Search (50 results, page 1 of 3)

0.025826475 = product of:
  0.08781001 = sum of:
    0.013703404 = product of:
      0.027406808 = sum of:
        0.027406808 = weight(_text_:bibliothekswesen in 2808) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027406808 = score(doc=2808,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11129492 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
              0.024967048 = queryNorm
            0.24625391 = fieldWeight in 2808, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2808)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.027988197 = weight(_text_:informationswissenschaft in 2808) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.027988197 = score(doc=2808,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11246919 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.024967048 = queryNorm
        0.24885213 = fieldWeight in 2808, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2808)
    0.027406808 = weight(_text_:bibliothekswesen in 2808) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.027406808 = score(doc=2808,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11129492 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
          0.024967048 = queryNorm
        0.24625391 = fieldWeight in 2808, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2808)
    0.006751988 = weight(_text_:in in 2808) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.006751988 = score(doc=2808,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.033961542 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.024967048 = queryNorm
        0.19881277 = fieldWeight in 2808, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2808)
    0.011959616 = product of:
      0.023919232 = sum of:
        0.023919232 = weight(_text_:22 in 2808) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023919232 = score(doc=2808,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.08743035 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.024967048 = queryNorm
            0.27358043 = fieldWeight in 2808, 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=2808)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.29411766 = coord(5/17)

Abstract

Internet based electronic resources are growing dramatically but there have been no empirical studies evaluating the impact of e-sources, as a whole, on formal scholarly communication. reports results of an investigation into how much e-sources have been used in formal scholarly communication, using a case study in the area of Library and Information Science (LIS) during the period 1994 to 1996. 4 citation based indicators were used in the study of the impact measurement. Concludes that, compared with the impact of print sources, the impact of e-sources on formal scholarly communication in LIS is small, as measured by e-sources cited, and does not increase significantly by year even though there is observable growth of these impact across the years. It is found that periodical format is related to the rate of citing e-sources, articles are more likely to cite e-sources than are print priodical articles. However, once authors cite electronic resource, there is no significant difference in the number of references per article by periodical format or by year. Suggests that, at this stage, citing e-sources may depend on authors rather than the periodical format in which authors choose to publish

Date

30. 1.1999 17:22:22

Field

Bibliothekswesen
Informationswissenschaft

0.018157315 = product of:
  0.077168584 = sum of:
    0.013703404 = product of:
      0.027406808 = sum of:
        0.027406808 = weight(_text_:bibliothekswesen in 53) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027406808 = score(doc=53,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11129492 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
              0.024967048 = queryNorm
            0.24625391 = fieldWeight in 53, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=53)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.027988197 = weight(_text_:informationswissenschaft in 53) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.027988197 = score(doc=53,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11246919 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.024967048 = queryNorm
        0.24885213 = fieldWeight in 53, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=53)
    0.027406808 = weight(_text_:bibliothekswesen in 53) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.027406808 = score(doc=53,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11129492 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
          0.024967048 = queryNorm
        0.24625391 = fieldWeight in 53, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=53)
    0.008070169 = weight(_text_:in in 53) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008070169 = score(doc=53,freq=20.0), product of:
        0.033961542 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.024967048 = queryNorm
        0.2376267 = fieldWeight in 53, product of:
          4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
            20.0 = termFreq=20.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=53)
  0.23529412 = coord(4/17)

Abstract

Purpose - The essential purpose of this paper is to measure the amount of web resources used for scholarly contributions in the area of library and information science (LIS) in India. It further aims to make an analysis of the nature and type of web resources and studies the various standards for web citations. Design/methodology/approach - In this study, the result of analysis of 292 web citations spread over 95 scholarly papers published in the proceedings of the National Conference of the Society for Information Science, India (SIS-2005) has been reported. All the 292 web citations were scanned and data relating to types of web domains, file formats, styles of citations, etc., were collected through a structured check list. The data thus obtained were systematically analyzed, figurative representations were made and appropriate interpretations were drawn. Findings - The study revealed that 292 (34.88 per cent) out of 837 were web citations, proving a significant correlation between the use of Internet resources and research productivity of LIS professionals in India. The highest number of web citations (35.6 per cent) was from .edu/.ac type domains. Most of the web resources (46.9 per cent) cited in the study were hypertext markup language (HTML) files. Originality/value - The paper is the result of an original analysis of web citations undertaken in order to study the dependence of LIS professionals in India on web sources for their scholarly contributions. This carries research value for web content providers, authors and researchers in LIS.

