Search (12 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Yan, E."
  • × theme_ss:"Informetrie"
  • × year_i:[2010 TO 2020}
  1. Pan, X.; Yan, E.; Hua, W.: Science communication and dissemination in different cultures : an analysis of the audience for TED videos in China and abroad (2016) 0.00 
    0.003211426 = product of:
  0.022479981 = sum of:
    0.017435152 = weight(_text_:web in 2938) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017435152 = score(doc=2938,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.18028519 = fieldWeight in 2938, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2938)
    0.0050448296 = weight(_text_:information in 2938) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0050448296 = score(doc=2938,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 2938, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2938)
  0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    Abstract
    Disseminated across the world in more than 100 languages and viewed over 1 billion times, TED Talks is a successful example of web-based science communication. This study investigates the impact of TED Talks videos on YouKu, a Chinese video portal, and YouTube using 6 measures of impact: number of views; likes; dislikes; comments; bookmarks; and shares. In particular, we study the relationship between the topicality and impact of these videos. Findings demonstrate that topics vary greatly in terms of their impact: Topics on entertainment and psychology/philosophy receive more views and likes, whereas design/art and astronomy/biology/oceanography attract fewer comments and bookmarks. Moreover, we identify several topical differences between YouKu and YouTube users. Topics on global issues and technology are more popular on YouKu, whereas topics on entertainment and psychology/philosophy are more popular on YouTube. By analyzing the popularity distribution of videos and the audience characteristics of YouKu, we find that women are more interested in topics on education and psychology/philosophy, whereas men favor topics on technology and astronomy/biology/oceanography.
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 67(2016) no.6, S.1473-1486
  2. Yan, E.: Finding knowledge paths among scientific disciplines (2014) 0.00 
    0.0020725802 = product of:
  0.014508061 = sum of:
    0.0050448296 = weight(_text_:information in 1534) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0050448296 = score(doc=1534,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 1534, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1534)
    0.009463232 = product of:
      0.028389696 = sum of:
        0.028389696 = weight(_text_:22 in 1534) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.028389696 = score(doc=1534,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.103770934 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.27358043 = fieldWeight in 1534, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1534)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    Date
    26.10.2014 20:22:22
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 65(2014) no.11, S.2331-2347
  3. 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 
    9.5338316E-4 = product of:
  0.013347364 = sum of:
    0.013347364 = weight(_text_:information in 4608) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013347364 = score(doc=4608,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.256578 = fieldWeight in 4608, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4608)
  0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    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.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 62(2011) no.10, S.1933-1953
  4. Yan, E.; Ding, Y.: Weighted citation : an indicator of an article's prestige (2010) 0.00 
    8.153676E-4 = product of:
  0.011415146 = sum of:
    0.011415146 = weight(_text_:information in 3705) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011415146 = score(doc=3705,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.21943474 = fieldWeight in 3705, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3705)
  0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    Abstract
    The authors propose using the technique of weighted citation to measure an article's prestige. The technique allocates a different weight to each reference by taking into account the impact of citing journals and citation time intervals. Weightedcitation captures prestige, whereas citation counts capture popularity. They compare the value variances for popularity and prestige for articles published in the Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology from 1998 to 2007, and find that the majority have comparable status.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 61(2010) no.8, S.1635-1643
  5. Yan, E.; Sugimoto, C.R.: Institutional interactions : exploring social, cognitive, and geographic relationships between institutions as demonstrated through citation networks (2011) 0.00 
    6.115257E-4 = product of:
  0.00856136 = sum of:
    0.00856136 = weight(_text_:information in 4627) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.00856136 = score(doc=4627,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.16457605 = fieldWeight in 4627, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4627)
  0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    Abstract
    The objective of this research is to examine the interaction of institutions, based on their citation and collaboration networks. The domain of library and information science is examined, using data from 1965-2010. A linear model is formulated to explore the factors that are associated with institutional citation behaviors, using the number of citations as the dependent variable, and the number of collaborations, physical distance, and topical distance as independent variables. It is found that institutional citation behaviors are associated with social, topical, and geographical factors. Dynamically, the number of citations is becoming more associated with collaboration intensity and less dependent on the country boundary and/or physical distance. This research is informative for scientometricians and policy makers.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 62(2011) no.8, S.1498-1514
  6. Yan, E.: Research dynamics, impact, and dissemination : a topic-level analysis (2015) 0.00 
    6.115257E-4 = product of:
  0.00856136 = sum of:
    0.00856136 = weight(_text_:information in 2272) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.00856136 = score(doc=2272,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.16457605 = fieldWeight in 2272, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2272)
  0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    Abstract
    In informetrics, journals have been used as a standard unit to analyze research impact, productivity, and scholarship. The increasing practice of interdisciplinary research challenges the effectiveness of journal-based assessments. The aim of this article is to highlight topics as a valuable unit of analysis. A set of topic-based approaches is applied to a data set on library and information science publications. Results show that topic-based approaches are capable of revealing the research dynamics, impact, and dissemination of the selected data set. The article also identifies a nonsignificant relationship between topic popularity and impact and argues for the need to use both variables in describing topic characteristics. Additionally, a flow map illustrates critical topic-level knowledge dissemination channels.
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 66(2015) no.11, S.2357-2372
  7. Yan, E.; Ding, Y.: Discovering author impact : a PageRank perspective (2011) 0.00 
    5.7655195E-4 = product of:
  0.008071727 = sum of:
    0.008071727 = weight(_text_:information in 2704) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008071727 = score(doc=2704,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.1551638 = fieldWeight in 2704, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2704)
  0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    Source
    Information processing and management. 47(2011) no.1, S.125-134
  8. Ding, Y.; Yan, E.: Scholarly network similarities : how bibliographic coupling networks, citation networks, cocitation networks, topical networks, coauthorship networks, and coword networks relate to each other (2012) 0.00 
    4.32414E-4 = product of:
  0.0060537956 = sum of:
    0.0060537956 = weight(_text_:information in 274) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0060537956 = score(doc=274,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 274, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=274)
  0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 63(2012) no.7, S.1313-1326
  9. Yan, E.; Yu, Q.: Using path-based approaches to examine the dynamic structure of discipline-level citation networks (2016) 0.00 
    4.32414E-4 = product of:
  0.0060537956 = sum of:
    0.0060537956 = weight(_text_:information in 3053) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0060537956 = score(doc=3053,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 3053, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3053)
  0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 67(2016) no.8, S.1943-1955
  10. Yan, E.: Disciplinary knowledge production and diffusion in science (2016) 0.00 
    4.32414E-4 = product of:
  0.0060537956 = sum of:
    0.0060537956 = weight(_text_:information in 3092) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0060537956 = score(doc=3092,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 3092, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3092)
  0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 67(2016) no.9, S.2223-2245
  11. Zhao, M.; Yan, E.; Li, K.: Data set mentions and citations : a content analysis of full-text publications (2018) 0.00 
    4.32414E-4 = product of:
  0.0060537956 = sum of:
    0.0060537956 = weight(_text_:information in 4008) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0060537956 = score(doc=4008,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 4008, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4008)
  0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 69(2018) no.1, S.32-46
  12. Yan, E.; Li, K.: Which domains do open-access journals do best in? : a 5-year longitudinal study (2018) 0.00 
    3.6034497E-4 = product of:
  0.0050448296 = sum of:
    0.0050448296 = weight(_text_:information in 4257) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0050448296 = score(doc=4257,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 4257, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4257)
  0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 69(2018) no.6, S.844-856

Authors