Search (51 results, page 1 of 3)

  • × language_ss:"e"
  • × theme_ss:"Elektronisches Publizieren"
  • × year_i:[2010 TO 2020}
  1. Benoit, G.; Hussey, L.: Repurposing digital objects : case studies across the publishing industry (2011) 0.01 
    0.014629557 = product of:
  0.03657389 = sum of:
    0.015195617 = weight(_text_:information in 4198) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015195617 = score(doc=4198,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.07914162 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045082662 = queryNorm
        0.1920054 = fieldWeight in 4198, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4198)
    0.021378273 = product of:
      0.042756546 = sum of:
        0.042756546 = weight(_text_:22 in 4198) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.042756546 = score(doc=4198,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1578718 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045082662 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 4198, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4198)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    Large, data-rich organizations have tremendously large collections of digital objects to be "repurposed," to respond quickly and economically to publishing, marketing, and information needs. Some management typically assume that a content management system, or some other technique such as OWL and RDF, will automatically address the workflow and technical issues associated with this reuse. Four case studies show that the sources of some roadblocks to agile repurposing are as much managerial and organizational as they are technical in nature. The review concludes with suggestions on how digital object repurposing can be integrated given these organizations' structures.
    Date
    22. 1.2011 14:23:07
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 62(2011) no.2, S.363-374
  2. Walters, W.H.; Linvill, A.C.: Bibliographic index coverage of open-access journals in six subject areas (2011) 0.01 
    0.009178056 = product of:
  0.022945141 = sum of:
    0.0076749455 = weight(_text_:information in 4635) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0076749455 = score(doc=4635,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.07914162 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045082662 = queryNorm
        0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 4635, 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=4635)
    0.015270196 = product of:
      0.030540392 = sum of:
        0.030540392 = weight(_text_:22 in 4635) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.030540392 = score(doc=4635,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1578718 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045082662 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4635, 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=4635)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    We investigate the extent to which open-access (OA) journals and articles in biology, computer science, economics, history, medicine, and psychology are indexed in each of 11 bibliographic databases. We also look for variations in index coverage by journal subject, journal size, publisher type, publisher size, date of first OA issue, region of publication, language of publication, publication fee, and citation impact factor. Two databases, Biological Abstracts and PubMed, provide very good coverage of the OA journal literature, indexing 60 to 63% of all OA articles in their disciplines. Five databases provide moderately good coverage (22-41%), and four provide relatively poor coverage (0-12%). OA articles in biology journals, English-only journals, high-impact journals, and journals that charge publication fees of $1,000 or more are especially likely to be indexed. Conversely, articles from OA publishers in Africa, Asia, or Central/South America are especially unlikely to be indexed. Four of the 11 databases index commercially published articles at a substantially higher rate than articles published by universities, scholarly societies, nonprofit publishers, or governments. Finally, three databases-EBSCO Academic Search Complete, ProQuest Research Library, and Wilson OmniFile-provide less comprehensive coverage of OA articles than of articles in comparable subscription journals.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 62(2011) no.8, S.1614-1628
  3. Li, X.; Thelwall, M.; Kousha, K.: ¬The role of arXiv, RePEc, SSRN and PMC in formal scholarly communication (2015) 0.01 
    0.009178056 = product of:
  0.022945141 = sum of:
    0.0076749455 = weight(_text_:information in 2593) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0076749455 = score(doc=2593,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.07914162 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045082662 = queryNorm
        0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 2593, 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=2593)
    0.015270196 = product of:
      0.030540392 = sum of:
        0.030540392 = weight(_text_:22 in 2593) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.030540392 = score(doc=2593,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1578718 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045082662 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2593, 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=2593)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Date
    20. 1.2015 18:30:22
    Source
    Aslib journal of information management. 67(2015) no.6, S.614-635
  4. Moed, H.F.; Halevi, G.: On full text download and citation distributions in scientific-scholarly journals (2016) 0.01 
    0.009178056 = product of:
  0.022945141 = sum of:
    0.0076749455 = weight(_text_:information in 2646) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0076749455 = score(doc=2646,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.07914162 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045082662 = queryNorm
        0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 2646, 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=2646)
    0.015270196 = product of:
      0.030540392 = sum of:
        0.030540392 = weight(_text_:22 in 2646) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.030540392 = score(doc=2646,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1578718 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045082662 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2646, 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=2646)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Date
    22. 1.2016 14:11:17
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 67(2016) no.2, S.412-431
  5. Ortega, J.L.: ¬The presence of academic journals on Twitter and its relationship with dissemination (tweets) and research impact (citations) (2017) 0.01 
    0.009178056 = product of:
  0.022945141 = sum of:
    0.0076749455 = weight(_text_:information in 4410) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0076749455 = score(doc=4410,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.07914162 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045082662 = queryNorm
        0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 4410, 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=4410)
    0.015270196 = product of:
      0.030540392 = sum of:
        0.030540392 = weight(_text_:22 in 4410) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.030540392 = score(doc=4410,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1578718 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045082662 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4410, 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=4410)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Date
    20. 1.2015 18:30:22
    Source
    Aslib journal of information management. 69(2017) no.6, S.674-687
  6. Costas, R.; Perianes-Rodríguez, A.; Ruiz-Castillo, J.: On the quest for currencies of science : field "exchange rates" for citations and Mendeley readership (2017) 0.01 
    0.007342445 = product of:
  0.018356113 = sum of:
    0.006139957 = weight(_text_:information in 4051) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.006139957 = score(doc=4051,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.07914162 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045082662 = queryNorm
        0.0775819 = fieldWeight in 4051, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4051)
    0.012216156 = product of:
      0.024432313 = sum of:
        0.024432313 = weight(_text_:22 in 4051) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.024432313 = score(doc=4051,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1578718 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045082662 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 4051, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4051)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Date
    20. 1.2015 18:30:22
    Source
    Aslib journal of information management. 69(2017) no.5, S.557-575
  7. Engels, T.C.E; Istenic Starcic, A.; Kulczycki, E.; Pölönen, J.; Sivertsen, G.: Are book publications disappearing from scholarly communication in the social sciences and humanities? (2018) 0.01 
    0.007342445 = product of:
  0.018356113 = sum of:
    0.006139957 = weight(_text_:information in 4631) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.006139957 = score(doc=4631,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.07914162 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045082662 = queryNorm
        0.0775819 = fieldWeight in 4631, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4631)
    0.012216156 = product of:
      0.024432313 = sum of:
        0.024432313 = weight(_text_:22 in 4631) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.024432313 = score(doc=4631,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1578718 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045082662 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 4631, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4631)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Date
    20. 1.2015 18:30:22
    Source
    Aslib journal of information management. 70(2018) no.6, S.592-607
  8. Kliegl, R.: ¬A vision of scientific communication (2016) 0.01 
    0.0058723125 = product of:
  0.029361563 = sum of:
    0.029361563 = weight(_text_:und in 3249) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.029361563 = score(doc=3249,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09991972 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045082662 = queryNorm
        0.29385152 = fieldWeight in 3249, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3249)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Source
    Wissenschaftliches Publizieren: zwischen Digitalisierung, Leistungsmessung, Ökonomisierung und medialer Beobachtung. Hrsg.: Peter Weingart u. Niels Taubert
  9. Bläsi, C.: Literary studies, business studies - and information science? : Yes, it's a key discipline for the empowerment of publishing studies for the digital age (2015) 0.00 
    0.004253887 = product of:
  0.021269435 = sum of:
    0.021269435 = weight(_text_:information in 2986) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021269435 = score(doc=2986,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.07914162 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045082662 = queryNorm
        0.2687516 = fieldWeight in 2986, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2986)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Source
    Re:inventing information science in the networked society: Proceedings of the 14th International Symposium on Information Science, Zadar/Croatia, 19th-21st May 2015. Eds.: F. Pehar, C. Schloegl u. C. Wolff
  10. García, J.A.; Rodriguez-Sánchez, R.; Fdez-Valdivia, J.: ¬The principal-agent problem in peer review : an interactionist perspective on everyday use of biomedical information (2015) 0.00 
    0.0037599404 = product of:
  0.018799702 = sum of:
    0.018799702 = weight(_text_:information in 1638) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.018799702 = score(doc=1638,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.07914162 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045082662 = queryNorm
        0.23754507 = fieldWeight in 1638, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1638)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Abstract
    In economics, the principal-agent problem is the difficulty in motivating one party (the agent), to act in the best interests of another (the principal) rather than in his own interests. We consider the example of a journal editor (the principal) wondering whether his or her reviewer (the agent) is recommending rejection of a manuscript because it does not have enough quality to be published or because the reviewer dislikes effort and he/she must work to acquire in-depth knowledge of the content of the manuscript. The reviewer's effort provides him or her with superior information about a manuscript's quality. If this information is not correctly communicated, the reviewer has more information when compared with the journal editor. This inherently leads to an encouragement of moral hazard, where the editor will not know whether the reviewer has done his or her job in accordance to the editor's interest. Prescriptions need to be given as to how the journal editor should control the reviewers to curb self-interest. Besides the associate editors monitoring the peer-review process, incentives can be employed to limit moral hazard on the part of the reviewer. Drawing on agency theory, we examine the incentives motivating the reviewers to expend effort to generate information about the quality of submissions. This model predicts that for reviewers early in their careers, promotion-based incentives may mean there is no need for within-job incentives, but also that within-job rewards for a referee's performance should depend on individual differences in ability and promotion opportunities.
