-
Campanario, J.M.: Have referees rejected some of the most-cited articles of all times? (1996)
0.08
0.08383608 = sum of:
0.03654821 = product of:
0.14619283 = sum of:
0.14619283 = weight(_text_:authors in 4215) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.14619283 = score(doc=4215,freq=8.0), product of:
0.2418733 = queryWeight, product of:
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.053056188 = queryNorm
0.60441905 = fieldWeight in 4215, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4215)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.047287866 = sum of:
0.0041575856 = weight(_text_:s in 4215) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0041575856 = score(doc=4215,freq=2.0), product of:
0.057684682 = queryWeight, product of:
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.053056188 = queryNorm
0.072074346 = fieldWeight in 4215, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4215)
0.043130282 = weight(_text_:22 in 4215) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.043130282 = score(doc=4215,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18579373 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.053056188 = 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)
- 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
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 47(1996) no.4, S.302-310
-
Chan, H.C.; Kim, H.-W.; Tan, W.C.: Information systems citation patterns from International Conference on Information Systems articles (2006)
0.07
0.06556197 = sum of:
0.018274104 = product of:
0.07309642 = sum of:
0.07309642 = weight(_text_:authors in 201) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07309642 = score(doc=201,freq=2.0), product of:
0.2418733 = queryWeight, product of:
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.053056188 = queryNorm
0.30220953 = fieldWeight in 201, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=201)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.047287866 = sum of:
0.0041575856 = weight(_text_:s in 201) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0041575856 = score(doc=201,freq=2.0), product of:
0.057684682 = queryWeight, product of:
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.053056188 = queryNorm
0.072074346 = fieldWeight in 201, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=201)
0.043130282 = weight(_text_:22 in 201) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.043130282 = score(doc=201,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18579373 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.053056188 = 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)
- 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
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 57(2006) no.9, S.1263-1274
-
Døsen, K.: One more reference on self-reference (1992)
0.06
0.06305049 = product of:
0.12610099 = sum of:
0.12610099 = sum of:
0.011086896 = weight(_text_:s in 4604) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.011086896 = score(doc=4604,freq=2.0), product of:
0.057684682 = queryWeight, product of:
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.053056188 = queryNorm
0.19219826 = fieldWeight in 4604, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=4604)
0.11501409 = weight(_text_:22 in 4604) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.11501409 = score(doc=4604,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18579373 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.053056188 = 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)
- Date
- 7. 2.2005 14:10:22
- Source
- Mathematical intelligencer. 14(1992), no.4, S.4-5
-
Ahlgren, P.; Jarneving, B.; Rousseau, R.: Requirements for a cocitation similarity measure, with special reference to Pearson's correlation coefficient (2003)
0.06
0.05876667 = sum of:
0.027241426 = product of:
0.1089657 = sum of:
0.1089657 = weight(_text_:authors in 5171) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.1089657 = score(doc=5171,freq=10.0), product of:
0.2418733 = queryWeight, product of:
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.053056188 = queryNorm
0.45050737 = fieldWeight in 5171, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5171)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.031525247 = sum of:
0.002771724 = weight(_text_:s in 5171) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.002771724 = score(doc=5171,freq=2.0), product of:
0.057684682 = queryWeight, product of:
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.053056188 = queryNorm
0.048049565 = fieldWeight in 5171, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5171)
0.028753523 = weight(_text_:22 in 5171) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.028753523 = score(doc=5171,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18579373 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.053056188 = queryNorm
0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 5171, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5171)
- Abstract
- Ahlgren, Jarneving, and. Rousseau review accepted procedures for author co-citation analysis first pointing out that since in the raw data matrix the row and column values are identical i,e, the co-citation count of two authors, there is no clear choice for diagonal values. They suggest the number of times an author has been co-cited with himself excluding self citation rather than the common treatment as zeros or as missing values. When the matrix is converted to a similarity matrix the normal procedure is to create a matrix of Pearson's r coefficients between data vectors. Ranking by r and by co-citation frequency and by intuition can easily yield three different orders. It would seem necessary that the adding of zeros to the matrix will not affect the value or the relative order of similarity measures but it is shown that this is not the case with Pearson's r. Using 913 bibliographic descriptions form the Web of Science of articles form JASIS and Scientometrics, authors names were extracted, edited and 12 information retrieval authors and 12 bibliometric authors each from the top 100 most cited were selected. Co-citation and r value (diagonal elements treated as missing) matrices were constructed, and then reconstructed in expanded form. Adding zeros can both change the r value and the ordering of the authors based upon that value. A chi-squared distance measure would not violate these requirements, nor would the cosine coefficient. It is also argued that co-citation data is ordinal data since there is no assurance of an absolute zero number of co-citations, and thus Pearson is not appropriate. The number of ties in co-citation data make the use of the Spearman rank order coefficient problematic.
