Search (3 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × language_ss:"e"
  • × theme_ss:"Informetrie"
  • × type_ss:"a"
  • × type_ss:"el"
  1. Van der Veer Martens, B.: Do citation systems represent theories of truth? (2001) 0.01 
    0.014441042 = product of:
  0.028882084 = sum of:
    0.028882084 = product of:
      0.08664625 = sum of:
        0.08664625 = weight(_text_:22 in 3925) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08664625 = score(doc=3925,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.15835609 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045220956 = queryNorm
            0.54716086 = fieldWeight in 3925, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3925)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    22. 7.2006 15:22:28
  2. Schreiber, M.: Restricting the h-index to a citation time window : a case study of a timed Hirsch index (2014) 0.01 
    0.008223822 = product of:
  0.016447645 = sum of:
    0.016447645 = product of:
      0.049342934 = sum of:
        0.049342934 = weight(_text_:h in 1563) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.049342934 = score(doc=1563,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.11234917 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045220956 = queryNorm
            0.4391927 = fieldWeight in 1563, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1563)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    The h-index has been shown to increase in many cases mostly because of citations to rather old publications. This inertia can be circumvented by restricting the evaluation to a citation time window. Here I report results of an empirical study analyzing the evolution of the thus defined timed h-index in dependence on the length of the citation time window.
    Object
    h-index
  3. Harzing, A.-W.: Comparing the Google Scholar h-index with the ISI Journal Impact Factor (2008) 0.01 
    0.007195845 = product of:
  0.01439169 = sum of:
    0.01439169 = product of:
      0.043175068 = sum of:
        0.043175068 = weight(_text_:h in 855) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.043175068 = score(doc=855,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.11234917 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045220956 = queryNorm
            0.38429362 = fieldWeight in 855, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=855)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Publication in academic journals is a key criterion for appointment, tenure and promotion in universities. Many universities weigh publications according to the quality or impact of the journal. Traditionally, journal quality has been assessed through the ISI Journal Impact Factor (JIF). This paper proposes an alternative metric - Hirsch's h-index - and data source - Google Scholar - to assess journal impact. Using a systematic comparison between the Google Scholar h-index and the ISI JIF for a sample of 838 journals in Economics & Business, we argue that the former provides a more accurate and comprehensive measure of journal impact.
    Object
    h-index

Authors

Years