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 66(2015) no.2, S.297-308
  11. Teixeira da Silva, J.A.; Dobránszki, J.: Do open access data files represent an academic Risk? (2015) 0.00 
    0.0036839743 = product of:
  0.018419871 = sum of:
    0.018419871 = weight(_text_:information in 2253) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.018419871 = score(doc=2253,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.07914162 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045082662 = queryNorm
        0.23274569 = fieldWeight in 2253, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=2253)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 66(2015) no.11, S.2390-2391
  12. Salminen, A.; Jauhiainen, E.; Nurmeksela, R.: ¬A life cycle model of XML documents (2014) 0.00 
    0.0031904154 = product of:
  0.015952077 = sum of:
    0.015952077 = weight(_text_:information in 1553) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015952077 = score(doc=1553,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.07914162 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045082662 = queryNorm
        0.20156369 = fieldWeight in 1553, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1553)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Abstract
    Electronic documents produced in business processes are valuable information resources for organizations. In many cases they have to be accessible long after the life of the business processes or information systems in connection with which they were created. To improve the management and preservation of documents, organizations are deploying Extensible Markup Language (XML) as a standardized format for documents. The goal of this paper is to increase understanding of XML document management and provide a framework to enable the analysis and description of the management of XML documents throughout their life. We followed the design science approach. We introduce a document life cycle model consisting of five phases. For each of the phases we describe the typical activities related to the management of XML documents. Furthermore, we also identify the typical actors, systems, and types of content items associated with the activities of the phases. We demonstrate the use of the model in two case studies: one concerning the State Budget Proposal of the Finnish government and the other concerning a faculty council meeting agenda at a university.
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 65(2014) no.12, S.2564-2580
  13. Nobarany, S.; Booth, K.S.: Understanding and supporting anonymity policies in peer review (2017) 0.00 
    0.0031904154 = product of:
  0.015952077 = sum of:
    0.015952077 = weight(_text_:information in 3533) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015952077 = score(doc=3533,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.07914162 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045082662 = queryNorm
        0.20156369 = fieldWeight in 3533, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3533)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Abstract
    Design of peer-review support systems is shaped by the policies that define and govern the process of peer review. An important component of these are policies that deal with anonymity: The rules that govern the concealment and transparency of information related to identities of the various stakeholders (authors, reviewers, editors, and others) involved in the peer-review process. Anonymity policies have been a subject of debate for several decades within scholarly communities. Because of widespread criticism of traditional peer-review processes, a variety of new peer-review processes have emerged that manage the trade-offs between disclosure and concealment of identities in different ways. Based on an analysis of policies and guidelines for authors and reviewers provided by publication venues, we developed a framework for understanding how disclosure and concealment of identities is managed. We discuss the appropriate role of information technology and computer support for the peer-review process within that framework.