Field

Bibliothekswesen
Informationswissenschaft

0.017956844 = product of:
  0.07631659 = sum of:
    0.013703404 = product of:
      0.027406808 = sum of:
        0.027406808 = weight(_text_:bibliothekswesen in 5176) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027406808 = score(doc=5176,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11129492 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
              0.024967048 = queryNorm
            0.24625391 = fieldWeight in 5176, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5176)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.027988197 = weight(_text_:informationswissenschaft in 5176) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.027988197 = score(doc=5176,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11246919 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.024967048 = queryNorm
        0.24885213 = fieldWeight in 5176, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5176)
    0.027406808 = weight(_text_:bibliothekswesen in 5176) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.027406808 = score(doc=5176,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11129492 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
          0.024967048 = queryNorm
        0.24625391 = fieldWeight in 5176, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5176)
    0.007218178 = weight(_text_:in in 5176) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.007218178 = score(doc=5176,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.033961542 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.024967048 = queryNorm
        0.21253976 = fieldWeight in 5176, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5176)
  0.23529412 = coord(4/17)

Abstract

Vaughn, and Shaw look at the relationship between traditional citation and Web citation (not hyperlinks but rather textual mentions of published papers). Using English language research journals in ISI's 2000 Journal Citation Report - Information and Library Science category - 1209 full length papers published in 1997 in 46 journals were identified. Each was searched in Social Science Citation Index and on the Web using Google phrase search by entering the title in quotation marks, and followed for distinction where necessary with sub-titles, author's names, and journal title words. After removing obvious false drops, the number of web sites was recorded for comparison with the SSCI counts. A second sample from 1992 was also collected for examination. There were a total of 16,371 web citations to the selected papers. The top and bottom ranked four journals were then examined and every third citation to every third paper was selected and classified as to source type, domain, and country of origin. Web counts are much higher than ISI citation counts. Of the 46 journals from 1997, 26 demonstrated a significant correlation between Web and traditional citation counts, and 11 of the 15 in the 1992 sample also showed significant correlation. Journal impact factor in 1998 and 1999 correlated significantly with average Web citations per journal in the 1997 data, but at a low level. Thirty percent of web citations come from other papers posted on the web, and 30percent from listings of web based bibliographic services, while twelve percent come from class reading lists. High web citation journals often have web accessible tables of content.

Field

Bibliothekswesen
Informationswissenschaft

0.009657495 = product of:
  0.054725803 = sum of:
    0.044445828 = weight(_text_:allgemeines in 2274) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.044445828 = score(doc=2274,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.14244758 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.705423 = idf(docFreq=399, maxDocs=44218)
          0.024967048 = queryNorm
        0.31201532 = fieldWeight in 2274, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.705423 = idf(docFreq=399, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=2274)
    0.00670716 = weight(_text_:und in 2274) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.00670716 = score(doc=2274,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.055336144 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.024967048 = queryNorm
        0.12120757 = fieldWeight in 2274, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=2274)
    0.0035728158 = weight(_text_:in in 2274) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0035728158 = score(doc=2274,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.033961542 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.024967048 = queryNorm
        0.10520181 = fieldWeight in 2274, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=2274)
  0.1764706 = coord(3/17)

Abstract

This is a practical guide to using web metrics to measure impact and demonstrate value. The web provides an opportunity to collect a host of different metrics, from those associated with social media accounts and websites to more traditional research outputs. This book is a clear guide for library and information professionals as to what web metrics are available and how to assess and use them to make informed decisions and demonstrate value. As individuals and organizations increasingly use the web in addition to traditional publishing avenues and formats, this book provides the tools to unlock web metrics and evaluate the impact of this content. The key topics covered include: bibliometrics, webometrics and web metrics; data collection tools; evaluating impact on the web; evaluating social media impact; investigating relationships between actors; exploring traditional publications in a new environment; web metrics and the web of data; the future of web metrics and the library and information professional. The book will provide a practical introduction to web metrics for a wide range of library and information professionals, from the bibliometrician wanting to demonstrate the wider impact of a researcher's work than can be demonstrated through traditional citations databases, to the reference librarian wanting to measure how successfully they are engaging with their users on Twitter. It will be a valuable tool for anyone who wants to not only understand the impact of content, but demonstrate this impact to others within the organization and beyond.

