Search (4 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Li, K."
  • × author_ss:"Yan, E."
  • × theme_ss:"Informetrie"
  1. Yan, E.; Li, K.: Which domains do open-access journals do best in? : a 5-year longitudinal study (2018) 0.03 
    0.031798244 = product of:
  0.07949561 = sum of:
    0.022488397 = weight(_text_:technology in 4257) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022488397 = score(doc=4257,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13667917 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04589033 = queryNorm
        0.16453418 = fieldWeight in 4257, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4257)
    0.057007212 = weight(_text_:social in 4257) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.057007212 = score(doc=4257,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.18299131 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04589033 = queryNorm
        0.3115296 = fieldWeight in 4257, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4257)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    Although researchers have begun to investigate the difference in scientific impact between closed-access and open-access journals, studies that focus specifically on dynamic and disciplinary differences remain scarce. This study serves to fill this gap by using a large longitudinal dataset to examine these differences. Using CiteScore as a proxy for journal scientific impact, we employ a series of statistical tests to identify the quartile categories and disciplinary areas in which impact trends differ notably between closed- and open-access journals. We find that closed-access journals have a noticeable advantage in social sciences (for example, business and economics), whereas open-access journals perform well in medical and healthcare domains (for example, health profession and nursing). Moreover, we find that after controlling for a journal's rank and disciplinary differences, there are statistically more closed-access journals in the top 10%, Quartile 1, and Quartile 2 categories as measured by CiteScore; in contrast, more open-access journals in Quartile 4 gained scientific impact from 2011 to 2015. Considering dynamic and disciplinary trends in tandem, we find that more closed-access journals in Social Sciences gained in impact, whereas in biochemistry and medicine, more open-access journals experienced such gains.
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 69(2018) no.6, S.844-856
  2. Zhao, M.; Yan, E.; Li, K.: Data set mentions and citations : a content analysis of full-text publications (2018) 0.01 
    0.005397215 = product of:
  0.026986076 = sum of:
    0.026986076 = weight(_text_:technology in 4008) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026986076 = score(doc=4008,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13667917 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04589033 = queryNorm
        0.19744103 = fieldWeight in 4008, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4008)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 69(2018) no.1, S.32-46
  3. Yan, E.; Chen, Z.; Li, K.: Authors' status and the perceived quality of their work : measuring citation sentiment change in nobel articles (2020) 0.01 
    0.005397215 = product of:
  0.026986076 = sum of:
    0.026986076 = weight(_text_:technology in 5670) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026986076 = score(doc=5670,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13667917 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04589033 = queryNorm
        0.19744103 = fieldWeight in 5670, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5670)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 71(2020) no.3, S.314-324
  4. Wu, C.; Yan, E.; Zhu, Y.; Li, K.: Gender imbalance in the productivity of funded projects : a study of the outputs of National Institutes of Health R01 grants (2021) 0.01 
    0.005397215 = product of:
  0.026986076 = sum of:
    0.026986076 = weight(_text_:technology in 391) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026986076 = score(doc=391,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13667917 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04589033 = queryNorm
        0.19744103 = fieldWeight in 391, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=391)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 72(2021) no.11, S.1386-1399

Authors

Years