Search (120 results, page 2 of 6)

  • × theme_ss:"Citation indexing"
  • × type_ss:"a"
  1. Klein, A.: Von der Schneeflocke zur Lawine : Möglichkeiten der Nutzung freier Zitationsdaten in Bibliotheken (2017) 0.00 
    0.0025697185 = product of:
  0.029551763 = sum of:
    0.00895379 = weight(_text_:und in 4002) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.00895379 = score(doc=4002,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.052235067 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.023567878 = queryNorm
        0.17141339 = fieldWeight in 4002, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4002)
    0.020597974 = weight(_text_:im in 4002) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020597974 = score(doc=4002,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.066621356 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.8267863 = idf(docFreq=7115, maxDocs=44218)
          0.023567878 = queryNorm
        0.30917975 = fieldWeight in 4002, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.8267863 = idf(docFreq=7115, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4002)
  0.08695652 = coord(2/23)
    Abstract
    Zitationen spielen eine wichtige Rolle im wissenschaftlichen Diskurs, in der Recherchepraxis sowie im Bereich der Bibliometrie. In jüngster Zeit gibt es zunehmend Initiativen, die Zitationen als Open Data zur freien Nachnutzung verfügbar machen. Der Beitrag beschreibt den Stand der Entwicklung dieser Initiativen und zeigt, dass in nächster Zeit eine kritische Masse von Daten entstehen könnte, aus denen sich gerade für Bibliotheken neue Perspektiven ergeben. Als konkrete Möglichkeit zur Partizipation für Bibliotheken wird das DFG-Projekt Linked Open Citation Database (LOC-DB) vorgestellt.
  2. Wagner-Döbler, R.: ¬Die Nutzung von Zitationsindizes durch deutsche Soziologen : Ergebnisse einer Umfrage (2001) 0.00 
    0.0023676122 = product of:
  0.02722754 = sum of:
    0.012662571 = weight(_text_:und in 6831) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012662571 = score(doc=6831,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.052235067 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.023567878 = queryNorm
        0.24241515 = fieldWeight in 6831, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6831)
    0.014564968 = weight(_text_:im in 6831) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014564968 = score(doc=6831,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.066621356 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.8267863 = idf(docFreq=7115, maxDocs=44218)
          0.023567878 = queryNorm
        0.2186231 = fieldWeight in 6831, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.8267863 = idf(docFreq=7115, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6831)
  0.08695652 = coord(2/23)
    Abstract
    Über das Ausmaß der Nutzung der Zitationsindizes des Institute for Scientific Information ist wenig bekannt; dies gilt insbesondere auch für den Social Science Citation Index (SSCI). Eine im Sommer 1999 durchgeführte Untersuchung unter deutschen Soziologen bestätigte bekannte Schwachpunkte des SSCI in Bezug auf Sprachraum und Literaturformen. Rund die Hälfte der antwortenden Soziologen gehörte zu den Nutzern, von denen wiederum die Hälfte den SSCI nur selten in Anspruch nahmen. etwa die Hälfte der Antwortenden hält die Auswertung von Zitationsindizes für eine sinnvolle informationelle Ergänzung der Evaluation sozialwissenschaftlicher Forschungsleistungen. Als weiteres Umfragergebnis zeigte sich, dass das Phanomen unsubstanzieller Koautorenschaft auch in der Soziologie weit verbreitet ist
    Source
    nfd Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 52(2001) H.7, S.401-405
  3. Czepel, R.: ¬Die Geographie der wissenschaftlichen Zitierung (2003) 0.00 
    0.0020183483 = product of:
  0.023211004 = sum of:
    0.011440733 = weight(_text_:und in 2273) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011440733 = score(doc=2273,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.052235067 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.023567878 = queryNorm
        0.219024 = fieldWeight in 2273, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2273)
    0.011770271 = weight(_text_:im in 2273) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011770271 = score(doc=2273,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.066621356 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.8267863 = idf(docFreq=7115, maxDocs=44218)
          0.023567878 = queryNorm
        0.17667414 = fieldWeight in 2273, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.8267863 = idf(docFreq=7115, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2273)
  0.08695652 = coord(2/23)
    Abstract