- Date
- 9. 7.2006 10:22:35
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and technology. 54(2003) no.6, S.549-568
-
McCain, K.W.: Mapping authors in intellectual space : a technical overview (1990)
0.05
0.054274388 = sum of:
0.04873094 = product of:
0.19492376 = sum of:
0.19492376 = weight(_text_:authors in 6903) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.19492376 = score(doc=6903,freq=2.0), product of:
0.2418733 = queryWeight, product of:
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.053056188 = queryNorm
0.80589205 = fieldWeight in 6903, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=6903)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.005543448 = product of:
0.011086896 = sum of:
0.011086896 = weight(_text_:s in 6903) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.011086896 = score(doc=6903,freq=2.0), product of:
0.057684682 = queryWeight, product of:
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.053056188 = queryNorm
0.19219826 = fieldWeight in 6903, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=6903)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 41(1990) no.6, S.433-443
-
Piternick, A.B.: Name of an author! (1992)
0.05
0.04653713 = sum of:
0.043072477 = product of:
0.17228991 = sum of:
0.17228991 = weight(_text_:authors in 3293) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.17228991 = score(doc=3293,freq=4.0), product of:
0.2418733 = queryWeight, product of:
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.053056188 = queryNorm
0.7123147 = fieldWeight in 3293, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3293)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.003464655 = product of:
0.00692931 = sum of:
0.00692931 = weight(_text_:s in 3293) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.00692931 = score(doc=3293,freq=2.0), product of:
0.057684682 = queryWeight, product of:
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.053056188 = queryNorm
0.120123915 = fieldWeight in 3293, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3293)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Citing authors' names in indexes and references can cause great difficulties, as ghosts, subterfuges, and collaborative teamwork may often obscure the true begetters of published works. Presents a collection of facts and findings about authors that relate in one way or another to their names
- Source
- Indexer. 18(1992) no.2, S.95-100
-
Lin, X.; White, H.D.; Buzydlowski, J.: Real-time author co-citation mapping for online searching (2003)
0.04
0.04294093 = sum of:
0.040862136 = product of:
0.16344854 = sum of:
0.16344854 = weight(_text_:authors in 1080) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.16344854 = score(doc=1080,freq=10.0), product of:
0.2418733 = queryWeight, product of:
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.053056188 = queryNorm
0.67576104 = fieldWeight in 1080, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1080)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.0020787928 = product of:
0.0041575856 = sum of:
0.0041575856 = weight(_text_:s in 1080) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0041575856 = score(doc=1080,freq=2.0), product of:
0.057684682 = queryWeight, product of:
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.053056188 = queryNorm
0.072074346 = fieldWeight in 1080, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1080)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Author searching is traditionally based on the matching of name strings. Special characteristics of authors as personal names and subject indicators are not considered. This makes it difficult to identify a set of related authors or to group authors by subjects in retrieval systems. In this paper, we describe the design and implementation of a prototype visualization system to enhance author searching. The system, called AuthorLink, is based on author co-citation analysis and visualization mapping algorithms such as Kohonen's feature maps and Pathfinder networks. AuthorLink produces interactive author maps in real time from a database of 1.26 million records supplied by the Institute for Scientific Information. The maps show subject groupings and more fine-grained intellectual connections among authors. Through the interactive interface the user can take advantage of such information to refine queries and retrieve documents through point-and-click manipulation of the authors' names.
- Source
- Information processing and management. 39(2003) no.5, S.689-706
-
Garfield, E.; Stock, W.G.: Citation Consciousness : Interview with Eugene Garfiels, chairman emeritus of ISI; Philadelphia (2002)
0.04
0.03940656 = product of:
0.07881312 = sum of:
0.07881312 = sum of:
0.00692931 = weight(_text_:s in 613) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.00692931 = score(doc=613,freq=2.0), product of:
0.057684682 = queryWeight, product of:
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.053056188 = queryNorm
0.120123915 = fieldWeight in 613, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=613)
0.07188381 = weight(_text_:22 in 613) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07188381 = score(doc=613,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18579373 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.053056188 = queryNorm
0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 613, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=613)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Password. 2002, H.6, S.22-25
-
Feitelson, D.G.; Yovel, U.: Predictive ranking of computer scientists using CiteSeer data (2004)
0.04
0.039352216 = sum of:
0.03692696 = product of:
0.14770783 = sum of:
0.14770783 = weight(_text_:authors in 1259) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.14770783 = score(doc=1259,freq=6.0), product of:
0.2418733 = queryWeight, product of:
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.053056188 = queryNorm
0.61068267 = fieldWeight in 1259, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1259)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.0024252585 = product of:
0.004850517 = sum of:
0.004850517 = weight(_text_:s in 1259) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.004850517 = score(doc=1259,freq=2.0), product of:
0.057684682 = queryWeight, product of:
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.053056188 = queryNorm
0.08408674 = fieldWeight in 1259, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1259)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- The increasing availability of digital libraries with cross-citation data on the Internet enables new studies in bibliometrics. The paper focuses on the list of 10.000 top-cited authors in computer science available as part of CiteSeer. Using data from several consecutive lists a model of how authors accrue citations with time is constructed. By comparing the rate at which individual authors accrue citations with the average rate, predictions are made of how their ranking in the list will change in the future.