BK

06.00 Information und Dokumentation: Allgemeines

Classification

06.00 Information und Dokumentation: Allgemeines

Content

1. Introduction. MetricsIndicators -- Web metrics and Ranganathan's laws of library science -- Web metrics for the library and information professional -- The aim of this book -- The structure of the rest of this book -- 2. Bibliometrics, webometrics and web metrics. Web metrics -- Information science metrics -- Web analytics -- Relational and evaluative metrics -- Evaluative web metrics -- Relational web metrics -- Validating the results -- 3. Data collection tools. The anatomy of a URL, web links and the structure of the web -- Search engines 1.0 -- Web crawlers -- Search engines 2.0 -- Post search engine 2.0: fragmentation -- 4. Evaluating impact on the web. Websites -- Blogs -- Wikis -- Internal metrics -- External metrics -- A systematic approach to content analysis -- 5. Evaluating social media impact. Aspects of social network sites -- Typology of social network sites -- Research and tools for specific sites and services -- Other social network sites -- URL shorteners: web analytic links on any site -- General social media impact -- Sentiment analysis -- 6. Investigating relationships between actors. Social network analysis methods -- Sources for relational network analysis -- 7. Exploring traditional publications in a new environment. More bibliographic items -- Full text analysis -- Greater context -- 8. Web metrics and the web of data. The web of data -- Building the semantic web -- Implications of the web of data for web metrics -- Investigating the web of data today -- SPARQL -- Sindice -- LDSpider: an RDF web crawler -- 9. The future of web metrics and the library and information professional. How far we have come -- The future of web metrics -- The future of the library and information professional and web metrics.

Footnote

Rez. in: JASIST 66(2015) no.11, S.2392-2395 (Enrique Orduña-Malea)

0.0019995102 = product of:
  0.016995836 = sum of:
    0.0068477658 = weight(_text_:in in 6389) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0068477658 = score(doc=6389,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.033961542 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.024967048 = queryNorm
        0.20163295 = fieldWeight in 6389, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=6389)
    0.010148071 = product of:
      0.020296142 = sum of:
        0.020296142 = weight(_text_:22 in 6389) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020296142 = score(doc=6389,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08743035 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.024967048 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 6389, 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=6389)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.11764706 = coord(2/17)

Abstract

Examines the use of networked information sources in scholarly communication. Networked information sources are defined broadly to cover: documents and images stored on electronic network hosts; data files; newsgroups; listservs; online information services and electronic periodicals. Reports results of a survey to determine how heavily, if at all, networked information sources are cited in scholarly printed periodicals published in 1993 and 1994. 27 printed periodicals, representing a wide range of subjects and the most influential periodicals in their fields, were identified through the Science Citation Index and Social Science Citation Index Journal Citation Reports. 97 articles were selected for further review and references, footnotes and bibliographies were checked for references to networked information sources. Only 2 articles were found to contain such references. Concludes that, although networked information sources facilitate scholars' work to a great extent during the research process, scholars have yet to incorporate such sources in the bibliographies of their published articles

Source

IFLA journal. 22(1996) no.3, S.240-245

0.0017034091 = product of:
  0.014478978 = sum of:
    0.004330907 = weight(_text_:in in 2742) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.004330907 = score(doc=2742,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.033961542 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.024967048 = queryNorm
        0.12752387 = fieldWeight in 2742, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2742)
    0.010148071 = product of:
      0.020296142 = sum of:
        0.020296142 = weight(_text_:22 in 2742) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020296142 = score(doc=2742,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08743035 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.024967048 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2742, 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=2742)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.11764706 = coord(2/17)

Abstract

In this research, we aim to identify factors that significantly affect the clickthrough of Web searchers. Our underlying goal is determine more efficient methods to optimize the clickthrough rate. We devise a clickthrough metric for measuring customer satisfaction of search engine results using the number of links visited, number of queries a user submits, and rank of clicked links. We use a neural network to detect the significant influence of searching characteristics on future user clickthrough. Our results show that high occurrences of query reformulation, lengthy searching duration, longer query length, and the higher ranking of prior clicked links correlate positively with future clickthrough. We provide recommendations for leveraging these findings for improving the performance of search engine retrieval and result ranking, along with implications for search engine marketing.