    Ein britischer Forscher hat sich die Mühe gemacht, die geografischen Muster der Zitierungen von 1981 bis zur Gegenwart freizulegen. Das Ergebnis: Die publizistische Wahrnehmung ist in der Wissenschaft äußerst ungleich verteilt. Die USA dominieren mit großem Abstand vor dem Rest der WeIt. Und auch dort konzentrieren sich die Verweise auf einige wenige Ballungsräume der Forschung. Michael Batty vom Centre for Advanced Spatial Analysis in London bediente sich für seine Analyse der Datenbank "ISIHighlyCited.com" (http: //www.isihighlycited.com/), in der Forscher aus verschiedenen Disziplinen aufgelistet werden, die die weltweit meisten Zitate auf sich gezogen haben. In diesen Ranglisten nehmen die akademischen Edelschmieden aus den USA etwa jene Rolle ein, die Österreichische Athleten im Alpinschisport besetzen. Einzig der Forschungsraum London kann mit der Konkurrenz aus Übersee halbwegs mithalten. Der Artikel "Citation Geography: It's About Location" von Michael Batty erschien im Magazin "The Scientist" (Band 17, Heft 16/10, Ausgabe vom 25.8.03; http://www.thescientist.com/yr2003/aug/opinion 030825.html). Die Zeitschrift ist nach individueller Registrierung frei zugänglich. Der Homepage des Autors http: //www.casa.ucl.ac.uk/citations/ können weitere Details entnommen werden. Ob die Anzahl derZitate auch etwas über die wissenschaftliche Qualität aussagt, ist genau so Gegenstand von Diskussionen, wie dies etwa bei den "Impact-Faktoren" von Journalen der Fall ist (vgl. "Kann wissenschaftliche Qualität gemessen werden?", http://science.orf.at/science/news/58648). Ganz wertfrei kann man die ISI-Daten jedenfalls dazu verwenden, um herauszufinden, in welchem Land, in welcher Stadt und in welcher Institution die meist zitierten Forscher dieses Erdballs sitzen. Das Ergebnis dieser von Michael Batty erstellten "Geografie derwissenschaftlichen Zitierung" ist eindeutig: Einige Wenige ziehen den Großteil der publizistischen Aufmerksamkeit auf sich - und lassen für den Rest nur wenig über. Diese Aussage gilt gleichermaßen für Ranglisten von Städten, Institutionen und Ländern. Und: In allen drei Fällen kommen die Spitzereiter aus dem US-amerikanischen Raum.
  4. Stock, W.G.: Journal Citation Reports : Ein Impact Factor für Bibliotheken, Verlage und Autoren? (2001) 0.00 
    0.0020169285 = product of:
  0.023194678 = sum of:
    0.012791129 = weight(_text_:und in 5915) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012791129 = score(doc=5915,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.052235067 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.023567878 = queryNorm
        0.24487628 = fieldWeight in 5915, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5915)
    0.010403548 = weight(_text_:im in 5915) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010403548 = score(doc=5915,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.066621356 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.8267863 = idf(docFreq=7115, maxDocs=44218)
          0.023567878 = queryNorm
        0.15615936 = fieldWeight in 5915, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.8267863 = idf(docFreq=7115, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5915)
  0.08695652 = coord(2/23)
    Abstract
    Gibt es objektive Kriterien für die Bestellung und Abbestellung wissenschaftlicher Zeitschriften? Wie lange sollte eine Bibliothek Periodikabestände benutzernah aufstellen? Kann ein Verlag -außer via Verkaufszahlen - auf Kriterien des Erfolgs seiner Zeitschriften zurückgreifen? Hat ein Autor eine Entscheidungsgrundlage, welcher Zeitschrift er seinen Artikel anbietet? Ist die Forschungsaktivität eines Instituts oder eines Wissenschaftlers über den Impact derjenigen Zeitschriftentitel zu evaluieren, die die Forschungsergebnisse drucken? Können die 'Journal Citation Reports (JCR) "des "Institute for Scientific Information" bei der Klärung solcher Fragen helfen? Sind die JCR ein nützliches oder gar ein notwendiges Hilfsmittel für Bibliotheken, für Verlage, für Wissenschaftsmanager und für wissenschaftliche Autoren? Die 'Journal Citation Reports" geben im Jahresrhythmus informetrische Kennzahlen wie die Zitationsrate, den Impact Factor, den Immediacy Index, die Halbwertszeit für eine Auswahl wissenschaftlicher Zeitschriften an. Zusätzlich berichten sie darüber, weiche Zeitschriften weiche anderen Zeitschriften zitieren bzw. von diesen zitiert werden, so dass "Soziogramme" wissenschaftlicher Zeitschriftenkommunikation entstehen. Wir wollen am Beispiel des aktuellen Jahrgangs ( 1999) die JCR detailliert beschreiben, die Auswahlkriterien der Zeitschriften beleuchten, die verwendeten informetrischen Kennwerte - vor allem den Impact Factor - kritisch hinterfragen, um danach die Einsatzgebiete bei Bibliotheken, in der Wissenschaftsevaluation, bei Verlagen und bei Autoren zu diskutieren. Das Fazit sei vorweggenommen: Die JCR sind ein nicht umgehbares Hilfsmittel für die fokussierten Anwendungsbereiche. Sie sind mitnichten frei von Problemen. Wir schließen daher mit einigen Verbesserungsvorschlägen
  5. Chan, H.C.; Kim, H.-W.; Tan, W.C.: Information systems citation patterns from International Conference on Information Systems articles (2006) 0.00 
    0.0019020058 = product of:
  0.021873066 = sum of:
    0.0122937 = product of:
      0.0245874 = sum of:
        0.0245874 = weight(_text_:international in 201) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0245874 = score(doc=201,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.078619614 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.33588 = idf(docFreq=4276, maxDocs=44218)
              0.023567878 = queryNorm
            0.31273875 = fieldWeight in 201, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.33588 = idf(docFreq=4276, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=201)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.009579366 = product of:
      0.019158732 = sum of:
        0.019158732 = weight(_text_:22 in 201) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.019158732 = score(doc=201,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08253069 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.023567878 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 201, 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=201)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.08695652 = coord(2/23)
    Abstract
    Research patterns could enhance understanding of the Information Systems (IS) field. Citation analysis is the methodology commonly used to determine such research patterns. In this study, the citation methodology is applied to one of the top-ranked Information Systems conferences - International Conference on Information Systems (ICIS). Information is extracted from papers in the proceedings of ICIS 2000 to 2002. A total of 145 base articles and 4,226 citations are used. Research patterns are obtained using total citations, citations per journal or conference, and overlapping citations. We then provide the citation ranking of journals and conferences. We also examine the difference between the citation ranking in this study and the ranking of IS journals and IS conferences in other studies. Based on the comparison, we confirm that IS research is a multidisciplinary research area. We also identify the most cited papers and authors in the IS research area, and the organizations most active in producing papers in the top-rated IS conference. We discuss the findings and implications of the study.
    Date
    3. 1.2007 17:22:03
  6. White, H.D.; McCain, K.W.: Visualizing a discipline : an author co-citation analysis of information science, 1972-1995 (1998) 0.00 
    0.0018378935 = product of:
  0.04227155 = sum of:
    0.04227155 = weight(_text_:informationswissenschaft in 5020) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04227155 = score(doc=5020,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.10616633 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.023567878 = queryNorm
        0.3981634 = fieldWeight in 5020, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5020)
  0.04347826 = coord(1/23)
    Field
    Informationswissenschaft
  7. Cronin, B.; Shaw, D.: Banking (on) different forms of symbolic capital (2002) 0.00 
    0.0018378935 = product of:
  0.04227155 = sum of:
    0.04227155 = weight(_text_:informationswissenschaft in 1263) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04227155 = score(doc=1263,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.10616633 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.023567878 = queryNorm
        0.3981634 = fieldWeight in 1263, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1263)
  0.04347826 = coord(1/23)
    Field
    Informationswissenschaft
  8. Pao, M.L.: Term and citation retrieval : a field study (1993) 0.00 
    0.0016672731 = product of:
  0.03834728 = sum of:
    0.03834728 = sum of:
      0.012570425 = weight(_text_:1 in 3741) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.012570425 = score(doc=3741,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.057894554 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
            0.023567878 = queryNorm
          0.2171262 = fieldWeight in 3741, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3741)
      0.025776858 = weight(_text_:29 in 3741) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.025776858 = score(doc=3741,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.08290443 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
            0.023567878 = queryNorm
          0.31092256 = fieldWeight in 3741, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3741)
  0.04347826 = coord(1/23)
    Source
    Information processing and management. 29(1993) no.1, S.95-112
  9. Wouters, P.: ¬The signs of science (1998) 0.00 
    0.0015544195 = product of:
  0.017875824 = sum of:
    0.0062852125 = product of:
      0.012570425 = sum of:
        0.012570425 = weight(_text_:1 in 1023) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.012570425 = score(doc=1023,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.057894554 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
              0.023567878 = queryNorm
            0.2171262 = fieldWeight in 1023, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1023)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.011590611 = product of:
      0.023181222 = sum of:
        0.023181222 = weight(_text_:international in 1023) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023181222 = score(doc=1023,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.078619614 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.33588 = idf(docFreq=4276, maxDocs=44218)
              0.023567878 = queryNorm
            0.2948529 = fieldWeight in 1023, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.33588 = idf(docFreq=4276, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1023)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.08695652 = coord(2/23)
    Footnote
    Paper presented at the 6th conference of the International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics, Jerusalem, 16-19 June 1997
    Source
    Scientometrics. 41(1998) nos.1/2, S.225-241
  10. Davis, P.M.; Cohen, S.A.: ¬The effect of the Web on undergraduate citation behavior 1996-1999 (2001) 0.00 
    0.0012504549 = product of:
  0.028760463 = sum of:
    0.028760463 = sum of:
      0.0094278185 = weight(_text_:1 in 5768) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0094278185 = score(doc=5768,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.057894554 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