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 68(2017) no.4, S.957-971
  14. Xia, J.: ¬A longitudinal study of scholars attitudes and behaviors toward open-access journal publishing (2010) 0.00 
    0.0030391235 = product of:
  0.015195617 = sum of:
    0.015195617 = weight(_text_:information in 3429) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015195617 = score(doc=3429,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.07914162 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045082662 = queryNorm
        0.1920054 = fieldWeight in 3429, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3429)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Abstract
    This research applies statistical time series analysis to examine the changing pattern of scholars' attitudes toward open-access (OA) journal publishing from the early 1990s. By synthesizing survey results in existing studies, this research focuses on representative aspects of the attitudes and behaviors recorded through the years. It finds that although an increase in the publishing and awareness rates of scholars with regard to OA journals has been observed, scholars have been consistently concerned with the low prestige of such journals and their lack of peer review, which is not the case in practice. It is hoped that the findings will provide useful information for the improvement of OA advocacy.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 61(2010) no.3, S.615-624
  15. D'Ambra, J.; Wilson, C.S.; Akter, S.: Application of the task-technology fit model to structure and evaluate the adoption of E-books by Academics (2013) 0.00 
    0.0026586796 = product of:
  0.013293398 = sum of:
    0.013293398 = weight(_text_:information in 529) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013293398 = score(doc=529,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.07914162 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045082662 = queryNorm
        0.16796975 = fieldWeight in 529, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=529)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Abstract
    Increasingly, e-books are becoming alternatives to print books in academic libraries, thus providing opportunities to assess how well the use of e-books meets the requirements of academics. This study uses the task-technology fit (TTF) model to explore the interrelationships of e-books, the affordances offered by smart readers, the information needs of academics, and the "fit" of technology to tasks as well as performance. We propose that the adoption of e-books will be dependent on how academics perceive the fit of this new medium to the tasks they undertake as well as what added-value functionality is delivered by the information technology that delivers the content. The study used content analysis and an online survey, administered to the faculty in Medicine, Science and Engineering at the University of New South Wales, to identify the attributes of a TTF construct of e-books in academic settings. Using exploratory factor analysis, preliminary findings confirmed annotation, navigation, and output as the core dimensions of the TTF construct. The results of confirmatory factor analysis using partial least squares path modeling supported the overall TTF model in reflecting significant positive impact of task, technology, and individual characteristics on TTF for e-books in academic settings; it also confirmed significant positive impact of TTF on individuals' performance and use, and impact of using e-books on individual performance. Our research makes two contributions: the development of an e-book TTF construct and the testing of that construct in a model validating the efficacy of the TTF framework in measuring perceived fit of e-books to academic tasks.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 64(2013) no.1, S.48-64
  16. Thelwall, M.; Kousha, K.: SlideShare presentations, citations, users, and trends : a professional site with academic and educational uses (2017) 0.00 
    0.0026586796 = product of:
  0.013293398 = sum of:
    0.013293398 = weight(_text_:information in 3766) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013293398 = score(doc=3766,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.07914162 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045082662 = queryNorm
        0.16796975 = fieldWeight in 3766, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3766)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Abstract
    SlideShare is a free social website that aims to help users distribute and find presentations. Owned by LinkedIn since 2012, it targets a professional audience but may give value to scholarship through creating a long-term record of the content of talks. This article tests this hypothesis by analyzing sets of general and scholarly related SlideShare documents using content and citation analysis and popularity statistics reported on the site. The results suggest that academics, students, and teachers are a minority of SlideShare uploaders, especially since 2010, with most documents not being directly related to scholarship or teaching. About two thirds of uploaded SlideShare documents are presentation slides, with the remainder often being files associated with presentations or video recordings of talks. SlideShare is therefore a presentation-centered site with a predominantly professional user base. Although a minority of the uploaded SlideShare documents are cited by, or cite, academic publications, probably too few articles are cited by SlideShare to consider extracting SlideShare citations for research evaluation. Nevertheless, scholars should consider SlideShare to be a potential source of academic and nonacademic information, particularly in library and information science, education, and business.
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 68(2017) no.8, S.1989-2003
  17. Abella, A.; Ortiz-de-Urbina-Criado, M.; De-Pablos-Heredero, C.: ¬The process of open data publication and reuse (2019) 0.00 
    0.002604963 = product of:
  0.013024815 = sum of:
    0.013024815 = weight(_text_:information in 4989) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013024815 = score(doc=4989,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.07914162 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045082662 = queryNorm
        0.16457605 = fieldWeight in 4989, 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=4989)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Abstract
    Open data movement advocates support to public authorities by making available to society the public information they manage. The data released are identified as open government data and the creation of open data portals supports their commitment through open government policies. The worldwide increase of the open data publication is making more necessary the modelling of its impact on society. This research analyses the process of open data publication starting in the internal systems of the organization and reaching the actual reuse of data in reuser's ecosystem surrounding the open data portals. Different reuser's profiles are identified and described within the reuser's ecosystem. Some key elements of the publication process are presented in order to guarantee sustainability of open data initiatives and to further analyse the social and economic impact.
