Search (50 results, page 2 of 3)

  • × author_ss:"Rousseau, R."
  • × language_ss:"e"
  1. Egghe, L.; Rousseau, R.; Hooydonk, G. van: Methods for accrediting publications to authors or countries : consequences for evaluation studies (2000) 0.00 
    0.0021179102 = product of:
  0.012707461 = sum of:
    0.012707461 = weight(_text_:information in 4384) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012707461 = score(doc=4384,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.0772133 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043984205 = queryNorm
        0.16457605 = fieldWeight in 4384, 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=4384)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    Abstract
    One aim of science evaluation studies is to determine quantitatively the contribution of different players (authors, departments, countries) to the whole system. This information is then used to study the evolution of the system, for instance to gauge the results of special national or international programs. Taking articles as our basic data, we want to determine the exact relative contribution of each coauthor or each country. These numbers are brought together to obtain country scores, or department scores, etc. It turns out, as we will show in this article, that different scoring methods can yield totally different rankings. Conseqeuntly, a ranking between countries, universities, research groups or authors, based on one particular accrediting methods does not contain an absolute truth about their relative importance
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 51(2000) no.2, S.145-157
  2. Jin, B.; Li, L.; Rousseau, R.: Long-term influences of interventions in the normal development of science : China and the cultural revolution (2004) 0.00 
    0.0021179102 = product of:
  0.012707461 = sum of:
    0.012707461 = weight(_text_:information in 2232) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012707461 = score(doc=2232,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.0772133 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043984205 = queryNorm
        0.16457605 = fieldWeight in 2232, 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=2232)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    Abstract
    Intellectual and technological talents and skills are the driving force for scientific and industrial development, especially in our times characterized by a knowledgebased economy. Major events in society and related political decisions, however, can have a long-term effect an a country's scientific weIl-being. Although the Cultural Revolution took place from 1966 to 1976, its aftermath can still be felt. This is shown by this study of the production and productivity of Chinese scientists as a function of their age. Based an the 1995-2000 data from the Chinese Science Citation database (CSCD), this article investigates the year-by-year age distribution of scientific and technological personnel publishing in China. It is shown that the "Talent Fault" originating during the Cultural Revolution still exists, and that a new gap resulting from recent brain drain might be developing. The purpose of this work is to provide necessary information about the current situation and especially the existing problems of the S&T workforce in China.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 55(2004) no.6, S.544-550
  3. Egghe, L.; Guns, R.; Rousseau, R.: Thoughts on uncitedness : Nobel laureates and Fields medalists as case studies (2011) 0.00 
    0.0021179102 = product of:
  0.012707461 = sum of:
    0.012707461 = weight(_text_:information in 4994) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012707461 = score(doc=4994,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.0772133 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043984205 = queryNorm
        0.16457605 = fieldWeight in 4994, 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=4994)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    Footnote
    Vgl.: Erratum. In: Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 63(2012) no.2, S.429.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 62(2011) no.8, S.1637-1644
  4. Rousseau, S.; Rousseau, R.: Interactions between journal attributes and authors' willingness to wait for editorial decisions (2012) 0.00 
    0.0021179102 = product of:
  0.012707461 = sum of:
    0.012707461 = weight(_text_:information in 250) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012707461 = score(doc=250,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.0772133 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043984205 = queryNorm
        0.16457605 = fieldWeight in 250, 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=250)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    Abstract
    In this article, we report on a discrete choice experiment to determine the willingness-to-wait (WTW) in the context of journal submissions. Respondents to our survey are mostly active in the information sciences, including librarians. Besides WTW, other attributes included in the study are the quality of the editorial board, the quality of referee reports, the probability of being accepted, the ISI impact factor, and the standing of the journal among peers. Interaction effects originating from scientists' personal characteristics (age, region of origin, motivations to publish) with the WTW are highlighted. A difference was made between submitting a high quality article and a standard article. Among the interesting results obtained from our analysis we mention that for a high-quality article, researchers are willing to wait some 18 months longer for a journal with an ISI impact factor above 2 than for a journal without an impact factor, keeping all other factors constant. For a standard article, the WTW decreases to some 8 months. Gender had no effect on our conclusions.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 63(2012) no.6, S.1213-1225
