-
Nicholas, D.; Huntington, P.; Jamali, H.R.; Rowlands, I.; Fieldhouse, M.: Student digital information-seeking behaviour in context (2009)
0.06
0.06346937 = product of:
0.12693875 = sum of:
0.12693875 = sum of:
0.08539981 = weight(_text_:journals in 2680) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08539981 = score(doc=2680,freq=2.0), product of:
0.25656942 = queryWeight, product of:
5.021064 = idf(docFreq=792, maxDocs=44218)
0.05109862 = queryNorm
0.33285263 = fieldWeight in 2680, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.021064 = idf(docFreq=792, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2680)
0.041538943 = weight(_text_:22 in 2680) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.041538943 = score(doc=2680,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17893866 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05109862 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2680, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2680)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Purpose - This study provides evidence on the actual information-seeking behaviour of students in a digital scholarly environment, not what they thought they did. It also compares student information-seeking behaviour with that of other academic communities, and, in some cases, for practitioners. Design/methodology/approach - Data were gathered as part of CIBER's ongoing Virtual Scholar programme. In particular log data from two digital journals libraries, Blackwell Synergy and OhioLINK, and one e-book collection (Oxford Scholarship Online) are utilized. Findings - The study showed a distinctive form of information-seeking behaviour associated with students and differences between them and other members of the academic community. For example, students constituted the biggest users in terms of sessions and pages viewed, and they were more likely to undertake longer online sessions. Undergraduates and postgraduates were the most likely users of library links to access scholarly databases, suggesting an important "hot link" role for libraries. Originality/value - Few studies have focused on the actual (rather than perceived) information-seeking behaviour of students. The study fills that gap.
- Date
- 23. 2.2009 17:22:41
-
Rowlands, I.: Journal diffusion factors : a new approach to measuring research influence (2002)
0.03
0.028466603 = product of:
0.056933206 = sum of:
0.056933206 = product of:
0.11386641 = sum of:
0.11386641 = weight(_text_:journals in 693) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.11386641 = score(doc=693,freq=2.0), product of:
0.25656942 = queryWeight, product of:
5.021064 = idf(docFreq=792, maxDocs=44218)
0.05109862 = queryNorm
0.44380352 = fieldWeight in 693, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.021064 = idf(docFreq=792, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=693)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- This paper introduces a new bibliometric tool, the journal diffusion factor. An argument is presented that the bibliometric indicators commonly used to measure the quality of research (journal impact factor, immediacy index and cited half-life) offer little insight into the transdisciplinary reception (thus the wider influence) of journals. The journal diffusion factor describes a neglected dynamic of citation reception and is intended as a complementary partial indicator for research evaluation purposes, to be read alongside existing well-established indicators.
-
Frandsen, T.F.; Rousseau, R.; Rowlands, I.: Diffusion factors (2006)
0.02
0.017791625 = product of:
0.03558325 = sum of:
0.03558325 = product of:
0.0711665 = sum of:
0.0711665 = weight(_text_:journals in 5587) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0711665 = score(doc=5587,freq=2.0), product of:
0.25656942 = queryWeight, product of:
5.021064 = idf(docFreq=792, maxDocs=44218)
0.05109862 = queryNorm
0.2773772 = fieldWeight in 5587, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.021064 = idf(docFreq=792, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5587)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- 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.
