Search (4 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Cronin, B."
  • × type_ss:"a"
  • × year_i:[2000 TO 2010}
  1. Cronin, B.: Vernacular and vehicular language (2009) 0.02
    0.019783817 = product of:
      0.098919086 = sum of:
        0.098919086 = weight(_text_:22 in 7192) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.098919086 = score(doc=7192,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18262155 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052150324 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 7192, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=7192)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Date
    22. 3.2009 11:44:11
  2. Davenport, E.; Cronin, B.: Knowledge management : Semantic drift or conceptual shift? (2000) 0.01
    0.014131299 = product of:
      0.07065649 = sum of:
        0.07065649 = weight(_text_:22 in 2277) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07065649 = score(doc=2277,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18262155 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052150324 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 2277, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2277)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Date
    31. 7.2001 20:22:57
  3. Cronin, B.: Semiotics and evaluative bibliometrics (2000) 0.01
    0.011431146 = product of:
      0.057155732 = sum of:
        0.057155732 = weight(_text_:system in 4542) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.057155732 = score(doc=4542,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1642502 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052150324 = queryNorm
            0.3479797 = fieldWeight in 4542, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4542)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Abstract
    The reciprocal relationship between bibliographic references and citations in the context of the scholarly communication system is examined. Semiotic analysis of referencing behaviours and citation counting reveals the complexity of prevailing sign systems and associated symbolic practices.
  4. Cronin, B.: Hyperauthorship : a postmodern perversion or evidence of a structural shift in scholarly communication practices? (2001) 0.01
    0.008001803 = product of:
      0.040009014 = sum of:
        0.040009014 = weight(_text_:system in 5909) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.040009014 = score(doc=5909,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1642502 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052150324 = queryNorm
            0.2435858 = fieldWeight in 5909, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5909)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Abstract
    Classical assumptions about the nature and ethical entailments of authorship (the standard model) are being challenged by developments in scientific collaboration and multiple authorship. In the biomedical research community, multiple authorship has increased to such an extent that the trustworthiness of the scientific communication system has been called into question. Documented abuses, such as honorific authorship, have serious implications in terms of the acknowledgment of authority, allocation of credit, and assigning of accountability. Within the biomedical world it has been proposed that authors be replaced by lists of contributors (the radical model), whose specific inputs to a given study would be recorded unambiguously. The wider implications of the 'hyperauthorship' phenomenon for scholarly publication are considered