  5. Egghe, L.; Rousseau, R.: ¬The influence of publication delays on the observed aging distribution of scientific literature (2000) 0.00 
    0.001996785 = product of:
  0.011980709 = sum of:
    0.011980709 = weight(_text_:information in 4385) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011980709 = score(doc=4385,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.0772133 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043984205 = queryNorm
        0.1551638 = fieldWeight in 4385, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4385)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 51(2000) no.2, S.158-165
  6. Egghe, L.; Liang, L.; Rousseau, R.: ¬A relation between h-index and impact factor in the power-law model (2009) 0.00 
    0.001996785 = product of:
  0.011980709 = sum of:
    0.011980709 = weight(_text_:information in 6759) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011980709 = score(doc=6759,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.0772133 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043984205 = queryNorm
        0.1551638 = fieldWeight in 6759, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6759)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 60(2009) no.11, S.2362-2365
  7. Egghe, L.; Rousseau, R.: ¬An h-index weighted by citation impact (2008) 0.00 
    0.001996785 = product of:
  0.011980709 = sum of:
    0.011980709 = weight(_text_:information in 695) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011980709 = score(doc=695,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.0772133 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043984205 = queryNorm
        0.1551638 = fieldWeight in 695, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=695)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    Source
    Information processing and management. 44(2008) no.2, S.770-780
  8. Rousseau, R.: Informetric laws (2009) 0.00 
    0.001996785 = product of:
  0.011980709 = sum of:
    0.011980709 = weight(_text_:information in 3795) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011980709 = score(doc=3795,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.0772133 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043984205 = queryNorm
        0.1551638 = fieldWeight in 3795, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3795)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    Source
    Encyclopedia of library and information sciences. 3rd ed. Ed.: M.J. Bates
  9. Zhang, L.; Rousseau, R.; Glänzel, W.: Document-type country profiles (2011) 0.00 
    0.001996785 = product of:
  0.011980709 = sum of:
    0.011980709 = weight(_text_:information in 4487) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011980709 = score(doc=4487,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.0772133 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043984205 = queryNorm
        0.1551638 = fieldWeight in 4487, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4487)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 62(2011) no.7, S.1403-1411
  10. Liu, Y.; Rousseau, R.: Citation analysis and the development of science : a case study using articles by some Nobel prize winners (2014) 0.00 
    0.001996785 = product of:
  0.011980709 = sum of:
    0.011980709 = weight(_text_:information in 1197) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011980709 = score(doc=1197,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.0772133 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043984205 = queryNorm
        0.1551638 = fieldWeight in 1197, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1197)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 65(2014) no.2, S.281-289
  11. Rousseau, R.: Citation data as a proxy for quality or scientific influence are at best PAC (probably approximately correct) (2016) 0.00 
    0.001996785 = product of:
  0.011980709 = sum of:
    0.011980709 = weight(_text_:information in 3210) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011980709 = score(doc=3210,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.0772133 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043984205 = queryNorm
        0.1551638 = fieldWeight in 3210, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3210)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 67(2016) no.12, S.3092-3094
  12. Frandsen, T.F.; Rousseau, R.; Rowlands, I.: Diffusion factors (2006) 0.00 
    0.0017649251 = product of:
  0.01058955 = sum of:
    0.01058955 = weight(_text_:information in 5587) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01058955 = score(doc=5587,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.0772133 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043984205 = queryNorm
        0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 5587, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5587)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    Abstract
    Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to clarify earlier work on journal diffusion metrics. Classical journal indicators such as the Garfield impact factor do not measure the breadth of influence across the literature of a particular journal title. As a new approach to measuring research influence, the study complements these existing metrics with a series of formally described diffusion factors. Design/methodology/approach - Using a publication-citation matrix as an organising construct, the paper develops formal descriptions of two forms of diffusion metric: "relative diffusion factors" and "journal diffusion factors" in both their synchronous and diachronous forms. It also provides worked examples for selected library and information science and economics journals, plus a sample of health information papers to illustrate their construction and use. Findings - Diffusion factors capture different aspects of the citation reception process than existing bibliometric measures. The paper shows that diffusion factors