-
Aguillo, I.F.; Granadino, B.; Ortega, J.L.; Prieto, J.A.: Scientific research activity and communication measured with cybermetrics indicators (2006)
0.01
0.009469198 = product of:
0.018938396 = sum of:
0.018938396 = product of:
0.037876792 = sum of:
0.037876792 = weight(_text_:b in 5898) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.037876792 = score(doc=5898,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16126883 = queryWeight, product of:
3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
0.045518078 = queryNorm
0.23486741 = fieldWeight in 5898, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5898)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
-
wst: Cut-and-paste-Wissenschaft (2003)
0.01
0.009250606 = product of:
0.018501213 = sum of:
0.018501213 = product of:
0.037002426 = sum of:
0.037002426 = weight(_text_:22 in 1270) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.037002426 = score(doc=1270,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15939656 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045518078 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1270, 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=1270)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Content
- "Mikhail Simkin und Vwani Roychowdhury von der University of Califomia, Los Angeles, haben eine in der wissenschaftlichen Gemeinschaft verbreitete Unsitte erstmals quantitativ erfasst. Die Wissenschaftler analysierten die Verbreitung von Druckfehlern in den Literaturlisten wissenschaftlicher Arbeiten (www.arxiv.org/abs/cond-mat/0212043). 78 Prozent aller zitierten Aufsätze - so schätzen die Forscher - haben die zitierenden Wissenschaftler demnach nicht gelesen, sondern nur per 'cut and paste' von einer Vorlage in ihre eigene Literaturliste übernommen. Das könne man beispielsweise abschätzen aus der Analyse fehlerhafter Seitenangaben in der Literaturliste eines 1973 veröffentlichten Aufsatzes über die Struktur zweidimensionaler Kristalle: Dieser Aufsatz ist rund 4300 mal zitiert worden. In 196 Fällen enthalten die Zitate jedoch Fehler in der Jahreszahl, dem Band der Zeitschrift oder der Seitenzahl, die als Indikatoren für cut and paste genommen werden können, denn man kann, obwohl es Milliarden Möglichkeiten gibt, nur 45 verschiedene Arten von Druckfehlern unterscheiden. In erster Näherung ergibt sich eine Obergrenze für die Zahl der `echten Leser' daher aus der Zahl der unterscheidbaren Druckfehler (45) geteilt durch die Gesamtzahl der Publikationen mit Druckfehler (196), das macht etwa 22 Prozent."
-
Chan, H.C.; Kim, H.-W.; Tan, W.C.: Information systems citation patterns from International Conference on Information Systems articles (2006)
0.01
0.009250606 = product of:
0.018501213 = sum of:
0.018501213 = product of:
0.037002426 = sum of:
0.037002426 = weight(_text_:22 in 201) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.037002426 = score(doc=201,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15939656 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045518078 = 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)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 3. 1.2007 17:22:03
-
H-Index auch im Web of Science (2008)
0.01
0.009250606 = product of:
0.018501213 = sum of:
0.018501213 = product of:
0.037002426 = sum of:
0.037002426 = weight(_text_:22 in 590) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.037002426 = score(doc=590,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15939656 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045518078 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 590, 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=590)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 6. 4.2008 19:04:22
-
Mingers, J.; Burrell, Q.L.: Modeling citation behavior in Management Science journals (2006)
0.01
0.009250606 = product of:
0.018501213 = sum of:
0.018501213 = product of:
0.037002426 = sum of:
0.037002426 = weight(_text_:22 in 994) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.037002426 = score(doc=994,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15939656 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045518078 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 994, 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=994)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 26.12.2007 19:22:05
-
Ma, N.; Guan, J.; Zhao, Y.: Bringing PageRank to the citation analysis (2008)
0.01
0.009250606 = product of:
0.018501213 = sum of:
0.018501213 = product of:
0.037002426 = sum of:
0.037002426 = weight(_text_:22 in 2064) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.037002426 = score(doc=2064,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15939656 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045518078 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2064, 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=2064)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 31. 7.2008 14:22:05
-
Johnson, B.; Oppenheim, C.: How socially connected are citers to those that they cite? (2007)
0.01
0.007890998 = product of:
0.015781997 = sum of:
0.015781997 = product of:
0.031563994 = sum of:
0.031563994 = weight(_text_:b in 839) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.031563994 = score(doc=839,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16126883 = queryWeight, product of:
3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
0.045518078 = queryNorm
0.19572285 = fieldWeight in 839, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=839)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
-
Hayer, L.: Lazarsfeld zitiert : eine bibliometrische Analyse (2008)
0.01
0.0077088396 = product of:
0.015417679 = sum of:
0.015417679 = product of:
0.030835358 = sum of:
0.030835358 = weight(_text_:22 in 1934) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030835358 = score(doc=1934,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15939656 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045518078 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1934, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1934)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 6.2008 12:54:12
-
White, H.D.; Wellman, B.; Nazer, N.: Does Citation Reflect Social Structure? : Longitudinal Evidence From the "Globenet" Interdisciplinary Research Group (2004)
0.01
0.0063127987 = product of:
0.012625597 = sum of:
0.012625597 = product of:
0.025251195 = sum of:
0.025251195 = weight(_text_:b in 2095) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.025251195 = score(doc=2095,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16126883 = queryWeight, product of:
3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
0.045518078 = queryNorm
0.15657827 = fieldWeight in 2095, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2095)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
-
Bornmann, L.; Daniel, H.-D.: Selecting manuscripts for a high-impact journal through peer review : a citation analysis of communications that were accepted by Angewandte Chemie International Edition, or rejected but published elsewhere (2008)
0.01
0.0063127987 = product of:
0.012625597 = sum of:
0.012625597 = product of:
0.025251195 = sum of:
0.025251195 = weight(_text_:b in 2381) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.025251195 = score(doc=2381,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16126883 = queryWeight, product of:
3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
0.045518078 = queryNorm
0.15657827 = fieldWeight in 2381, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2381)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- All journals that use peer review have to deal with the following question: Does the peer review system fulfill its declared objective to select the best scientific work? We investigated the journal peer-review process at Angewandte Chemie International Edition (AC-IE), one of the prime chemistry journals worldwide, and conducted a citation analysis for Communications that were accepted by the journal (n = 878) or rejected but published elsewhere (n = 959). The results of negative binomial-regression models show that holding all other model variables constant, being accepted by AC-IE increases the expected number of citations by up to 50%. A comparison of average citation counts (with 95% confidence intervals) of accepted and rejected (but published elsewhere) Communications with international scientific reference standards was undertaken. As reference standards, (a) mean citation counts for the journal set provided by Thomson Reuters corresponding to the field chemistry and (b) specific reference standards that refer to the subject areas of Chemical Abstracts were used. When compared to reference standards, the mean impact on chemical research is for the most part far above average not only for accepted Communications but also for rejected (but published elsewhere) Communications. However, average and below-average scientific impact is to be expected significantly less frequently for accepted Communications than for rejected Communications. All in all, the results of this study confirm that peer review at AC-IE is able to select the best scientific work with the highest impact on chemical research.
