-
Harter, S.P.: Scholarly communication and electronic journals : an impact study (1998)
0.15
0.15499915 = product of:
0.3099983 = sum of:
0.3099983 = sum of:
0.25461304 = weight(_text_:journals in 3035) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.25461304 = score(doc=3035,freq=10.0), product of:
0.25656942 = queryWeight, product of:
5.021064 = idf(docFreq=792, maxDocs=44218)
0.05109862 = queryNorm
0.9923749 = fieldWeight in 3035, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
5.021064 = idf(docFreq=792, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3035)
0.055385258 = weight(_text_:22 in 3035) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.055385258 = score(doc=3035,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17893866 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05109862 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 3035, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3035)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Studies the effects of e-journals on the scholarly communities they are serving. Considers to what extent scholars and researchers are aware of, influenced by, using, or building their own work on research published in e-journals. Draws a sample of scholarly, peer-reviewed e-journals and conducts several analyzes thorugh citation analysis. The data show that the impact of journals on scholarly communication has been minimal
- Date
- 22. 2.1999 16:56:06
-
Asubiaro, T.V.; Onaolapo, S.: ¬A comparative study of the coverage of African journals in Web of Science, Scopus, and CrossRef (2023)
0.15
0.14560515 = product of:
0.2912103 = sum of:
0.2912103 = sum of:
0.2565945 = weight(_text_:journals in 992) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.2565945 = score(doc=992,freq=26.0), product of:
0.25656942 = queryWeight, product of:
5.021064 = idf(docFreq=792, maxDocs=44218)
0.05109862 = queryNorm
1.0000978 = fieldWeight in 992, product of:
5.0990195 = tf(freq=26.0), with freq of:
26.0 = termFreq=26.0
5.021064 = idf(docFreq=792, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=992)
0.03461579 = weight(_text_:22 in 992) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03461579 = score(doc=992,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17893866 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05109862 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 992, 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=992)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- This is the first study that evaluated the coverage of journals from Africa in Web of Science, Scopus, and CrossRef. A list of active journals published in each of the 55 African countries was compiled from Ulrich's periodicals directory and African Journals Online (AJOL) website. Journal master lists for Web of Science, Scopus, and CrossRef were searched for the African journals. A total of 2,229 unique active African journals were identified from Ulrich (N = 2,117, 95.0%) and AJOL (N = 243, 10.9%) after removing duplicates. The volume of African journals in Web of Science and Scopus databases is 7.4% (N = 166) and 7.8% (N = 174), respectively, compared to the 45.6% (N = 1,017) covered in CrossRef. While making up only 17.% of all the African journals, South African journals had the best coverage in the two most authoritative databases, accounting for 73.5% and 62.1% of all the African journals in Web of Science and Scopus, respectively. In contrast, Nigeria published 44.5% of all the African journals. The distribution of the African journals is biased in favor of Medical, Life and Health Sciences and Humanities and the Arts in the three databases. The low representation of African journals in CrossRef, a free indexing infrastructure that could be harnessed for building an African-centric research indexing database, is concerning.
