Search (11 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Marx, W."
  • × theme_ss:"Informetrie"
  • × type_ss:"a"
  1. Marx, W.; Bornmann, L.: On the problems of dealing with bibliometric data (2014) 0.00 
    0.004281203 = product of:
  0.029968418 = sum of:
    0.0100241685 = weight(_text_:information in 1239) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0100241685 = score(doc=1239,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.04306919 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.23274569 = fieldWeight in 1239, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1239)
    0.019944249 = product of:
      0.039888497 = sum of:
        0.039888497 = weight(_text_:22 in 1239) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.039888497 = score(doc=1239,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.085914485 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02453417 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 1239, 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=1239)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    Date
    18. 3.2014 19:13:22
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 65(2014) no.4, S.866-867
  2. Marx, W.: Special features of historical papers from the viewpoint of bibliometrics (2011) 0.00 
    0.0031385582 = product of:
  0.021969907 = sum of:
    0.0070881573 = weight(_text_:information in 4133) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0070881573 = score(doc=4133,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.04306919 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.16457605 = fieldWeight in 4133, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4133)
    0.014881751 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 4133) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014881751 = score(doc=4133,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.07421378 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.20052543 = fieldWeight in 4133, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4133)
  0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    Abstract
    This paper deals with the specific features of historical papers relevant for information retrieval and bibliometrics. The analysis is based mainly on the citation indexes accessible under the Web of Science (WoS) but also on field-specific databases: the Chemical Abstracts Service (CAS) literature database and the INSPEC database. First, the journal coverage of the WoS (in particular of the WoS Century of Science archive), the limitations of specific search fields as well as several database errors are discussed. Then, the problem of misspelled citations and their "mutations" is demonstrated by a few typical examples. Complex author names, complicated journal names, and other sources of errors that result from prior citation practice are further issues. Finally, some basic phenomena limiting the meaning of citation counts of historical papers are presented and explained.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 62(2011) no.3, S.433-439
  3. Bornmann, L.; Schier, H.; Marx, W.; Daniel, H.-D.: Is interactive open access publishing able to identify high-impact submissions? : a study on the predictive validity of Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics by using percentile rank classes (2011) 0.00 
    0.0025173177 = product of:
  0.017621223 = sum of:
    0.013444485 = weight(_text_:system in 4132) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013444485 = score(doc=4132,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.07727166 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.17398985 = fieldWeight in 4132, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4132)
    0.004176737 = weight(_text_:information in 4132) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.004176737 = score(doc=4132,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.04306919 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 4132, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4132)
  0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    Abstract
    In a comprehensive research project, we investigated the predictive validity of selection decisions and reviewers' ratings at the open access journal Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics (ACP). ACP is a high-impact journal publishing papers on the Earth's atmosphere and the underlying chemical and physical processes. Scientific journals have to deal with the following question concerning the predictive validity: Are in fact the "best" scientific works selected from the manuscripts submitted? In this study we examined whether selecting the "best" manuscripts means selecting papers that after publication show top citation performance as compared to other papers in this research area. First, we appraised the citation impact of later published manuscripts based on the percentile citedness rank classes of the population distribution (scaling in a specific subfield). Second, we analyzed the association between the decisions (n = 677 accepted or rejected, but published elsewhere manuscripts) or ratings (reviewers' ratings for n = 315 manuscripts), respectively, and the citation impact classes of the manuscripts. The results confirm the predictive validity of the ACP peer review system.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 62(2011) no.1, S.61-71
  4. Marx, W.: Wie mißt man Forschungsqualität? : der Science Citation Index - ein Maßstab für die Bewertung (1996) 0.00 
    0.0015365126 = product of:
  0.021511177 = sum of:
    0.021511177 = weight(_text_:system in 5036) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021511177 = score(doc=5036,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.07727166 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.27838376 = fieldWeight in 5036, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5036)
  0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    Abstract
    Ein überfordertes Gutachter-System, knapper fließende Forschungsgelder sowie die starke Faszination von Ranglisten bewirken zunehmend den Einsatz bibliometrischer Methoden zur Messung von Forschungsqualität. Grundlage der meisten Bewertungen ist der Science Citation Index, der nun auch in der Version als Online-Datenbank für umfangreiche Analysen genutzt werden kann. Erweiterungen der Retrievalsprache beim Host STN International ermöglichen statistische Analysen, die bisher nur dem SCI-Hersteller und wenigen Spezialisten vorbehalten waren. Voraussetzung für eine sinnvolle Anwendung sind vor allem die Wahl geeigneter Selektionskriterien sowie die sorgfältige Interpretation der Ergebnisse im Rahmen der Grenzen dieser Methoden