Date

22. 3.2009 17:49:11

6.964362E-4 = product of:
  0.011839416 = sum of:
    0.011839416 = product of:
      0.023678832 = sum of:
        0.023678832 = weight(_text_:22 in 108) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023678832 = score(doc=108,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08743035 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.024967048 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 108, 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=108)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.05882353 = coord(1/17)

Date

10. 1.1999 16:22:37

4.4125595E-4 = product of:
  0.007501351 = sum of:
    0.007501351 = weight(_text_:in in 203) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.007501351 = score(doc=203,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.033961542 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.024967048 = queryNorm
        0.22087781 = fieldWeight in 203, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=203)
  0.05882353 = coord(1/17)

Abstract

Changes in the topography of the Web can be expressed in at least four ways: (1) more sites on more servers in more places, (2) more pages and objects added to existing sites and pages, (3) changes in traffic, and (4) modifications to existing text, graphic, and other Web objects. This article does not address the first three factors (more sites, more pages, more traffic) in the growth of the Web. It focuses instead on changes to an existing set of Web documents. The article documents changes to an aging set of Web pages, first identified and "collected" in December 1996 and followed weekly thereafter. Results are reported through February 2001. The article addresses two related phenomena: (1) the life cycle of Web objects, and (2) changes to Web objects. These data reaffirm that the half-life of a Web page is approximately 2 years. There is variation among Web pages by top-level domain and by page type (navigation, content). Web page content appears to stabilize over time; aging pages change less often than once they did

4.4125595E-4 = product of:
  0.007501351 = sum of:
    0.007501351 = weight(_text_:in in 3781) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.007501351 = score(doc=3781,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.033961542 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.024967048 = queryNorm
        0.22087781 = fieldWeight in 3781, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3781)
  0.05882353 = coord(1/17)

Abstract

Social media has become integrated into the fabric of the scholarly communication system in fundamental ways, principally through scholarly use of social media platforms and the promotion of new indicators on the basis of interactions with these platforms. Research and scholarship in this area has accelerated since the coining and subsequent advocacy for altmetrics-that is, research indicators based on social media activity. This review provides an extensive account of the state-of-the art in both scholarly use of social media and altmetrics. The review consists of 2 main parts: the first examines the use of social media in academia, reviewing the various functions these platforms have in the scholarly communication process and the factors that affect this use. The second part reviews empirical studies of altmetrics, discussing the various interpretations of altmetrics, data collection and methodological limitations, and differences according to platform. The review ends with a critical discussion of the implications of this transformation in the scholarly communication system.

4.3300746E-4 = product of:
  0.0073611266 = sum of:
    0.0073611266 = weight(_text_:in in 3093) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0073611266 = score(doc=3093,freq=26.0), product of:
        0.033961542 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.024967048 = queryNorm
        0.2167489 = fieldWeight in 3093, product of:
          5.0990195 = tf(freq=26.0), with freq of:
            26.0 = termFreq=26.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3093)
  0.05882353 = coord(1/17)

Abstract

How do authors refer to Web-based information sources in their formal scientific publications? It is not yet weIl known how scientists and scholars actually include new types of information sources, available through the new media, in their published work. This article reports an a comparative study of the lists of references in 38 scientific journals in five different scientific and social scientific fields. The fields are sociology, library and information science, biochemistry and biotechnology, neuroscience, and the mathematics of computing. As is weIl known, references, citations, and hyperlinks play different roles in academic publishing and communication. Our study focuses an hyperlinks as attributes of references in formal scholarly publications. The study developed and applied a method to analyze the differential roles of publishing media in the analysis of scientific and scholarly literature references. The present secondary databases that include reference and citation data (the Web of Science) cannot be used for this type of research. By the automated processing and analysis of the full text of scientific and scholarly articles, we were able to extract the references and hyperlinks contained in these references in relation to other features of the scientific and scholarly literature. Our findings show that hyperlinking references are indeed, as expected, abundantly present in the formal literature. They also tend to cite more recent literature than the average reference. The large majority of the references are to Web instances of traditional scientific journals. Other types of Web-based information sources are less weIl represented in the lists of references, except in the case of pure e-journals. We conclude that this can be explained by taking the role of the publisher into account. Indeed, it seems that the shift from print-based to electronic publishing has created new roles for the publisher. By shaping the way scientific references are hyperlinking to other information sources, the publisher may have a large impact an the availability of scientific and scholarly information.