- Date
- 22. 6.2023 14:09:06
-
Speier, C.; Palmer, J.; Wren, D.; Hahn, S.: Faculty perceptions of electronic journals as scholarly communication : a question of prestige and legitimacy (1999)
0.14
0.14155903 = product of:
0.28311807 = sum of:
0.28311807 = sum of:
0.22773282 = weight(_text_:journals in 3674) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.22773282 = score(doc=3674,freq=8.0), product of:
0.25656942 = queryWeight, product of:
5.021064 = idf(docFreq=792, maxDocs=44218)
0.05109862 = queryNorm
0.88760704 = fieldWeight in 3674, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
5.021064 = idf(docFreq=792, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3674)
0.055385258 = weight(_text_:22 in 3674) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.055385258 = score(doc=3674,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17893866 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05109862 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 3674, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3674)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Recent years have seen a proliferation of electronic journals across academic disciplines. Electronic journals offer many advantages to multiple constituencies, however, their acceptance by faculty and university promotion and tenure committees is unclear. This research examines perceptions of faculty and promotion and tenure committee members regarding the perceived prestige and legitimacy of electronic journals as an outlet for scholarly communication
- Date
- 22. 5.1999 14:43:47
-
Valauskas, E.J.: Using the Internet in libraries (1994)
0.13
0.12693875 = product of:
0.2538775 = sum of:
0.2538775 = sum of:
0.17079961 = weight(_text_:journals in 7053) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.17079961 = score(doc=7053,freq=2.0), product of:
0.25656942 = queryWeight, product of:
5.021064 = idf(docFreq=792, maxDocs=44218)
0.05109862 = queryNorm
0.66570526 = fieldWeight in 7053, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.021064 = idf(docFreq=792, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=7053)
0.083077885 = weight(_text_:22 in 7053) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.083077885 = score(doc=7053,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17893866 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05109862 = queryNorm
0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 7053, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=7053)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Content
- Kapitel zu: Internet tools: Gopher, WAIS, World-Wide Web, NCSA Mosaic; Online library catalogues; Discussion lists; Electronic journals and newsletters; FTP
- Source
- IFLA journal. 20(1994) no.1, S.22-28
-
Keller, A.: Retrospektive Digitalisierung von Zeitschriften (2000)
0.13
0.12693875 = product of:
0.2538775 = sum of:
0.2538775 = sum of:
0.17079961 = weight(_text_:journals in 4834) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.17079961 = score(doc=4834,freq=2.0), product of:
0.25656942 = queryWeight, product of:
5.021064 = idf(docFreq=792, maxDocs=44218)
0.05109862 = queryNorm
0.66570526 = fieldWeight in 4834, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.021064 = idf(docFreq=792, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4834)
0.083077885 = weight(_text_:22 in 4834) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.083077885 = score(doc=4834,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17893866 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05109862 = queryNorm
0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 4834, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4834)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 6.2000 13:38:19
- Footnote
- Bericht über die Tagung: "Digitizing journals", 13.-14.3.2000 in Kopenhagen
-
Weibel, S.: ¬An architecture for scholarly publishing on the World Wide Web (1995)
0.13
0.12630384 = product of:
0.25260767 = sum of:
0.25260767 = sum of:
0.19722241 = weight(_text_:journals in 4555) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.19722241 = score(doc=4555,freq=6.0), product of:
0.25656942 = queryWeight, product of:
5.021064 = idf(docFreq=792, maxDocs=44218)
0.05109862 = queryNorm
0.7686903 = fieldWeight in 4555, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
5.021064 = idf(docFreq=792, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4555)
0.055385258 = weight(_text_:22 in 4555) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.055385258 = score(doc=4555,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17893866 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05109862 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 4555, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4555)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- OCLC distributes several scholarly journals under its Electronic Journals Online programme, acting, in effect, as an 'electronic printer' for scholarly publishers. It is prototyping a WWW accessible version of these journals. Describes the problems encountered, detail some of the short term solutions, and highlight changes to existing standards that will enhance the use of the WWW for scholarly electronic publishing
- Date
- 23. 7.1996 10:22:20
-
Tonta, Y.; Ünal, Y.: Scatter of journals and literature obsolescence reflected in document delivery requests (2005)
0.12
0.124097 = product of:
0.248194 = sum of:
0.248194 = sum of:
0.22050136 = weight(_text_:journals in 3271) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.22050136 = score(doc=3271,freq=30.0), product of:
0.25656942 = queryWeight, product of:
5.021064 = idf(docFreq=792, maxDocs=44218)
0.05109862 = queryNorm
0.85942185 = fieldWeight in 3271, product of:
5.477226 = tf(freq=30.0), with freq of:
30.0 = termFreq=30.0
5.021064 = idf(docFreq=792, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3271)
0.027692629 = weight(_text_:22 in 3271) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.027692629 = score(doc=3271,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17893866 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05109862 = queryNorm
0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 3271, 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=3271)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- In this paper we investigate the scattering of journals and literature obsolescence reflected in more than 137,000 document delivery requests submitted to a national document delivery service. We first summarize the major findings of the study with regards to the performance of the service. We then identify the "core" journals from which article requests were satisfied and address the following research questions: (a) Does the distribution of (core) journals conform to the Bradford's Law of Scattering? (b) Is there a relationship between usage of journals and impact factors, journals with high impact factors being used more often than the rest? (c) Is there a relationship between usage of journals and total citation counts, journals with high total citation counts being used more often than the rest? (d) What is the median age of use (half-life) of requested articles in general? (e) Do requested articles that appear in core journals get obsolete more slowly? (f) Is there a relationship between obsolescence and journal impact factors, journals with high impact factors being obsolete more slowly? (g) Is there a relationship between obsolescence and total citation counts, journals with high total citation counts being obsolete more slowly? Based an the analysis of findings, we found that the distribution of highly and moderately used journal titles conform to Bradford's Law. The median age of use was 8 years for all requested articles. Ninety percent of the articles requested were 21 years of age or younger. Articles that appeared in 168 core journal titles seem to get obsolete slightly more slowly than those of all titles. We observed no statistically significant correlations between the frequency of journal use and ISI journal impact factors, and between the frequency of journal use and ISI- (Institute for Scientific Information, Philadelphia, PA) cited half-lives for the most heavily used 168 core journal titles. There was a weak correlation between usage of journals and ISI-reported total citation counts. No statistically significant relationship was found between median age of use and journal impact factors and between median age of use and total citation counts. There was a weak negative correlation between ISI journal impact factors and cited half-lives of 168 core journals, and a weak correlation between ISI citation halflives and use half-lives of core journals. No correlation was found between cited half-lives of 168 core journals and their corresponding total citation counts as reported by ISI. Findings of the current study are discussed along with those of other studies.
- Date
- 20. 3.2005 10:54:22
-
Mukherjee, B.: Do open-access journals in library and information science have any scholarly impact? : a bibliometric study of selected open-access journals using Google Scholar (2009)
0.12
0.12405765 = product of:
0.2481153 = sum of:
0.2481153 = sum of:
0.21349952 = weight(_text_:journals in 2745) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.21349952 = score(doc=2745,freq=18.0), product of:
0.25656942 = queryWeight, product of:
5.021064 = idf(docFreq=792, maxDocs=44218)
0.05109862 = queryNorm
0.83213156 = fieldWeight in 2745, product of:
4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
18.0 = termFreq=18.0
5.021064 = idf(docFreq=792, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2745)
0.03461579 = weight(_text_:22 in 2745) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03461579 = score(doc=2745,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17893866 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05109862 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2745, 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=2745)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Using 17 fully open-access journals published uninterruptedly during 2000 to 2004 in the field of library and information science, the present study investigates the impact of these open-access journals in terms of quantity of articles published, subject distribution of the articles, synchronous and diachronous impact factor, immediacy index, and journals' and authors' self-citation. The results indicate that during this 5-year publication period, there are as many as 1,636 articles published by these journals. At the same time, the articles have received a total of 8,591 Web citations during a 7-year citation period. Eight of 17 journals have received more than 100 citations. First Monday received the highest number of citations; however, the average number of citations per article was the highest in D-Lib Magazine. The value of the synchronous impact factor varies from 0.6989 to 1.0014 during 2002 to 2005, and the diachronous impact factor varies from 1.472 to 2.487 during 2000 to 2004. The range of the immediacy index varies between 0.0714 and 1.395. D-Lib Magazine has an immediacy index value above 0.5 in all the years whereas the immediacy index value varies from year to year for the other journals. When the citations of sample articles were analyzed according to source, it was found that 40.32% of the citations came from full-text articles, followed by 33.35% from journal articles. The percentage of journals' self-citation was only 6.04%.