can be applied at the whole journal level or for sets of articles and that they provide a richer evidence base for citation analyses than traditional measures alone. Research limitations/implications - The focus of this paper is on clarifying the concepts underlying diffusion factors and there is unlimited scope for further work to apply these metrics to much larger and more comprehensive data sets than has been attempted here. Practical implications - These new tools extend the range of tools available for bibliometric, and possibly webometric, analysis. Diffusion factors might find particular application in studies where the research questions focus on the dynamic aspects of innovation and knowledge transfer. Originality/value - This paper will be of interest to those with theoretical interests in informetric distributions as well as those interested in science policy and innovation studies.
  13. Egghe, L.; Rousseau, R.; Rousseau, S.: TOP-curves (2007) 0.00 
    0.0017471868 = product of:
  0.010483121 = sum of:
    0.010483121 = weight(_text_:information in 50) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010483121 = score(doc=50,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.0772133 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043984205 = queryNorm
        0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 50, 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=50)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 58(2007) no.6, S.777-785
  14. Egghe, L.; Liang, L.; Rousseau, R.: Fundamental properties of rhythm sequences (2008) 0.00 
    0.0017471868 = product of:
  0.010483121 = sum of:
    0.010483121 = weight(_text_:information in 1965) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010483121 = score(doc=1965,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.0772133 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043984205 = queryNorm
        0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 1965, 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=1965)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 59(2008) no.9, S.1469-1478
  15. Guns, R.; Rousseau, R.: Simulating growth of the h-index (2009) 0.00 
    0.0017471868 = product of:
  0.010483121 = sum of:
    0.010483121 = weight(_text_:information in 2717) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010483121 = score(doc=2717,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.0772133 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043984205 = queryNorm
        0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 2717, 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=2717)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 60(2009) no.2, S.410-417
  16. Rousseau, R.: Basic properties of both percentile rank scores and the I3 indicator (2012) 0.00 
    0.0017471868 = product of:
  0.010483121 = sum of:
    0.010483121 = weight(_text_:information in 4993) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010483121 = score(doc=4993,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.0772133 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043984205 = queryNorm
        0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 4993, 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=4993)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 63(2012) no.2, S.416-420
  17. Egghe, L.; Rousseau, R.: ¬The Hirsch index of a shifted Lotka function and its relation with the impact factor (2012) 0.00 
    0.0017471868 = product of:
  0.010483121 = sum of:
    0.010483121 = weight(_text_:information in 243) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010483121 = score(doc=243,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.0772133 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043984205 = queryNorm
        0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 243, 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=243)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 63(2012) no.5, S.1048-1053
  18. Yan, S.; Rousseau, R.; Huang, S.: Contributions of chinese authors in PLOS ONE (2016) 0.00 
    0.0017471868 = product of:
  0.010483121 = sum of:
    0.010483121 = weight(_text_:information in 2765) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010483121 = score(doc=2765,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.0772133 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043984205 = queryNorm
        0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 2765, 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=2765)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 67(2016) no.3, S.543-549
  19. Egghe, L.; Rousseau, R.: Aging, obsolescence, impact, growth, and utilization : definitions and relations (2000) 0.00 
    0.0014975886 = product of:
  0.0089855315 = sum of:
    0.0089855315 = weight(_text_:information in 5154) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0089855315 = score(doc=5154,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.0772133 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043984205 = queryNorm
        0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 5154, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5154)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 51(2000) no.11, S.1004-1017
  20. Frandsen, T.F.; Rousseau, R.: Article impact calculated over arbitrary periods (2005) 0.00 
    0.0014975886 = product of:
  0.0089855315 = sum of:
    0.0089855315 = weight(_text_:information in 3264) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0089855315 = score(doc=3264,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.0772133 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043984205 = queryNorm
        0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 3264, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3264)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 56(2005) no.1, S.58-62

Authors

Years

Types

  • a 49
  • m 1
  • More… Less…

Themes

Subjects

Classifications