Search (4 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × theme_ss:"Citation indexing"
  • × theme_ss:"Informetrie"
  • × year_i:[1990 TO 2000}
  1. So, C.Y.K.: Citation ranking versus expert judgement in evaluating communication scholars : effects of research specialty size and individual prominence (1998) 0.03 
    0.027978165 = product of:
  0.16786899 = sum of:
    0.16786899 = weight(_text_:ranking in 327) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.16786899 = score(doc=327,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.20271951 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.4090285 = idf(docFreq=537, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03747799 = queryNorm
        0.828085 = fieldWeight in 327, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          5.4090285 = idf(docFreq=537, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=327)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    Abstract
    Numerous attempts have been made to validate the use of citations as an evaluation method by comparing it with peer review. Unlike past studies using journals, research articles or universities as the subject matter, the present study extends the comparison to the ranking of individual scholars. Results show that citation ranking and expert judgement of communication scholars are highly correlated. The citation methods and the expert judgement method are found to work better in smaller research areas and yield more valid evaluation results for more prominent scholars
  2. Sen, B.K.; Pandalai, T.A.; Karanjai, A.: Ranking of scientists - a new approach (1998) 0.03 
    0.027978165 = product of:
  0.16786899 = sum of:
    0.16786899 = weight(_text_:ranking in 5113) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.16786899 = score(doc=5113,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.20271951 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.4090285 = idf(docFreq=537, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03747799 = queryNorm
        0.828085 = fieldWeight in 5113, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          5.4090285 = idf(docFreq=537, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5113)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    Abstract
    A formula for the ranking of scientists based on diachronous citation counts is proposed. The paper generalises the fact that the citation generation potential (CGP) is not the same for all papers, it differs from paper to paper, and also to a certain extent depends on the subject domain of the papers. The method of ranking proposed in no way replaces peer review. It merely acts as an aid for peers to help them arrive at a better judgement.
  3. Alvarez, P.; Pulgarin, A.: ¬The Rasch model : measuring the impact of scientific journals: analytical chemistry (1996) 0.02 
    0.022844076 = product of:
  0.13706446 = sum of:
    0.13706446 = weight(_text_:ranking in 8505) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.13706446 = score(doc=8505,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.20271951 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.4090285 = idf(docFreq=537, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03747799 = queryNorm
        0.67612857 = fieldWeight in 8505, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.4090285 = idf(docFreq=537, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=8505)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    Abstract
    Focuses on a way to determine a ranking of science journals according to the number of citations-to and items-published data used by Science Citation Insitute of Citation Reports of the Institute for Science Information to determine journal ranking by impact factor. Applies latent traits theory to bibliometrics
  4. Tsay, M.-Y.: From Science Citation Index to Journal Citation Reports, amd criteria for journals evaluation (1997) 0.01 
    0.014134051 = product of:
  0.084804304 = sum of:
    0.084804304 = weight(_text_:ranking in 657) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.084804304 = score(doc=657,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.20271951 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.4090285 = idf(docFreq=537, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03747799 = queryNorm
        0.4183332 = fieldWeight in 657, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.4090285 = idf(docFreq=537, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=657)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    Abstract
    Investigates the characteristics of Journal Citation Reports (JCR) through the study of the Science Citation Index (SCI). Other criteria for evaluating a journal are also discussed. The compilation process of SCI data, and the characteristics, applications and limitations of SCI are studied. A detailed description of JCR is provided including: journal ranking listing, citing journal listing, cited journal listing, subject category listing, source data, impact factor, immediacy index, cited half-life and citing half-life. The applications and limitations of JCR are also explored. In addition to the criteria listed in JCR, the size, circulation and influence of journals are also considered significant criteria fir evaluation purposes

Authors

Languages