Footnote

Beitrag in einem Themenheft über Webometrics

4.245987E-4 = product of:
  0.007218178 = sum of:
    0.007218178 = weight(_text_:in in 3091) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.007218178 = score(doc=3091,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.033961542 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.024967048 = queryNorm
        0.21253976 = fieldWeight in 3091, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3091)
  0.05882353 = coord(1/17)

Abstract

Because of the increasing presence of scientific publications an the Web, combined with the existing difficulties in easily verifying and retrieving these publications, research an techniques and methods for retrieval of scientific Web publications is called for. In this article, we report an the initial steps taken toward the construction of a test collection of scientific Web publications within the subject domain of plant biology. The steps reported are those of data gathering and data analysis aiming at identifying characteristics of scientific Web publications. The data used in this article were generated based an specifically selected domain topics that are searched for in three publicly accessible search engines (Google, AlITheWeb, and AItaVista). A sample of the retrieved hits was analyzed with regard to how various publication attributes correlated with the scientific quality of the content and whether this information could be employed to harvest, filter, and rank Web publications. The attributes analyzed were inlinks, outlinks, bibliographic references, file format, language, search engine overlap, structural position (according to site structure), and the occurrence of various types of metadata. As could be expected, the ranked output differs between the three search engines. Apparently, this is caused by differences in ranking algorithms rather than the databases themselves. In fact, because scientific Web content in this subject domain receives few inlinks, both AItaVista and AlITheWeb retrieved a higher degree of accessible scientific content than Google. Because of the search engine cutoffs of accessible URLs, the feasibility of using search engine output for Web content analysis is also discussed.

Footnote

Beitrag in einem Themenheft über Webometrics

4.245987E-4 = product of:
  0.007218178 = sum of:
    0.007218178 = weight(_text_:in in 3880) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.007218178 = score(doc=3880,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.033961542 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.024967048 = queryNorm
        0.21253976 = fieldWeight in 3880, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3880)
  0.05882353 = coord(1/17)

Abstract

The number and type of Web citations to journal articles in four areas of science are examined: biology, genetics, medicine, and multidisciplinary sciences. For a sample of 5,972 articles published in 114 journals, the median Web citation counts per journal article range from 6.2 in medicine to 10.4 in genetics. About 30% of Web citations in each area indicate intellectual impact (citations from articles or class readings, in contrast to citations from bibliographic services or the author's or journal's home page). Journals receiving more Web citations also have higher percentages of citations indicating intellectual impact. There is significant correlation between the number of citations reported in the databases from the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI, now Thomson Scientific) and the number of citations retrieved using the Google search engine (Web citations). The correlation is much weaker for journals published outside the United Kingdom or United States and for multidisciplinary journals. Web citation numbers are higher than ISI citation counts, suggesting that Web searches might be conducted for an earlier or a more fine-grained assessment of an article's impact. The Web-evident impact of non-UK/USA publications might provide a balance to the geographic or cultural biases observed in ISI's data, although the stability of Web citation counts is debatable.

4.245987E-4 = product of:
  0.007218178 = sum of:
    0.007218178 = weight(_text_:in in 1189) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.007218178 = score(doc=1189,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.033961542 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.024967048 = queryNorm
        0.21253976 = fieldWeight in 1189, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1189)
  0.05882353 = coord(1/17)

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to investigate the validity of tweets about scientific publications as an indicator of societal impact by measuring the degree to which the publications are tweeted beyond academia. We introduce methods that allow for using a much larger and broader data set than in previous validation studies. It covers all areas of research and includes almost 40 million tweets by 2.5 million unique tweeters mentioning almost 4 million scientific publications. We find that, although half of the tweeters are external to academia, most of the tweets are from within academia, and most of the external tweets are responses to original tweets within academia. Only half of the tweeted publications are tweeted outside of academia. We conclude that, in general, the tweeting of scientific publications is not a valid indicator of the societal impact of research. However, publications that continue being tweeted after a few days represent recent scientific achievements that catch attention in society. These publications occur more often in the health sciences and in the social sciences and humanities.

