Search (8 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Thelwall, M."
  • × theme_ss:"Informetrie"
  • × year_i:[2020 TO 2030}
  1. Thelwall, M.; Thelwall, S.: ¬A thematic analysis of highly retweeted early COVID-19 tweets : consensus, information, dissent and lockdown life (2020) 0.03 
    0.026755556 = product of:
  0.040133335 = sum of:
    0.0037074753 = weight(_text_:s in 178) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0037074753 = score(doc=178,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.043647945 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04014573 = queryNorm
        0.08494043 = fieldWeight in 178, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=178)
    0.03642586 = product of:
      0.054638788 = sum of:
        0.027442828 = weight(_text_:29 in 178) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027442828 = score(doc=178,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14122012 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04014573 = queryNorm
            0.19432661 = fieldWeight in 178, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=178)
        0.02719596 = weight(_text_:22 in 178) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02719596 = score(doc=178,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1405835 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04014573 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 178, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=178)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    Purpose Public attitudes towards COVID-19 and social distancing are critical in reducing its spread. It is therefore important to understand public reactions and information dissemination in all major forms, including on social media. This article investigates important issues reflected on Twitter in the early stages of the public reaction to COVID-19. Design/methodology/approach A thematic analysis of the most retweeted English-language tweets mentioning COVID-19 during March 10-29, 2020. Findings The main themes identified for the 87 qualifying tweets accounting for 14 million retweets were: lockdown life; attitude towards social restrictions; politics; safety messages; people with COVID-19; support for key workers; work; and COVID-19 facts/news. Research limitations/implications Twitter played many positive roles, mainly through unofficial tweets. Users shared social distancing information, helped build support for social distancing, criticised government responses, expressed support for key workers and helped each other cope with social isolation. A few popular tweets not supporting social distancing show that government messages sometimes failed. Practical implications Public health campaigns in future may consider encouraging grass roots social web activity to support campaign goals. At a methodological level, analysing retweet counts emphasised politics and ignored practical implementation issues. Originality/value This is the first qualitative analysis of general COVID-19-related retweeting.
    Date
    20. 1.2015 18:30:22
    Source
    Aslib journal of information management. 72(2020) no.6, S.945-962
  2. Thelwall, M.; Kousha, K.; Abdoli, M.; Stuart, E.; Makita, M.; Wilson, P.; Levitt, J.: Why are coauthored academic articles more cited : higher quality or larger audience? (2023) 0.01 
    0.0077912677 = product of:
  0.011686902 = sum of:
    0.002621581 = weight(_text_:s in 995) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.002621581 = score(doc=995,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.043647945 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04014573 = queryNorm
        0.060061958 = fieldWeight in 995, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=995)
    0.009065321 = product of:
      0.02719596 = sum of:
        0.02719596 = weight(_text_:22 in 995) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02719596 = score(doc=995,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1405835 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04014573 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 995, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=995)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Date
    22. 6.2023 18:11:50
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 74(2023) no.7, S.791-810
  3. Thelwall, M.; Foster, D.: Male or female gender-polarized YouTube videos are less viewed (2021) 0.00 
    0.0010486324 = product of:
  0.003145897 = sum of:
    0.003145897 = weight(_text_:s in 414) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.003145897 = score(doc=414,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.043647945 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04014573 = queryNorm
        0.072074346 = fieldWeight in 414, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=414)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 72(2021) no.12, S.1528-1544
  4. Thelwall, M.: Female citation impact superiority 1996-2018 in six out of seven English-speaking nations (2020) 0.00 
    8.738604E-4 = product of:
  0.002621581 = sum of:
    0.002621581 = weight(_text_:s in 5948) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.002621581 = score(doc=5948,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.043647945 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04014573 = queryNorm
        0.060061958 = fieldWeight in 5948, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5948)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 71(2020) no.8, S.979-990
  5. Thelwall, M.; Maflahi, N.: Academic collaboration rates and citation associations vary substantially between countries and fields (2020) 0.00 
    8.738604E-4 = product of:
  0.002621581 = sum of:
    0.002621581 = weight(_text_:s in 5952) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.002621581 = score(doc=5952,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.043647945 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04014573 = queryNorm
        0.060061958 = fieldWeight in 5952, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5952)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 71(2020) no.8, S.968-978
  6. Thelwall, M.; Sud, P.: Do new research issues attract more citations? : a comparison between 25 Scopus subject categories (2021) 0.00 
    8.738604E-4 = product of:
  0.002621581 = sum of:
    0.002621581 = weight(_text_:s in 157) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.002621581 = score(doc=157,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.043647945 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04014573 = queryNorm
        0.060061958 = fieldWeight in 157, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=157)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 72(2021) no.3, S.269-279
  7. Thelwall, M.; Kousha, K.; Abdoli, M.; Stuart, E.; Makita, M.; Wilson, P.; Levitt, J.: Do altmetric scores reflect article quality? : evidence from the UK Research Excellence Framework 2021 (2023) 0.00 
    8.738604E-4 = product of:
  0.002621581 = sum of:
    0.002621581 = weight(_text_:s in 947) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.002621581 = score(doc=947,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.043647945 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04014573 = queryNorm
        0.060061958 = fieldWeight in 947, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=947)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 74(2023) no.5, S.582-593
  8. Thelwall, M.; Kousha, K.; Stuart, E.; Makita, M.; Abdoli, M.; Wilson, P.; Levitt, J.: In which fields are citations indicators of research quality? (2023) 0.00 
    8.738604E-4 = product of:
  0.002621581 = sum of:
    0.002621581 = weight(_text_:s in 1033) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.002621581 = score(doc=1033,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.043647945 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04014573 = queryNorm
        0.060061958 = fieldWeight in 1033, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1033)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 74(2023) no.8, S.941-953

Authors