            0.023567878 = queryNorm
          0.16284466 = fieldWeight in 5768, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5768)
      0.019332644 = weight(_text_:29 in 5768) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.019332644 = score(doc=5768,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.08290443 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
            0.023567878 = queryNorm
          0.23319192 = fieldWeight in 5768, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5768)
  0.04347826 = coord(1/23)
    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
    Date
    29. 9.2001 14:01:09
  11. Frandsen, T.F.; Rousseau, R.: Article impact calculated over arbitrary periods (2005) 0.00 
    0.0012504549 = product of:
  0.028760463 = sum of:
    0.028760463 = sum of:
      0.0094278185 = weight(_text_:1 in 3264) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0094278185 = score(doc=3264,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.057894554 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
            0.023567878 = queryNorm
          0.16284466 = fieldWeight in 3264, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3264)
      0.019332644 = weight(_text_:29 in 3264) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.019332644 = score(doc=3264,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.08290443 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
            0.023567878 = queryNorm
          0.23319192 = fieldWeight in 3264, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3264)
  0.04347826 = coord(1/23)
    Date
    20. 3.2005 10:29:08
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 56(2005) no.1, S.58-62
  12. Nicolaisen, J.: Citation analysis (2007) 0.00 
    0.0011106512 = product of:
  0.025544977 = sum of:
    0.025544977 = product of:
      0.051089954 = sum of:
        0.051089954 = weight(_text_:22 in 6091) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.051089954 = score(doc=6091,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08253069 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.023567878 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 6091, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=6091)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.04347826 = coord(1/23)
    Date
    13. 7.2008 19:53:22
  13. Døsen, K.: One more reference on self-reference (1992) 0.00 
    0.0011106512 = product of:
  0.025544977 = sum of:
    0.025544977 = product of:
      0.051089954 = sum of:
        0.051089954 = weight(_text_:22 in 4604) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.051089954 = score(doc=4604,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08253069 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.023567878 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 4604, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=4604)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.04347826 = coord(1/23)
    Date
    7. 2.2005 14:10:22
  14. Schneider, K.: Scopus contra ISI-WOS : Versuch einer vergleichenden Bewertung aus pharmakognostischer Sicht (2006) 0.00 
    0.0010772684 = product of:
  0.012388586 = sum of:
    0.007674677 = weight(_text_:und in 39) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.007674677 = score(doc=39,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.052235067 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.023567878 = queryNorm
        0.14692576 = fieldWeight in 39, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=39)
    0.0047139092 = product of:
      0.0094278185 = sum of:
        0.0094278185 = weight(_text_:1 in 39) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0094278185 = score(doc=39,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.057894554 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
              0.023567878 = queryNorm
            0.16284466 = fieldWeight in 39, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=39)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.08695652 = coord(2/23)
    Abstract
    Bei der vorliegenden Präsentation handelt es sich ausdrücklich um keine umfassende statistisch-bibliometrische Vergleichsanalyse der beiden Datenbanken, sondern um die Darstellung einiger subjektiv ausgewählter, punktueller, jedoch durchaus praxisnaher Suchanfragen (Zeitraum: 23.11. - 06.12.2005). Es wurde dazu nach in Fachzeitschriften publizierten, persönlich bekannten Arbeiten österreichischer Autoren mit vorwiegend "selteneren" deutschsprachigen Namen bzw. Doppelnamen (Wolfgang Wlach, Johannes Saukel, Ulrike Kastner, Karin Zitterl-Eglseer und Roswitha SchrutkaRechtenstamm) gesucht, die am Department für Pharmakognosie / Fakultät für Lebenswissenschaften / Universität Wien wissenschaftlich arbeiten bzw. gearbeitet haben. Weitere Suchanfragen galten (aus der Mitarbeit an Hagers Handbuch der Pharmazeutischen Praxis) persönlich bekannten Arbeiten über in der Phytotherapie, Homöopathie oder Volksheilkunde genutzte Pflanzen (Adlumia, Alchornea cordifolia, Siderits scardica). Zur vergleichenden Bewertung wurden die absolute Anzahl der "relevanten, gesuchten Treffer", die Anzahl der "Dubletten-Treffer" in beiden Datenbanken sowie die in der jeweiligen Datenbank "exklusiven Treffer" tabellarisch zusammen mit eigenen Anmerkungen angeführt.
