Search (3 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Wagner-Döbler, R."
  • × theme_ss:"Informetrie"
  • × year_i:[2000 TO 2010}
  1. Huber, J.C.; Wagner-Döbler, R.: Using the Mann-Whitney test on informetric data (2003) 0.00 
    0.00270615 = product of:
  0.0054123 = sum of:
    0.0054123 = product of:
      0.0108246 = sum of:
        0.0108246 = weight(_text_:a in 1686) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0108246 = score(doc=1686,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.20383182 = fieldWeight in 1686, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1686)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    The fields of informetrics and scientometrics have suffered from the lack of a powerful test to detect the differences between two samples. We show that the Mann-Whitney test is a good test an the publication productivity of journals and of authors. Its main limitation is a lack of Power on small samples that have small differences. This is not the fault of the test, but rather reflects the fact that small, similar samples have little to distinguish between them.
    Type
    a
  2. Havemann, F.; Heinz, M.; Wagner-Döbler, R.: Firm-like behavior of journals? : scaling properties of their output and impact growth dynamics (2005) 0.00 
    0.0020714647 = product of:
  0.0041429293 = sum of:
    0.0041429293 = product of:
      0.008285859 = sum of:
        0.008285859 = weight(_text_:a in 3874) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.008285859 = score(doc=3874,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.15602624 = fieldWeight in 3874, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3874)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    In the study of growth dynamics of artificial and natural systems, the scaling properties of fluctuations can exhibit information an the underlying processes responsible for the observed macroscopic behavior according to H.E. Stanley and colleagues (Lee, Amaral, Canning, Meyer, & Stanley, 1998; Plerou, Amaral, Gopikrishnan, Meyer, & Stanley, 1999; Stanley et al., 1996). With such an approach, they examined the growth dynamics of firms, of national economies, and of university research fundings and paper output. We investigated the scaling properties of journal output and impact according to the Journal Citation Reports (JCR; ISI, Philadelphia, PA) and find distributions of paper output and of citations near to lognormality. Growth rate distributions are near to Laplace "tents," however with a better fit to Subbotin distributions. The width of fluctuations decays with size according to a power law. The form of growth rate distributions seems not to depend an journal size, and conditional probability densities of the growth rates can thus be scaled onto one graph. To some extent even quantitatively, all our results are in agreement with the observations of Stanley and others. Further on, a Matthew effect of journal citations is confirmed. If journals "behave" like business firms, a better understanding of Bradford's Law as a result of competition among publishing houses, journals, and topics suggests itself.
    Type
    a
  3. Wagner-Döbler, R.: Kognitive Mobilität und Zipfs "Principle of Least Effort" (2004) 0.00 
    0.0011959607 = product of:
  0.0023919214 = sum of:
    0.0023919214 = product of:
      0.0047838427 = sum of:
        0.0047838427 = weight(_text_:a in 3159) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0047838427 = score(doc=3159,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.090081796 = fieldWeight in 3159, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3159)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Unter kognitiver Mobilität verstehe ich im folgenden nicht die Mobilität von Information, sondern die Bewegung des Denkens, und zwar hier des wissenschaftlichen Denkens. Wissenschaftliches Denken vollzieht sich disziplinär sowie interdisziplinär, im informationellen Austausch von Disziplinen und Forschungsgebieten. Dieser Austausch unterliegt, wie die Wissenschaftsgeschichte lehrt, einer Entwicklungsdynamik, die als Abfolge von Wanderungen oder Übergängen zwischen Forschungsgebieten in folgendem Sinn verständen werden kann. Beschäftigt sich ein Forscher A zum Zeitpunkt t1 mit Forschungsgebiet X und zum Zeitpunkt t2 als nächstes mit Forschungsgebiet Y, so liegt ein Übergang von X nach Y vor. Gibt es für diese Art von Übergängen charakteristische Eigenschaften oder Regularitäten.> Ein wichtiges Merkmal solcher Übergänge ist der Grad der Verwandtschaft, der kognitiven Affinität zwischen Ausgangs- und Zielgebiet der Migration. Am Beispiel der rund 150.000 Migrationen zwischen den mathematischen Subdisziplinen, wie sie sich in den Zeitschriftenartikel-Nachweisen der Mathematical Reviews von 1959 bis 1975 widerspiegeln, wurde das Verhältnis von kognitiver Mobilität und Affinität empirisch systematisch untersucht. Es bestätigte sich George K. Zipfs "Principle of Least Effort". Zählreiche Mechanismen und Faustregeln der Wissensorganisation dürften der Wirksamkeit dieses Prinzips zugrundeliegen.
    Type
    a

Authors

Languages