Search (2 results, page 1 of 1)

Did you mean:
rswk_00%3a%22World wide web %2f elektronische bibliothek %2f information retrieval %2f kongress %2f trondheim %3.2003%3E%22 2
rswk_00%3a%22World wide web %2f elektronische bibliothek %2f information retrieval %2f kongress %2f trondheim %32003%3E%22 2
rswk_00%3a%22World wide web %2f elektronische bibliothek %2f information retrieval %2f kongresse %2f trondheim %3.2003%3E%22 2
rswk_00%3a%22World wide web %2f elektronische bibliothek %2f information retrieval %2f kongress %2f trondheim %3.2008%3E%22 2
rswk_00%3a%22World wide web %2f elektronische bibliothek %2f information retrieval %2f kongresu %2f trondheim %3.2003%3E%22 2

Cronin, B.; Meho, L.I.: Using the h-index to rank influential information scientists (2006) 0.00
```
9.986174E-4 = product of:
  0.013980643 = sum of:
    0.013980643 = weight(_text_:information in 196) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013980643 = score(doc=196,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.2687516 = fieldWeight in 196, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=196)
  0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
```
Abstract

The authors apply a new bibliometric measure, the h-index (Hirsch, 2005), to the literature of information science. Faculty rankings based on raw citation counts are compared with those based on h-counts. There is a strong positive correlation between the two sets of rankings. It is shown how the h-index can be used to express the broad impact of a scholar's research output over time in more nuanced fashion than straight citation counts.

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 57(2006) no.9, S.1275-1278
Cronin, B.; Meho, L.I.: Applying the author affiliation index to library and information science journals (2008) 0.00
```
9.986174E-4 = product of:
  0.013980643 = sum of:
    0.013980643 = weight(_text_:information in 2361) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013980643 = score(doc=2361,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.2687516 = fieldWeight in 2361, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2361)
  0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
```
Abstract

The authors use a novel method - the Author Affiliation Index (AAI) - to determine whether faculty at the top-10 North American library and information science (LIS) programs have a disproportionate presence in the premier journals of the field. The study finds that LIS may be both too small and too interdisciplinary a domain for the AAI to provide reliable results.

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 59(2008) no.11, S.1861-1865