    Source
    Online Mitteilungen. 2006, Nr.85, S.21-24 [=Mitteilungen VÖB 59(2006) H.1]
  15. Marion, L.S.; McCain, K.W.: Contrasting views of software engineering journals : author cocitation choices and indexer vocabulary assignments (2001) 0.00 
    0.0010420457 = product of:
  0.02396705 = sum of:
    0.02396705 = sum of:
      0.007856515 = weight(_text_:1 in 5767) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.007856515 = score(doc=5767,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.057894554 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
            0.023567878 = queryNorm
          0.13570388 = fieldWeight in 5767, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5767)
      0.016110536 = weight(_text_:29 in 5767) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.016110536 = score(doc=5767,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.08290443 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
            0.023567878 = queryNorm
          0.19432661 = fieldWeight in 5767, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5767)
  0.04347826 = coord(1/23)
    Abstract
    We explore the intellectual subject structure and research themes in software engineering through the identification and analysis of a core journal literature. We examine this literature via two expert perspectives: that of the author, who identified significant work by citing it (journal cocitation analysis), and that of the professional indexer, who tags published work with subject terms to facilitate retrieval from a bibliographic database (subject profile analysis). The data sources are SCISEARCH (the on-line version of Science Citation Index), and INSPEC (a database covering software engineering, computer science, and information systems). We use data visualization tools (cluster analysis, multidimensional scaling, and PFNets) to show the "intellectual maps" of software engineering. Cocitation and subject profile analyses demonstrate that software engineering is a distinct interdisciplinary field, valuing practical and applied aspects, and spanning a subject continuum from "programming-in-the-smalI" to "programming-in-the-large." This continuum mirrors the software development life cycle by taking the operating system or major application from initial programming through project management, implementation, and maintenance. Object orientation is an integral but distinct subject area in software engineering. Key differences are the importance of management and programming: (1) cocitation analysis emphasizes project management and systems development; (2) programming techniques/languages are more influential in subject profiles; (3) cocitation profiles place object-oriented journals separately and centrally while the subject profile analysis locates these journals with the programming/languages group
    Date
    29. 9.2001 14:01:01
  16. Van der Veer Martens, B.: Do citation systems represent theories of truth? (2001) 0.00 
    9.816863E-4 = product of:
  0.022578783 = sum of:
    0.022578783 = product of:
      0.045157567 = sum of:
        0.045157567 = weight(_text_:22 in 3925) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.045157567 = score(doc=3925,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.08253069 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.023567878 = 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)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.04347826 = coord(1/23)
    Date
    22. 7.2006 15:22:28
  17. Bornmann, L.; Daniel, H.-D.: Multiple publication on a single research study: does it pay? : The influence of number of research articles on total citation counts in biomedicine (2007) 0.00 
    9.7151217E-4 = product of:
  0.01117239 = sum of:
    0.0039282576 = product of:
      0.007856515 = sum of:
        0.007856515 = weight(_text_:1 in 444) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.007856515 = score(doc=444,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.057894554 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
              0.023567878 = queryNorm
            0.13570388 = fieldWeight in 444, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=444)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.0072441325 = product of:
      0.014488265 = sum of:
        0.014488265 = weight(_text_:international in 444) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.014488265 = score(doc=444,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.078619614 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.33588 = idf(docFreq=4276, maxDocs=44218)
              0.023567878 = queryNorm
            0.18428308 = fieldWeight in 444, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.33588 = idf(docFreq=4276, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=444)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.08695652 = coord(2/23)
    Abstract
    Scientists may seek to report a single definable body of research in more than one publication, that is, in repeated reports of the same work or in fractional reports, in order to disseminate their research as widely as possible in the scientific community. Up to now, however, it has not been examined whether this strategy of "multiple publication" in fact leads to greater reception of the research. In the present study, we investigate the influence of number of articles reporting the results of a single study on reception in the scientific community (total citation counts of an article on a single study). Our data set consists of 96 applicants for a research fellowship from the Boehringer Ingelheim Fonds (BIF), an international foundation for the promotion of basic research in biomedicine. The applicants reported to us all articles that they had published within the framework of their doctoral research projects. On this single project, the applicants had published from 1 to 16 articles (M = 4; Mdn = 3). The results of a regression model with an interaction term show that the practice of multiple publication of research study results does in fact lead to greater reception of the research (higher total citation counts) in the scientific community. However, reception is dependent upon length of article: the longer the article, the more total citation counts increase with the number of articles. Thus, it pays for scientists to practice multiple publication of study results in the form of sizable reports.