Content

Beitrag in: JASIST special issue on 'Who tweets scientific publications? A large-scale study of tweeting audiences in all areas of research'. Vgl.: https://asistdl.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/asi.24830.

4.0280976E-4 = product of:
  0.0068477658 = sum of:
    0.0068477658 = weight(_text_:in in 3360) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0068477658 = score(doc=3360,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.033961542 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.024967048 = queryNorm
        0.20163295 = fieldWeight in 3360, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3360)
  0.05882353 = coord(1/17)

Abstract

The number of physics and astronomy preprints (manuscripts intended for publication but circulated for peer comment prior to submission) available electronically has increased dramatically over the past 5 years and Internet accessible preprint Web servers at the Stanford Accelerator Laboratory (SLAC) and the Los Alamos National Laboratoty (LANL) provide unrestricted access to citations and full text of many of these papers long before they appear in print. Includes data for periodicals ranked by number of citations to preprints and electronic preprints (e-prints). Identifies the growing importance of e-prints in the published literature and addresses areas of concern regarding their future role in scientific communication, including: inclusion of e-prints in abstracting and indexing services; connecting electronic periodicals with e-prints; guidelines for withdrawal and revision of e-prints; and maintaining the integritiy of the e-print servers

4.0280976E-4 = product of:
  0.0068477658 = sum of:
    0.0068477658 = weight(_text_:in in 5768) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0068477658 = score(doc=5768,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.033961542 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.024967048 = queryNorm
        0.20163295 = fieldWeight in 5768, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5768)
  0.05882353 = coord(1/17)

Abstract

A citation analysis of undergraduate term papers in microeconomics revealed a significant decrease in the frequency of scholarly resources cited between 1996 and 1999. Book citations decreased from 30% to 19%, newspaper citations increased from 7% to 19%, and Web citations increased from 9% to 21%. Web citations checked in 2000 revealed that only 18% of URLs cited in 1996 led to the correct Internet document. For 1999 bibliographies, only 55% of URLs led to the correct document. The authors recommend (1) setting stricter guidelines for acceptable citations in course assignments; (2) creating and maintaining scholarly portals for authoritative Web sites with a commitment to long-term access; and (3) continuing to instruct students how to critically evaluate resources

4.0280976E-4 = product of:
  0.0068477658 = sum of:
    0.0068477658 = weight(_text_:in in 2571) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0068477658 = score(doc=2571,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.033961542 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.024967048 = queryNorm
        0.20163295 = fieldWeight in 2571, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2571)
  0.05882353 = coord(1/17)

Abstract

A common task in both Webmetrics and Web information retrieval is to identify a set of Web pages or sites that are similar in content. In this paper we assess the extent to which links, colinks and couplings can be used to identify similar Web sites. As an experiment, a random sample of 500 pairs of domains from the UK academic Web were taken and human assessments of site similarity, based upon content type, were compared against ratings for the three concepts. The results show that using a combination of all three gives the highest probability of identifying similar sites, but surprisingly this was only a marginal improvement over using links alone. Another unexpected result was that high values for either colink counts or couplings were associated with only a small increased likelihood of similarity. The principal advantage of using couplings and colinks was found to be greater coverage in terms of a much larger number of pairs of sites being connected by these measures, instead of increased probability of similarity. In information retrieval terminology, this is improved recall rather than improved precision.

4.0280976E-4 = product of:
  0.0068477658 = sum of:
    0.0068477658 = weight(_text_:in in 153) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0068477658 = score(doc=153,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.033961542 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.024967048 = queryNorm
        0.20163295 = fieldWeight in 153, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=153)
  0.05882353 = coord(1/17)

Abstract

Information grounds emerge as people share information with others in a common place. Many studies have investigated the emergence of information grounds in public places. This study pays attention to the emergence, peak, and abeyance of an online information ground. It investigates a Facebook group used by youth for sharing information when misinformation spread wildly during the 2011 violence in Ambon, Indonesia. The findings demonstrate change and continuity in an online information ground; it became an information hub when reaching a peak cycle, and an information repository when entering into abeyance. Despite this period of nonactivity, the friendships and collective memories resulting from information ground interactions last over time and can be used for reactivating the online information ground when new needs emerge. Illuminating the lifecycles of an online information ground, the findings have potential to explain the dynamic of users' interactions with others and with information in quotidian spaces.

