2295)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Footnote

Erwiderung auf 'Janich, P.: Informationsbegriff und methodisch-kulturalistische Philosophie' in demselben Heft (S.169-182)

Source

Ethik und Sozialwissenschaften. 9(1998) H.2, S.238-239