- Date
- 22. 3.2009 17:54:59
-
ChaPudhry, A.S.; Periasamy, M.: ¬A study of current practices of selected libraries in cataloguing electronic journals (2001)
0.12
0.12386416 = product of:
0.24772832 = sum of:
0.24772832 = sum of:
0.19926621 = weight(_text_:journals in 746) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.19926621 = score(doc=746,freq=8.0), product of:
0.25656942 = queryWeight, product of:
5.021064 = idf(docFreq=792, maxDocs=44218)
0.05109862 = queryNorm
0.77665615 = fieldWeight in 746, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
5.021064 = idf(docFreq=792, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=746)
0.0484621 = weight(_text_:22 in 746) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0484621 = score(doc=746,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17893866 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05109862 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 746, 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=746)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- MARC records and online policy documents of selected libraries were reviewed to study the approaches taken by libraries worldwide to catalogue electronic journals. In general, libraries catalogue those electronic journals that are subscribed by them on priority basis. Most of them annotate the e-journal to the print record, some prefer to catalogue them separately, while the majority of the libraries adopt both approaches. While most of the libraries studied prefer full record, cataloguing e-journals separately with a brief record (at least containing MARC fields 245, 500, and 856) that identifies and locates the resource seems to be the best practice.
- Date
- 22. 1.2007 20:46:57
-
Campanario, J.M.: Large increases and decreases in journal impact factors in only one year : the effect of journal self-citations (2011)
0.12
0.12386416 = product of:
0.24772832 = sum of:
0.24772832 = sum of:
0.19926621 = weight(_text_:journals in 4187) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.19926621 = score(doc=4187,freq=8.0), product of:
0.25656942 = queryWeight, product of:
5.021064 = idf(docFreq=792, maxDocs=44218)
0.05109862 = queryNorm
0.77665615 = fieldWeight in 4187, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
5.021064 = idf(docFreq=792, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4187)
0.0484621 = weight(_text_:22 in 4187) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0484621 = score(doc=4187,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17893866 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05109862 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 4187, 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=4187)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- I studied the factors (citations, self-citations, and number of articles) that influenced large changes in only 1 year in the impact factors (IFs) of journals. A set of 360 instances of journals with large increases or decreases in their IFs from a given year to the following was selected from journals in the Journal Citation Reports from 1998 to 2007 (40 journals each year). The main factor influencing large changes was the change in the number of citations. About 54% of the increases and 42% of the decreases in the journal IFs were associated with changes in the journal self-citations.
- Date
- 22. 1.2011 12:53:00
-
Wolchover, N.: Wie ein Aufsehen erregender Beweis kaum Beachtung fand (2017)
0.12
0.120120615 = product of:
0.24024123 = sum of:
0.24024123 = sum of:
0.142333 = weight(_text_:journals in 3582) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.142333 = score(doc=3582,freq=2.0), product of:
0.25656942 = queryWeight, product of:
5.021064 = idf(docFreq=792, maxDocs=44218)
0.05109862 = queryNorm
0.5547544 = fieldWeight in 3582, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.021064 = idf(docFreq=792, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3582)
0.09790823 = weight(_text_:22 in 3582) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09790823 = score(doc=3582,freq=4.0), product of:
0.17893866 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05109862 = queryNorm
0.54716086 = fieldWeight in 3582, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3582)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Ein Statistikprofessor im Ruhestand beweist eine berühmte mathematische Vermutung über mehrdimensionale Normalverteilungen - und findet kaum Anklang, weil er nicht in den großen Journals publiziert.
