Search (6 results, page 1 of 1)

Sugimoto, C.R.; Li, D.; Russell, T.G.; Finlay, S.C.; Ding, Y.: ¬The shifting sands of disciplinary development : analyzing North American Library and Information Science dissertations using latent Dirichlet allocation (2011) 0.02
```
0.02044836 = sum of:
  0.015176657 = product of:
    0.060706627 = sum of:
      0.060706627 = weight(_text_:authors in 4143) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.060706627 = score(doc=4143,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.24105114 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052875843 = queryNorm
          0.25184128 = fieldWeight in 4143, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4143)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.005271704 = product of:
    0.010543408 = sum of:
      0.010543408 = weight(_text_:d in 4143) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.010543408 = score(doc=4143,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.10045733 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.899872 = idf(docFreq=17979, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052875843 = queryNorm
          0.104954086 = fieldWeight in 4143, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            1.899872 = idf(docFreq=17979, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4143)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)
```
Abstract

This work identifies changes in dominant topics in library and information science (LIS) over time, by analyzing the 3,121 doctoral dissertations completed between 1930 and 2009 at North American Library and Information Science programs. The authors utilize latent Dirichlet allocation (LDA) to identify latent topics diachronically and to identify representative dissertations of those topics. The findings indicate that the main topics in LIS have changed substantially from those in the initial period (1930-1969) to the present (2000-2009). However, some themes occurred in multiple periods, representing core areas of the field: library history occurred in the first two periods; citation analysis in the second and third periods; and information-seeking behavior in the fourth and last period. Two topics occurred in three of the five periods: information retrieval and information use. One of the notable changes in the topics was the diminishing use of the word library (and related terms). This has implications for the provision of doctoral education in LIS. This work is compared to other earlier analyses and provides validation for the use of LDA in topic analysis of a discipline.
Larivière, V.; Sugimoto, C.R.; Cronin, B.: ¬A bibliometric chronicling of library and information science's first hundred years (2012) 0.01
```
0.013143372 = product of:
  0.026286744 = sum of:
    0.026286744 = product of:
      0.105146974 = sum of:
        0.105146974 = weight(_text_:authors in 244) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.105146974 = score(doc=244,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.24105114 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052875843 = queryNorm
            0.43620193 = fieldWeight in 244, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=244)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
```
Abstract

This paper presents a condensed history of Library and Information Science (LIS) over the course of more than a century using a variety of bibliometric measures. It examines in detail the variable rate of knowledge production in the field, shifts in subject coverage, the dominance of particular publication genres at different times, prevailing modes of production, interactions with other disciplines, and, more generally, observes how the field has evolved. It shows that, despite a striking growth in the number of journals, papers, and contributing authors, a decrease was observed in the field's market-share of all social science and humanities research. Collaborative authorship is now the norm, a pattern seen across the social sciences. The idea of boundary crossing was also examined: in 2010, nearly 60% of authors who published in LIS also published in another discipline. This high degree of permeability in LIS was also demonstrated through reference and citation practices: LIS scholars now cite and receive citations from other fields more than from LIS itself. Two major structural shifts are revealed in the data: in 1960, LIS changed from a professional field focused on librarianship to an academic field focused on information and use; and in 1990, LIS began to receive a growing number of citations from outside the field, notably from Computer Science and Management, and saw a dramatic increase in the number of authors contributing to the literature of the field.
Gazni, A.; Sugimoto, C.R.; Didegah, F.: Mapping world scientific collaboration : authors, institutions, and countries (2012) 0.01
```
0.01287782 = product of:
  0.02575564 = sum of:
    0.02575564 = product of:
      0.10302256 = sum of:
        0.10302256 = weight(_text_:authors in 1141) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10302256 = score(doc=1141,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.24105114 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052875843 = queryNorm
            0.42738882 = fieldWeight in 1141, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1141)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
```
Abstract