  5. Marx, W.; Gramm, G.: Literaturflut - Informationslawine - Wissensexplosion : Wächst der Wissenschaft das Wissen über den Kopf? (1997) 0.00 
    8.267796E-4 = product of:
  0.011574914 = sum of:
    0.011574914 = weight(_text_:information in 1078) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011574914 = score(doc=1078,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.04306919 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.2687516 = fieldWeight in 1078, 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=1078)
  0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    Abstract
    Scientific information has stopped growing exponentially as in the last 300 years. Nevertheless, the number of scientific papers published yearly remains dramatic. Well orderd databases and sophisticated search systems allow scientists to find the needle in the haystack. A growing number of factual databases as well as more reviews compress and refine information. Not searching but controlling and working up information appear to become the most important problem in the future
  6. Bornmann, L.; Marx, W.: Distributions instead of single numbers : percentiles and beam plots for the assessment of single researchers (2014) 0.00 
    4.176737E-4 = product of:
  0.0058474317 = sum of:
    0.0058474317 = weight(_text_:information in 1190) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0058474317 = score(doc=1190,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.04306919 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 1190, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1190)
  0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 65(2014) no.1, S.206-208
  7. Marx, W.; Bornmann, L.; Barth, A.; Leydesdorff, L.: Detecting the historical roots of research fields by reference publication year spectroscopy (RPYS) (2014) 0.00 
    4.176737E-4 = product of:
  0.0058474317 = sum of:
    0.0058474317 = weight(_text_:information in 1238) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0058474317 = score(doc=1238,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.04306919 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 1238, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1238)
  0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 65(2014) no.4, S.751-764
  8. Bornmann, L.; Marx, W.: ¬The wisdom of citing scientists (2014) 0.00 
    4.176737E-4 = product of:
  0.0058474317 = sum of:
    0.0058474317 = weight(_text_:information in 1293) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0058474317 = score(doc=1293,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.04306919 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 1293, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1293)
  0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 65(2014) no.6, S.1288-1292
  9. Neuhaus, C.; Marx, W.; Daniel, H.-W.: ¬The publication and citation impact profiles of Angewandte Chemie and the Journal of the American Chemical Society based on the sections of Chemical Abstracts : a case study on the limitations of the Journal Impact Factor (2009) 0.00 
    3.3753135E-4 = product of:
  0.0047254385 = sum of:
    0.0047254385 = weight(_text_:information in 2707) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0047254385 = score(doc=2707,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.04306919 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.10971737 = fieldWeight in 2707, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2707)
  0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    Abstract
    The Journal Impact Factor (JIF) published by Thomson Reuters is often used to evaluate the significance and performance of scientific journals. Besides methodological problems with the JIF, the critical issue is whether a single measure is sufficient for characterizing the impact of journals, particularly the impact of multidisciplinary and wide-scope journals that publish articles in a broad range of research fields. Taking Angewandte Chemie International Edition and the Journal of the American Chemical Society as examples, we examined the two journals' publication and impact profiles across the sections of Chemical Abstracts and compared the results with the JIF. The analysis was based primarily on Communications published in Angewandte Chemie International Edition and the Journal of the American Chemical Society during 2001 to 2005. The findings show that the information available in the Science Citation Index is a rather unreliable indication of the document type and is therefore inappropriate for comparative analysis. The findings further suggest that the composition of the journal in terms of contribution types, the length of the citation window, and the thematic focus of the journal in terms of the sections of Chemical Abstracts has a significant influence on the overall journal citation impact. Therefore, a single measure of journal citation impact such as the JIF is insufficient for characterizing the significance and performance of wide-scope journals. For the comparison of journals, more sophisticated methods such as publication and impact profiles across subject headings of bibliographic databases (e.g., the sections of Chemical Abstracts) are valuable.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 60(2009) no.1, S.176-183
  10. Marx, W.; Bornmann, L.; Cardona, M.: Reference standards and reference multipliers for the comparison of the citation impact of papers published in different time periods (2010) 0.00 
    2.9833836E-4 = product of:
  0.004176737 = sum of:
    0.004176737 = weight(_text_:information in 3998) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.004176737 = score(doc=3998,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.04306919 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 3998, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3998)
  0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 61(2010) no.10, S.2061-20690
  11. Bornmann, L.; Thor, A.; Marx, W.; Schier, H.: ¬The application of bibliometrics to research evaluation in the humanities and social sciences : an exploratory study using normalized Google Scholar data for the publications of a research institute (2016) 0.00 
    2.9833836E-4 = product of:
  0.004176737 = sum of:
    0.004176737 = weight(_text_:information in 3160) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.004176737 = score(doc=3160,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.04306919 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02453417 = queryNorm
        0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 3160, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3160)
  0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 67(2016) no.11, S.2778-2789

Authors

Years

Languages