- Date
- 22. 4.2017 10:42:05
22. 4.2017 10:48:38
-
Walters, W.H.; Linvill, A.C.: Bibliographic index coverage of open-access journals in six subject areas (2011)
0.11
0.11145234 = product of:
0.22290468 = sum of:
0.22290468 = sum of:
0.1882889 = weight(_text_:journals in 4635) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.1882889 = score(doc=4635,freq=14.0), product of:
0.25656942 = queryWeight, product of:
5.021064 = idf(docFreq=792, maxDocs=44218)
0.05109862 = queryNorm
0.73387116 = fieldWeight in 4635, product of:
3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
14.0 = termFreq=14.0
5.021064 = idf(docFreq=792, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4635)
0.03461579 = weight(_text_:22 in 4635) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03461579 = score(doc=4635,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17893866 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05109862 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4635, 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=4635)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- We investigate the extent to which open-access (OA) journals and articles in biology, computer science, economics, history, medicine, and psychology are indexed in each of 11 bibliographic databases. We also look for variations in index coverage by journal subject, journal size, publisher type, publisher size, date of first OA issue, region of publication, language of publication, publication fee, and citation impact factor. Two databases, Biological Abstracts and PubMed, provide very good coverage of the OA journal literature, indexing 60 to 63% of all OA articles in their disciplines. Five databases provide moderately good coverage (22-41%), and four provide relatively poor coverage (0-12%). OA articles in biology journals, English-only journals, high-impact journals, and journals that charge publication fees of $1,000 or more are especially likely to be indexed. Conversely, articles from OA publishers in Africa, Asia, or Central/South America are especially unlikely to be indexed. Four of the 11 databases index commercially published articles at a substantially higher rate than articles published by universities, scholarly societies, nonprofit publishers, or governments. Finally, three databases-EBSCO Academic Search Complete, ProQuest Research Library, and Wilson OmniFile-provide less comprehensive coverage of OA articles than of articles in comparable subscription journals.
-
Manley, S.: Letters to the editor and the race for publication metrics (2022)
0.11
0.11051586 = product of:
0.22103173 = sum of:
0.22103173 = sum of:
0.17256962 = weight(_text_:journals in 547) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.17256962 = score(doc=547,freq=6.0), product of:
0.25656942 = queryWeight, product of:
5.021064 = idf(docFreq=792, maxDocs=44218)
0.05109862 = queryNorm
0.672604 = fieldWeight in 547, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
5.021064 = idf(docFreq=792, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=547)
0.0484621 = weight(_text_:22 in 547) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0484621 = score(doc=547,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17893866 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05109862 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 547, 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=547)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- This article discusses how letters to the editor boost publishing metrics for journals and authors, and then examines letters published since 2015 in six elite journals, including the Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. The initial findings identify some potentially anomalous use of letters and unusual self-citation patterns. The article proposes that Clarivate Analytics consider slightly reconfiguring the Journal Impact Factor to more fairly account for letters and that journals transparently explain their letter submission policies.
- Date
- 6. 4.2022 19:22:26
-
Tomney, H.; Burton, P.F.: Electronic journals : a case study of usage and attitudes among academics (1998)
0.11
0.10820834 = product of:
0.21641669 = sum of:
0.21641669 = sum of:
0.16103142 = weight(_text_:journals in 3687) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.16103142 = score(doc=3687,freq=4.0), product of:
0.25656942 = queryWeight, product of:
5.021064 = idf(docFreq=792, maxDocs=44218)
0.05109862 = queryNorm
0.627633 = fieldWeight in 3687, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
5.021064 = idf(docFreq=792, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3687)
0.055385258 = weight(_text_:22 in 3687) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.055385258 = score(doc=3687,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17893866 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05109862 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 3687, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3687)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Reports results of a questionnaire survey to assess the attitudes of scholarly users towards electronic journals and examines the current level of use of these publications by university academics in 2 departments in each of 5 faculties of a UK university
- Date
- 22. 5.1999 19:07:29
-
Liew, C.L.; Foo, S.; Chennupati, K.R.: ¬A proposed integrated environment for enhanced user interaction and value-adding of electronic documents : an empirical evaluation (2001)
0.11
0.10820834 = product of:
0.21641669 = sum of:
0.21641669 = sum of:
0.16103142 = weight(_text_:journals in 5196) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.16103142 = score(doc=5196,freq=4.0), product of:
0.25656942 = queryWeight, product of:
5.021064 = idf(docFreq=792, maxDocs=44218)
0.05109862 = queryNorm
0.627633 = fieldWeight in 5196, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
5.021064 = idf(docFreq=792, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5196)
0.055385258 = weight(_text_:22 in 5196) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.055385258 = score(doc=5196,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17893866 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05109862 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 5196, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5196)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Will traditional forms of communication seamlessly migrate to the Web? Liew, Foo, and Chennupati report that the top-ranked features of e-journals are those not available in paper journals: querying, navigation, and visualization.
