Search (6 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Rousseau, R."
  • × type_ss:"a"
  • × year_i:[2010 TO 2020}
  1. Egghe, L.; Guns, R.; Rousseau, R.; Leuven, K.U.: Erratum (2012) 0.05 
    0.053175673 = product of:
  0.106351346 = sum of:
    0.106351346 = sum of:
      0.035324864 = weight(_text_:2 in 4992) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.035324864 = score(doc=4992,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1294644 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05242341 = queryNorm
          0.27285388 = fieldWeight in 4992, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
            0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4992)
      0.07102648 = weight(_text_:22 in 4992) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.07102648 = score(doc=4992,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18357785 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05242341 = queryNorm
          0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 4992, 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=4992)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    14. 2.2012 12:53:22
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 63(2012) no.2, S.429
  2. Liu, Y.; Rousseau, R.: Citation analysis and the development of science : a case study using articles by some Nobel prize winners (2014) 0.01 
    0.007064973 = product of:
  0.014129946 = sum of:
    0.014129946 = product of:
      0.028259892 = sum of:
        0.028259892 = weight(_text_:2 in 1197) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.028259892 = score(doc=1197,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1294644 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05242341 = queryNorm
            0.2182831 = fieldWeight in 1197, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1197)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 65(2014) no.2, S.281-289
  3. Rousseau, R.: Basic properties of both percentile rank scores and the I3 indicator (2012) 0.01 
    0.0061818515 = product of:
  0.012363703 = sum of:
    0.012363703 = product of:
      0.024727406 = sum of:
        0.024727406 = weight(_text_:2 in 4993) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.024727406 = score(doc=4993,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1294644 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05242341 = queryNorm
            0.19099772 = fieldWeight in 4993, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4993)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 63(2012) no.2, S.416-420
  4. Egghe, L.; Guns, R.; Rousseau, R.: Thoughts on uncitedness : Nobel laureates and Fields medalists as case studies (2011) 0.01 
    0.0052987295 = product of:
  0.010597459 = sum of:
    0.010597459 = product of:
      0.021194918 = sum of:
        0.021194918 = weight(_text_:2 in 4994) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021194918 = score(doc=4994,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1294644 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05242341 = queryNorm
            0.16371232 = fieldWeight in 4994, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4994)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Footnote
    Vgl.: Erratum. In: Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 63(2012) no.2, S.429.
  5. Rousseau, S.; Rousseau, R.: Interactions between journal attributes and authors' willingness to wait for editorial decisions (2012) 0.01 
    0.0052987295 = product of:
  0.010597459 = sum of:
    0.010597459 = product of:
      0.021194918 = sum of:
        0.021194918 = weight(_text_:2 in 250) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021194918 = score(doc=250,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1294644 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05242341 = queryNorm
            0.16371232 = fieldWeight in 250, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=250)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    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.
  6. Liu, Y.; Rousseau, R.: Knowledge diffusion through publications and citations : a case study using ESI-fields as unit of diffusion (2010) 0.00 
    0.004415608 = product of:
  0.008831216 = sum of:
    0.008831216 = product of:
      0.017662432 = sum of:
        0.017662432 = weight(_text_:2 in 3334) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017662432 = score(doc=3334,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1294644 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05242341 = queryNorm
            0.13642694 = fieldWeight in 3334, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3334)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 61(2010) no.2, S.340-351

Authors