3.9717578E-4 = product of:
  0.006751988 = sum of:
    0.006751988 = weight(_text_:in in 4907) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.006751988 = score(doc=4907,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.033961542 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.024967048 = queryNorm
        0.19881277 = fieldWeight in 4907, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4907)
  0.05882353 = coord(1/17)

Abstract

The author examines patterns of productivity in the Internet mailing lists, also known as discussion lists or discussion groups. Datasets have been collected from electronic archives of two Internet mailing lists, the LINGUIST and the History of the English Language. Theoretical models widely used in informetric research have been applied to fit the distribution of posted messages over the population of authors. The Generalized Inverse Poisson-Gaussian and Poisson-lognormal distributions show excellent results in both datasets, while Lotka and Yule-Simon distribution demonstrate poor-to-mediocre fits. In the mailing list where moderation and quality control are enforced to a higher degree, i.e., the LINGUIST, Lotka, and Yule-Simon distributions perform better. The findings can be plausibly explained by the lesser applicability of the success-breedssuccess model to the information production in the electronic communication media, such as Internet mailing lists, where selectivity of publications is marginal or nonexistent. The hypothesis is preliminary, and needs to be validated against the larger variety of datasets. Characteristics of the quality control, competitiveness, and the reward structure in Internet mailing lists as compared to professional scholarly journals are discussed.

3.6771328E-4 = product of:
  0.0062511256 = sum of:
    0.0062511256 = weight(_text_:in in 3092) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0062511256 = score(doc=3092,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.033961542 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.024967048 = queryNorm
        0.18406484 = fieldWeight in 3092, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3092)
  0.05882353 = coord(1/17)

Abstract

Although time has been recognized as an important dimension in the co-citation literature, to date it has not been incorporated into the analogous process of link analysis an the Web. In this paper, we discuss several aspects and uses of the time dimension in the context of Web information retrieval. We describe the ideal casewhere search engines track and store temporal data for each of the pages in their repository, assigning timestamps to the hyperlinks embedded within the pages. We introduce several applications which benefit from the availability of such timestamps. To demonstrate our claims, we use a somewhat simplistic approach, which dates links by approximating the age of the page's content. We show that by using this crude measure alone it is possible to detect and expose significant events and trends. We predict that by using more robust methods for tracking modifications in the content of pages, search engines will be able to provide results that are more timely and better reflect current real-life trends than those they provide today.

Footnote

Beitrag in einem Themenheft über Webometrics

3.6771328E-4 = product of:
  0.0062511256 = sum of:
    0.0062511256 = weight(_text_:in in 3603) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0062511256 = score(doc=3603,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.033961542 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.024967048 = queryNorm
        0.18406484 = fieldWeight in 3603, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3603)
  0.05882353 = coord(1/17)

Abstract

This paper addresses a bibliometric methodology to discover the structure of the scientific 'landscape' in order to gain detailed insight into the development of MD fields, their interaction, and the transfer of knowledge between them. This methodology is appropriate to visualize the position of MD activities in relation to interdisciplinary MD developments, and particularly in relation to socio-economic problems. Furthermore, it allows the identification of the major actors. It even provides the possibility of foresight. We describe a first approach to apply bibliometric mapping as an instrument to investigate characteristics of knowledge transfer. In this paper we discuss the creation of 'maps of science' with help of advanced bibliometric methods. This 'bibliometric cartography' can be seen as a specific type of data-mining, applied to large amounts of scientific publications. As an example we describe the mapping of the field neuroscience, one of the largest and fast growing fields in the life sciences. The number of publications covered by this database is about 80,000 per year, the period covered is 1995-1998. Current research is going an to update the mapping for the years 1999-2002. This paper addresses the main lines of the methodology and its application in the study of knowledge transfer.