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and technology. 52(2001) no.1, S.22-35
-
Mingers, J.; Burrell, Q.L.: Modeling citation behavior in Management Science journals (2006)
0.11
0.106169276 = product of:
0.21233855 = sum of:
0.21233855 = sum of:
0.17079961 = weight(_text_:journals in 994) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.17079961 = score(doc=994,freq=8.0), product of:
0.25656942 = queryWeight, product of:
5.021064 = idf(docFreq=792, maxDocs=44218)
0.05109862 = queryNorm
0.66570526 = fieldWeight in 994, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
5.021064 = idf(docFreq=792, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=994)
0.041538943 = weight(_text_:22 in 994) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.041538943 = score(doc=994,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17893866 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05109862 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 994, 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=994)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Citation rates are becoming increasingly important in judging the research quality of journals, institutions and departments, and individual faculty. This paper looks at the pattern of citations across different management science journals and over time. A stochastic model is proposed which views the generating mechanism of citations as a gamma mixture of Poisson processes generating overall a negative binomial distribution. This is tested empirically with a large sample of papers published in 1990 from six management science journals and found to fit well. The model is extended to include obsolescence, i.e., that the citation rate for a paper varies over its cited lifetime. This leads to the additional citations distribution which shows that future citations are a linear function of past citations with a time-dependent and decreasing slope. This is also verified empirically in a way that allows different obsolescence functions to be fitted to the data. Conclusions concerning the predictability of future citations, and future research in this area are discussed.
- Date
- 26.12.2007 19:22:05
-
Ortega, J.L.: ¬The presence of academic journals on Twitter and its relationship with dissemination (tweets) and research impact (citations) (2017)
0.10
0.10446871 = product of:
0.20893742 = sum of:
0.20893742 = sum of:
0.17432164 = weight(_text_:journals in 4410) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.17432164 = score(doc=4410,freq=12.0), product of:
0.25656942 = queryWeight, product of:
5.021064 = idf(docFreq=792, maxDocs=44218)
0.05109862 = queryNorm
0.67943263 = fieldWeight in 4410, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
5.021064 = idf(docFreq=792, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4410)
0.03461579 = weight(_text_:22 in 4410) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03461579 = score(doc=4410,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17893866 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05109862 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4410, 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=4410)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Purpose The purpose of this paper is to analyze the relationship between dissemination of research papers on Twitter and its influence on research impact. Design/methodology/approach Four types of journal Twitter accounts (journal, owner, publisher and no Twitter account) were defined to observe differences in the number of tweets and citations. In total, 4,176 articles from 350 journals were extracted from Plum Analytics. This altmetric provider tracks the number of tweets and citations for each paper. Student's t-test for two-paired samples was used to detect significant differences between each group of journals. Regression analysis was performed to detect which variables may influence the getting of tweets and citations. Findings The results show that journals with their own Twitter account obtain more tweets (46 percent) and citations (34 percent) than journals without a Twitter account. Followers is the variable that attracts more tweets (ß=0.47) and citations (ß=0.28) but the effect is small and the fit is not good for tweets (R2=0.46) and insignificant for citations (R2=0.18). Originality/value This is the first study that tests the performance of research journals on Twitter according to their handles, observing how the dissemination of content in this microblogging network influences the citation of their papers.
