Search (5 results, page 1 of 1)

0.0046019107 = product of:
  0.013805731 = sum of:
    0.013805731 = product of:
      0.041417193 = sum of:
        0.041417193 = weight(_text_:science in 4943) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.041417193 = score(doc=4943,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.11619691 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.044112243 = queryNorm
            0.3564397 = fieldWeight in 4943, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4943)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

In non-English-speaking countries the measurement of research output in the social sciences and humanities (SSH) using standard bibliographic databases suffers from a major drawback: the underrepresentation of articles published in local, non-English, journals. Using papers indexed (1) in a local database of periodicals (Érudit) and (2) in the Web of Science, assigned to the population of university professors in the province of Québec, this paper quantifies, for individual researchers and departments, the importance of papers published in local journals. It also analyzes differences across disciplines and between French-speaking and English-speaking universities. The results show that, while the addition of papers published in local journals to bibliometric measures has little effect when all disciplines are considered and for anglophone universities, it increases the output of researchers from francophone universities in the social sciences and humanities by almost a third. It also shows that there is very little relation, at the level of individual researchers or departments, between the output indexed in the Web of Science and the output retrieved from the Érudit database; a clear demonstration that the Web of Science cannot be used as a proxy for the "overall" production of SSH researchers in Québec. The paper concludes with a discussion on these disciplinary and language differences, as well as on their implications for rankings of universities.

Object

Web of Science

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 62(2011) no.12, S.2437-2442

0.0039844 = product of:
  0.0119532 = sum of:
    0.0119532 = product of:
      0.0358596 = sum of:
        0.0358596 = weight(_text_:22 in 5272) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0358596 = score(doc=5272,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15447356 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.044112243 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 5272, 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=5272)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

30. 5.2019 19:22:49

0.00371968 = product of:
  0.01115904 = sum of:
    0.01115904 = product of:
      0.03347712 = sum of:
        0.03347712 = weight(_text_:science in 5270) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03347712 = score(doc=5270,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.11619691 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.044112243 = queryNorm
            0.2881068 = fieldWeight in 5270, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5270)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

National bibliographies have been identified as a crucial resource for historical research on the publishing landscape, but using them requires addressing challenges of data quality, completeness, and interpretation. We call this approach bibliographic data science. In this article, we briefly assess the development of book formats and the vernacularization process in early modern Europe. The work undertaken paves the way for more extensive integration of library catalogs to map the history of the book.

0.0030059554 = product of:
  0.009017866 = sum of:
    0.009017866 = product of:
      0.027053596 = sum of:
        0.027053596 = weight(_text_:science in 1888) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027053596 = score(doc=1888,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11619691 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.044112243 = queryNorm
            0.23282544 = fieldWeight in 1888, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1888)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Describes the position claiming that the contemporary technological, socio-political, and socio-economic environment gives us pause to consider the core theory and practices of bibliography, combining bibliography of the work (in library and information science), bibliography of the text (in textual studies and scholarly editing), and bibliography of the artifact (in book history and now digital forensics), and calls for collaborative multidisciplinary research at the intersection of these fields to ask, is there a new bibliography?

0.0026569143 = product of:
  0.007970743 = sum of:
    0.007970743 = product of:
      0.023912227 = sum of:
        0.023912227 = weight(_text_:science in 1285) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023912227 = score(doc=1285,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.11619691 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.044112243 = queryNorm
            0.20579056 = fieldWeight in 1285, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1285)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Since its creation in 1991, arXiv has become central to the diffusion of research in a number of fields. Combining data from the entirety of arXiv and the Web of Science (WoS), this article investigates (a) the proportion of papers across all disciplines that are on arXiv and the proportion of arXiv papers that are in the WoS, (b) the elapsed time between arXiv submission and journal publication, and (c) the aging characteristics and scientific impact of arXiv e-prints and their published version. It shows that the proportion of WoS papers found on arXiv varies across the specialties of physics and mathematics, and that only a few specialties make extensive use of the repository. Elapsed time between arXiv submission and journal publication has shortened but remains longer in mathematics than in physics. In physics, mathematics, as well as in astronomy and astrophysics, arXiv versions are cited more promptly and decay faster than WoS papers. The arXiv versions of papers-both published and unpublished-have lower citation rates than published papers, although there is almost no difference in the impact of the arXiv versions of published and unpublished papers.

Source

Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 65(2014) no.6, S.1157-1169