International collaboration is being heralded as the hallmark of contemporary scientific production. Yet little quantitative evidence has portrayed the landscape and trends of such collaboration. To this end, 14,000,000 documents indexed in Thomson Reuters's Web of Science (WoS) were studied to provide a state-of-the-art description of scientific collaborations across the world. The results indicate that the number of authors in the largest research teams have not significantly grown during the past decade; however, the number of smaller research teams has seen significant increases in growth. In terms of composition, the largest teams have become more diverse than the latter teams and tend more toward interinstitutional and international collaboration. Investigating the size of teams showed large variation between fields. Mapping scientific cooperation at the country level reveals that Western countries situated at the core of the map are extensively cooperating with each other. High-impact institutions are significantly more collaborative than others. This work should inform policy makers, administrators, and those interested in the progression of scientific collaboration.
Larivière, V.; Gingras, Y.; Sugimoto, C.R.; Tsou, A.: Team size matters : collaboration and scientific impact since 1900 (2015) 0.01
```
0.01287782 = product of:
  0.02575564 = sum of:
    0.02575564 = product of:
      0.10302256 = sum of:
        0.10302256 = weight(_text_:authors in 2035) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10302256 = score(doc=2035,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.24105114 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052875843 = queryNorm
            0.42738882 = fieldWeight in 2035, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2035)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
```
Abstract

This article provides the first historical analysis of the relationship between collaboration and scientific impact using three indicators of collaboration (number of authors, number of addresses, and number of countries) derived from articles published between 1900 and 2011. The results demonstrate that an increase in the number of authors leads to an increase in impact, from the beginning of the last century onward, and that this is not due simply to self-citations. A similar trend is also observed for the number of addresses and number of countries represented in the byline of an article. However, the constant inflation of collaboration since 1900 has resulted in diminishing citation returns: Larger and more diverse (in terms of institutional and country affiliation) teams are necessary to realize higher impact. The article concludes with a discussion of the potential causes of the impact gain in citations of collaborative papers.
Sugimoto, C.R.; Cronin, B.: Biobibliometric profiling : an examination of multifaceted approaches to scholarship (2012) 0.01
```
0.010623659 = product of:
  0.021247318 = sum of:
    0.021247318 = product of:
      0.08498927 = sum of:
        0.08498927 = weight(_text_:authors in 4991) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08498927 = score(doc=4991,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.24105114 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052875843 = queryNorm
            0.35257778 = fieldWeight in 4991, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4991)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
```
Abstract

We conducted a fine-grained prosopography of six distinguished information scientists to explore commonalities and differences in their approaches to scholarly production at different stages of their careers. Specifically, we gathered data on authors' genre preferences, rates and modes of scholarly production, and coauthorship patterns. We also explored the role played by gender and place in determining mentoring and collaboration practices across time. Our biobibliometric profiles of the sextet reveal the different shapes a scholar's career can take. We consider the implications of our findings for new entrants into the academic marketplace.
Milojevic, S.; Sugimoto, C.R.; Yan, E.; Ding, Y.: ¬The cognitive structure of Library and Information Science : analysis of article title words (2011) 0.00
```
0.002635852 = product of:
  0.005271704 = sum of:
    0.005271704 = product of:
      0.010543408 = sum of:
        0.010543408 = weight(_text_:d in 4608) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.010543408 = score(doc=4608,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10045733 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.899872 = idf(docFreq=17979, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052875843 = queryNorm
            0.104954086 = fieldWeight in 4608, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.899872 = idf(docFreq=17979, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4608)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
```
Abstract

This study comprises a suite of analyses of words in article titles in order to reveal the cognitive structure of Library and Information Science (LIS). The use of title words to elucidate the cognitive structure of LIS has been relatively neglected. The present study addresses this gap by performing (a) co-word analysis and hierarchical clustering, (b) multidimensional scaling, and (c) determination of trends in usage of terms. The study is based on 10,344 articles published between 1988 and 2007 in 16 LIS journals. Methodologically, novel aspects of this study are: (a) its large scale, (b) removal of non-specific title words based on the "word concentration" measure (c) identification of the most frequent terms that include both single words and phrases, and (d) presentation of the relative frequencies of terms using "heatmaps". Conceptually, our analysis reveals that LIS consists of three main branches: the traditionally recognized library-related and information-related branches, plus an equally distinct bibliometrics/scientometrics branch. The three branches focus on: libraries, information, and science, respectively. In addition, our study identifies substructures within each branch. We also tentatively identify "information seeking behavior" as a branch that is establishing itself separate from the three main branches. Furthermore, we find that cognitive concepts in LIS evolve continuously, with no stasis since 1992. The most rapid development occurred between 1998 and 2001, influenced by the increased focus on the Internet. The change in the cognitive landscape is found to be driven by the emergence of new information technologies, and the retirement of old ones.

Search (6 results, page 1 of 1)

Authors