- Date
- 20. 1.2015 18:30:22
-
Hotho, A.; Bloehdorn, S.: Data Mining 2004 : Text classification by boosting weak learners based on terms and concepts (2004)
0.10
0.10192762 = sum of:
0.08115815 = product of:
0.24347445 = sum of:
0.24347445 = weight(_text_:3a in 562) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.24347445 = score(doc=562,freq=2.0), product of:
0.43321466 = queryWeight, product of:
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.05109862 = queryNorm
0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 562, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=562)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.020769471 = product of:
0.041538943 = sum of:
0.041538943 = weight(_text_:22 in 562) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.041538943 = score(doc=562,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17893866 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05109862 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 562, 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=562)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Content
- Vgl.: http://www.google.de/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CEAQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fciteseerx.ist.psu.edu%2Fviewdoc%2Fdownload%3Fdoi%3D10.1.1.91.4940%26rep%3Drep1%26type%3Dpdf&ei=dOXrUMeIDYHDtQahsIGACg&usg=AFQjCNHFWVh6gNPvnOrOS9R3rkrXCNVD-A&sig2=5I2F5evRfMnsttSgFF9g7Q&bvm=bv.1357316858,d.Yms.
- Date
- 8. 1.2013 10:22:32
-
Mittler, E.; Schulz, M.: ProPrint world-wide print-on-demand services for study and research (2004)
0.10
0.0960965 = product of:
0.192193 = sum of:
0.192193 = sum of:
0.11386641 = weight(_text_:journals in 2855) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.11386641 = score(doc=2855,freq=2.0), product of:
0.25656942 = queryWeight, product of:
5.021064 = idf(docFreq=792, maxDocs=44218)
0.05109862 = queryNorm
0.44380352 = fieldWeight in 2855, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.021064 = idf(docFreq=792, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2855)
0.07832658 = weight(_text_:22 in 2855) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07832658 = score(doc=2855,freq=4.0), product of:
0.17893866 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05109862 = queryNorm
0.4377287 = fieldWeight in 2855, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2855)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- The libraries of more and more universities and research institutions have local digital repositories, and the amount of material is increasing every day. Users need an integrated retrieval interface that allows aggregated searching across multiple document servers without having to resort to manual processes. ProPrint offers an on-demand print service within Germany for over 2,000 monographs and 1,000 journals. Partners worldwide are now invited to join.
- Date
- 8.10.2004 14:22:14
- Source
- Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.2, S.227-230
-
Kreider, J.: ¬The correlation of local citation data with citation data from Journal Citation Reports (1999)
0.09
0.094727874 = product of:
0.18945575 = sum of:
0.18945575 = sum of:
0.14791681 = weight(_text_:journals in 102) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.14791681 = score(doc=102,freq=6.0), product of:
0.25656942 = queryWeight, product of:
5.021064 = idf(docFreq=792, maxDocs=44218)
0.05109862 = queryNorm
0.5765177 = fieldWeight in 102, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
5.021064 = idf(docFreq=792, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=102)
0.041538943 = weight(_text_:22 in 102) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.041538943 = score(doc=102,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17893866 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05109862 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 102, 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=102)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- University librarians continue to face the difficult task of determining which journals remain crucial for their collections during these times of static financial resources and escalating journal costs. One evaluative tool, Journal Citation Reports (JCR), recently has become available on CD-ROM, making it simpler for librarians to use its citation data as input for ranking journals. But many librarians remain unconvinced that the global citation data from the JCR bears enough correspondence to their local situation to be useful. In this project, I explore the correlation between global citation data available from JCR with local citation data generated specifically for the University of British Columbia, for 20 subject fields in the sciences and social sciences. The significant correlations obtained in this study suggest that large research-oriented university libraries could consider substituting global citation data for local citation data when evaluating their journals, with certain cautions.
- Date
- 10. 9.2000 17:38:22