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 70(2019) no.3, S.296-300
  18. Somers, J.: Torching the modern-day library of Alexandria : somewhere at Google there is a database containing 25 million books and nobody is allowed to read them. (2017) 0.00 
    0.0024432314 = product of:
  0.012216156 = sum of:
    0.012216156 = product of:
      0.024432313 = sum of:
        0.024432313 = weight(_text_:22 in 3608) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.024432313 = score(doc=3608,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1578718 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045082662 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 3608, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3608)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Abstract
    You were going to get one-click access to the full text of nearly every book that's ever been published. Books still in print you'd have to pay for, but everything else-a collection slated to grow larger than the holdings at the Library of Congress, Harvard, the University of Michigan, at any of the great national libraries of Europe-would have been available for free at terminals that were going to be placed in every local library that wanted one. At the terminal you were going to be able to search tens of millions of books and read every page of any book you found. You'd be able to highlight passages and make annotations and share them; for the first time, you'd be able to pinpoint an idea somewhere inside the vastness of the printed record, and send somebody straight to it with a link. Books would become as instantly available, searchable, copy-pasteable-as alive in the digital world-as web pages. It was to be the realization of a long-held dream. "The universal library has been talked about for millennia," Richard Ovenden, the head of Oxford's Bodleian Libraries, has said. "It was possible to think in the Renaissance that you might be able to amass the whole of published knowledge in a single room or a single institution." In the spring of 2011, it seemed we'd amassed it in a terminal small enough to fit on a desk. "This is a watershed event and can serve as a catalyst for the reinvention of education, research, and intellectual life," one eager observer wrote at the time. On March 22 of that year, however, the legal agreement that would have unlocked a century's worth of books and peppered the country with access terminals to a universal library was rejected under Rule 23(e)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. When the library at Alexandria burned it was said to be an "international catastrophe." When the most significant humanities project of our time was dismantled in court, the scholars, archivists, and librarians who'd had a hand in its undoing breathed a sigh of relief, for they believed, at the time, that they had narrowly averted disaster.
  19. Brown, D.J.: Repositories and journals: are they in conflict? : a literature review of relevant literature (2010) 0.00 
    0.0021708026 = product of:
  0.010854012 = sum of:
    0.010854012 = weight(_text_:information in 3954) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010854012 = score(doc=3954,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.07914162 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045082662 = queryNorm
        0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 3954, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3954)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Abstract
    Purpose - This paper aims to bring together information on whether any evidence exists of a commercial conflict between the creation of digital archives at research institutions and by key subject centres of excellence, and the business of journal publishing. Design/methodology/approach - Relevant publications, including articles published in refereed books and journals, as well as informal commentaries on listservs, blogs and wikis, were analysed to determine whether there is any evidence of a commercial relationship. Findings - Most of the published comments are highly subjective and anecdotal - there is a significant emotional overtone to many of the views expressed. There is precious little hard evidence currently available to support or debunk the idea that a commercial conflict exists between repositories and journal subscriptions. The situation is made more difficult by the many technological, sociological and administrative changes that are taking place in parallel to the establishment of repositories. Practical implications - Separating the key drivers and their impact is a major strategic challenge facing all stakeholders in the scholarly communication industry in future. Research limitations/implications - This is an important area which requires close monitoring - the possible threat that the established journal publishing system could be eroded away by a new "free" scholarly information system needs attention. One significant study in this area is being undertaken by the PEER group, funded by the European Commission with hard evidence being collected by UCL's CIBER research group. The results from this impartial investigation will be very welcome. Originality/value - The paper shows that relationship between repositories and journal subscriptions is vague.
  20. Solomon, D.J.; Björk, B.-C.: Publication fees in open access publishing : sources of funding and factors influencing choice of journal (2012) 0.00 
    0.0021708026 = product of:
  0.010854012 = sum of:
    0.010854012 = weight(_text_:information in 754) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010854012 = score(doc=754,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.07914162 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045082662 = queryNorm
        0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 754, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=754)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Abstract
    Open access (OA) journals distribute their content at no charge and use other means of funding the publication process. Publication fees or article-processing charges (APC)s have become the predominant means for funding professional OA publishing. We surveyed 1,038 authors who recently published articles in 74 OA journals that charge APCs stratified into seven discipline categories. Authors were asked about the source of funding for the APC, factors influencing their choice of a journal and past history publishing in OA and subscription journals. Additional information about the journal and the authors' country were obtained from the journal website. A total of 429 (41%) authors from 69 journals completed the survey. There were large differences in the source of funding among disciplines. Journals with impact factors charged higher APCs as did journals from disciplines where grant funding is plentiful. Fit, quality, and speed of publication were the most important factors in the authors' choice of a journal. OA was less important but a significant factor for many authors in their choice of a journal to publish. These findings are consistent with other research on OA publishing and suggest that OA publishing funded through APCs is likely to continue to grow.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 63(2012) no.1, S.98-107

Authors

Types

  • a 51
  • el 1
  • More… Less…

Themes