-
Døsen, K.: One more reference on self-reference (1992)
0.00
0.0028298455 = product of:
0.022638764 = sum of:
0.022638764 = product of:
0.06791629 = sum of:
0.06791629 = weight(_text_:22 in 4604) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06791629 = score(doc=4604,freq=2.0), product of:
0.109711945 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.031329893 = 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)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.125 = coord(1/8)
- Date
- 7. 2.2005 14:10:22
-
So, C.Y.K.: Citation ranking versus expert judgement in evaluating communication scholars : effects of research specialty size and individual prominence (1998)
0.00
0.0025111525 = product of:
0.02008922 = sum of:
0.02008922 = product of:
0.06026766 = sum of:
0.06026766 = weight(_text_:better in 327) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06026766 = score(doc=327,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14615852 = queryWeight, product of:
4.665146 = idf(docFreq=1131, maxDocs=44218)
0.031329893 = queryNorm
0.41234452 = fieldWeight in 327, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.665146 = idf(docFreq=1131, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=327)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.125 = coord(1/8)
- 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
-
Sen, B.K.; Pandalai, T.A.; Karanjai, A.: Ranking of scientists - a new approach (1998)
0.00
0.0025111525 = product of:
0.02008922 = sum of:
0.02008922 = product of:
0.06026766 = sum of:
0.06026766 = weight(_text_:better in 5113) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06026766 = score(doc=5113,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14615852 = queryWeight, product of:
4.665146 = idf(docFreq=1131, maxDocs=44218)
0.031329893 = queryNorm
0.41234452 = fieldWeight in 5113, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.665146 = idf(docFreq=1131, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5113)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.125 = coord(1/8)
- 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.
-
Yoon, L.L.: ¬The performance of cited references as an approach to information retrieval (1994)
0.00
0.0021972586 = product of:
0.01757807 = sum of:
0.01757807 = product of:
0.052734207 = sum of:
0.052734207 = weight(_text_:better in 8219) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.052734207 = score(doc=8219,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14615852 = queryWeight, product of:
4.665146 = idf(docFreq=1131, maxDocs=44218)
0.031329893 = queryNorm
0.36080146 = fieldWeight in 8219, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.665146 = idf(docFreq=1131, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=8219)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.125 = coord(1/8)
- Abstract
- Explores the relationship between the number of cited references used in a citation search and retrieval effectiveness. Focuses on analysing in terms of information retrieval effectiveness, the overlap among posting sets retrieved by various combinations of cited references. Findings from three case studies show the more cited references used for a citation search, the better the performance, in terms of retrieving more relevant documents, up to a point of diminishing returns. The overall level of overlap among relevant documents sets was found to be low. If only some of the cited references among many candidates are used for a citation search, a significant proportion of relevant documents may be missed. The characteristics of cited references showed that some variables are good indicators to predict relevance to a given question
-
Lindholm-Romantschuk, Y.: Scholarly book reviewing in the social sciences and humanities : the flow of ides within and among disciplines (1998)
0.00
0.0017847081 = product of:
0.014277665 = sum of:
0.014277665 = product of:
0.042832993 = sum of:
0.042832993 = weight(_text_:29 in 4063) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.042832993 = score(doc=4063,freq=2.0), product of:
0.110208765 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.031329893 = queryNorm
0.38865322 = fieldWeight in 4063, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4063)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.125 = coord(1/8)
- Date
- 29. 3.1996 18:19:32
-
Pao, M.L.: Term and citation retrieval : a field study (1993)
0.00
0.0014277663 = product of:
0.01142213 = sum of:
0.01142213 = product of:
0.03426639 = sum of:
0.03426639 = weight(_text_:29 in 3741) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03426639 = score(doc=3741,freq=2.0), product of:
0.110208765 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.031329893 = 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)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.125 = coord(1/8)
- Source
- Information processing and management. 29(1993) no.1, S.95-112
-
Campanario, J.M.: Have referees rejected some of the most-cited articles of all times? (1996)
0.00
0.001061192 = product of:
0.008489536 = sum of:
0.008489536 = product of:
0.025468607 = sum of:
0.025468607 = weight(_text_:22 in 4215) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.025468607 = score(doc=4215,freq=2.0), product of:
0.109711945 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.031329893 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4215, 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=4215)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.125 = coord(1/8)
- Abstract
- In this article a quantitative study is reported on the resistance that scientists may encounter when they do innovative work or when they attempt to publish articles that later become highly cited. A set of 205 commentaries by authors of some of the most-cited papers of all times have been examined in order to identify those articles whose authors encountered difficulty in getting his or her work published. There are 22 commentaries (10,7%) in which authors mention some difficulty or resistance in doing or publishing the research reported in the article. Three of the articles which had problems in being published are the most cited from their respective journals. According the authors' commentaries, although sometimes referees' negative evaluations can help improve the articles, in other instances referees and editors wrongly rejected the highly cited articles
-
Snyder, H.; Bonzi, S.: Patterns of self-citation across disciplines : 1980-1989 (1998)
0.00
0.001061192 = product of:
0.008489536 = sum of:
0.008489536 = product of:
0.025468607 = sum of:
0.025468607 = weight(_text_:22 in 3692) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.025468607 = score(doc=3692,freq=2.0), product of:
0.109711945 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.031329893 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3692, 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=3692)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.125 = coord(1/8)
- Date
- 22. 5.1999 19:33:24
