Search (2 results, page 1 of 1)

Did you mean:
editor's%3a%20den%2c M. u. G. schreiber%22 2
editor's%3a%20den%2c M. u. G. schreiben%22 2
editores%3a%20den%2c M. u. G. schreiber%22 2
editor's%3a%20den%2c M. u. G. schreibern%22 2
editors%3a%20den%2c M. u. G. schreiber%22 2

Haley, M.R.; McGee, M.K.: ¬A parametric "parent metric" approach for comparing maximum-normalized journal ranking metrics (2018) 0.01

0.010660393 = product of:
  0.053301964 = sum of:
    0.053301964 = weight(_text_:g in 3313) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.053301964 = score(doc=3313,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1605568 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.7559474 = idf(docFreq=2809, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04274735 = queryNorm
        0.331982 = fieldWeight in 3313, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.7559474 = idf(docFreq=2809, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3313)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract: This article proposes a parametric approach for facilitating inter-metric and inter-field comparisons of citation-based journal ranking metrics. The mechanism is simple to apply and adjusts for metric magnitude differentials and distributional asymmetries in the rank-score curves. The method is demonstrated using h-index, AWCR-index, g-index, and e-index data from journals in Accounting, Economics, and Finance.

Haley, M.R.: Ranking top economics and finance journals using Microsoft academic search versus Google scholar : How does the new publish or perish option compare? (2014) 0.01
```
0.007995294 = product of:
  0.03997647 = sum of:
    0.03997647 = weight(_text_:g in 1255) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03997647 = score(doc=1255,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1605568 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.7559474 = idf(docFreq=2809, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04274735 = queryNorm
        0.24898648 = fieldWeight in 1255, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.7559474 = idf(docFreq=2809, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1255)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
```
Abstract

Recently, Harzing's Publish or Perish software was updated to include Microsoft Academic Search as a second citation database search option for computing various citation-based metrics. This article explores the new search option by scoring 50 top economics and finance journals and comparing them with the results obtained using the original Google Scholar-based search option. The new database delivers significantly smaller scores for all metrics, but the rank correlations across the two databases for the h-index, g-index, AWCR, and e-index are significantly correlated, especially when the time frame is restricted to more recent years. Comparisons are also made to the Article Influence score from eigenfactor.org and to the RePEc h-index, both of which adjust for journal-level self-citations.