  18. Stock, W.G.: Wissenschaftsevaluation mittels Datenbanken : methodisch einwandfrei? (1995) 0.00 
    9.632559E-4 = product of:
  0.022154884 = sum of:
    0.022154884 = weight(_text_:und in 2443) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022154884 = score(doc=2443,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.052235067 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.023567878 = queryNorm
        0.42413816 = fieldWeight in 2443, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2443)
  0.04347826 = coord(1/23)
    Abstract
    Als Maß für die Produktivität und den Einfluß von Forschern, wissenschaftlichen Einrichtungen und Fachbereichen dienen häufig anhand von Publikations- und Zitationsanalysen erstellte Ranglisten. Doch nach welchen Kriterien sind die in elektronischen Fachdatenbanken gespeicherten Informationen auszuwerten, um ein einigermaßen zutreffendes Abbild der Forschungsleistung zu erhalten?
  19. Trkulja, V.: Weltgrößte Abstracts- und Zitationsdatenbank aus dem wissenschaftlichen Web (2005) 0.00 
    9.5357466E-4 = product of:
  0.021932216 = sum of:
    0.021932216 = weight(_text_:und in 3437) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021932216 = score(doc=3437,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.052235067 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.023567878 = queryNorm
        0.41987535 = fieldWeight in 3437, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3437)
  0.04347826 = coord(1/23)
    Abstract
    Scopus ist ein Such- und Navigationssystem für interdisziplinäre, wissenschaftliche Literatur. Die zur Zeit weltgrößte Abstract- & Zitationsdatenbank deckt 14.000 WTM-Titel von 4.000 Verlagen ab und liefert Ergebnisse aus dem wissenschaftlichen Web, inklusive Patentinformationen. Darüber hinaus unterstützt Scopus ein Volltext-Linking sowie eine erweiterte Bibliotheksintegration mit personalisierten Konfigurationsmöglichkeiten. Das neue Angebot ist überzeugend.
    Content
    Datenbestand Scopus beinhaltet - 12.650 akademische Zeitschriften (davon 1.100 Medline-Zeitschriften und 465 Open Access-Zeitschriften), - 750 Conference Proceedings, - 600 Trade Publications, - 27 Millionen Kurzfassungen der letzten zwanzig Jahre, - 230 Millionen Referenzen zu allen Kurzfassungen ab 1996 und - 180 Millionen wissenschaftliche Webseiten via Scirus. Der Inhalt wird täglich aktualisiert. Auf die Fachbereiche teilen sich die Quellen wie folgt auf: - 4.500 Chemistry, Physics, Mathematics and Engineering, - 5.900 Life and Health Sciences (100 Medline-Abdeckung), - 2.700 Social Sciences, Psychology and Economics und - 2.500 Biological, Agricultural and Environmental Sciences.
  20. Model, F.: 'Citation indexing' und Rückwärtskatalogisierung' : Beispiele für Zitatendokumentation (1964) 0.00 
    8.8981766E-4 = product of:
  0.020465806 = sum of:
    0.020465806 = weight(_text_:und in 5002) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020465806 = score(doc=5002,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.052235067 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.023567878 = queryNorm
        0.39180204 = fieldWeight in 5002, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=5002)
  0.04347826 = coord(1/23)

Authors

Years

Languages

  • e 89
  • d 31

Themes