- Source
- Journal of documentation. 60(2004) no.1, S.44-61
-
White, H.D.: Authors as citers over time (2001)
0.04
0.03584384 = sum of:
0.03445798 = product of:
0.13783193 = sum of:
0.13783193 = weight(_text_:authors in 5581) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.13783193 = score(doc=5581,freq=16.0), product of:
0.2418733 = queryWeight, product of:
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.053056188 = queryNorm
0.56985176 = fieldWeight in 5581, product of:
4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
16.0 = termFreq=16.0
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5581)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.001385862 = product of:
0.002771724 = sum of:
0.002771724 = weight(_text_:s in 5581) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.002771724 = score(doc=5581,freq=2.0), product of:
0.057684682 = queryWeight, product of:
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.053056188 = queryNorm
0.048049565 = fieldWeight in 5581, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5581)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- This study explores the tendency of authors to recite themselves and others in multiple works over time, using the insights gained to build citation theory. The set of all authors whom an author cites is defined as that author's citation identity. The study explains how to retrieve citation identities from the Institute for Scientific Information's files on Dialog and how to deal with idiosyncrasies of these files. As the author's oeuvre grows, the identity takes the form of a core-and-scatter distribution that may be divided into authors cited only once (unicitations) and authors cited at least twice (recitations). The latter group, especially those recited most frequently, are interpretable as symbols of a citer's main substantive concerns. As illustrated by the top recitees of eight information scientists, identities are intelligible, individualized, and wide-ranging. They are ego-centered without being egotistical. They are often affected by social ties between citers and citees, but the universal motivator seems to be the perceived relevance of the citees' works. Citing styles in identities differ: "scientific-paper style" authors recite heavily, adding to core; "bibliographic-essay style" authors are heavy on unicitations, adding to scatter; "literature-review style" authors do both at once. Identities distill aspects of citers' intellectual lives, such as orienting figures, interdisciplinary interests, bidisciplinary careers, and conduct in controversies. They can also be related to past schemes for classifying citations in categories such as positive-negative and perfunctory- organic; indeed, one author's frequent recitation of another, whether positive or negative, may be the readiest indicator of an organic relation between them. The shape of the core-and-scatter distribution of names in identities can be explained by the principle of least effort. Citers economize on effort by frequently reciting only a relatively small core of names in their identities. They also economize by frequent use of perfunctory citations, which require relatively little context, and infrequent use of negative citations, which require contexts more laborious to set
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and technology. 52(2001) no.2, S.87-108
-
Larivière, V.; Gingras, Y.; Archambault, E.: ¬The decline in the concentration of citations, 1900-2007 (2009)
0.03
0.032576513 = product of:
0.065153025 = sum of:
0.065153025 = sum of:
0.0041575856 = weight(_text_:s in 2763) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0041575856 = score(doc=2763,freq=2.0), product of:
0.057684682 = queryWeight, product of:
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.053056188 = queryNorm
0.072074346 = fieldWeight in 2763, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2763)
0.060995437 = weight(_text_:22 in 2763) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.060995437 = score(doc=2763,freq=4.0), product of:
0.18579373 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.053056188 = queryNorm
0.32829654 = fieldWeight in 2763, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2763)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 3.2009 19:22:35
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 60(2009) no.4, S.858-862
-
Leydesdorff, L.: Theories of citation? (1999)
0.03
0.03257599 = sum of:
0.030150732 = product of:
0.12060293 = sum of:
0.12060293 = weight(_text_:authors in 5130) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.12060293 = score(doc=5130,freq=4.0), product of:
0.2418733 = queryWeight, product of:
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.053056188 = queryNorm
0.49862027 = fieldWeight in 5130, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5130)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.0024252585 = product of:
0.004850517 = sum of:
0.004850517 = weight(_text_:s in 5130) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.004850517 = score(doc=5130,freq=2.0), product of:
0.057684682 = queryWeight, product of:
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.053056188 = queryNorm
0.08408674 = fieldWeight in 5130, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5130)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Citations support the communication of specialist knowledge by allowing authors and readers to make specific selections in several contexts at the same time. In the interactions between the social network of authors and the network of their reflexive communications, a sub textual code of communication with a distributed character has emerged. Citation analysis reflects on citation practices. Reference lists are aggregated in scientometric analysis using one of the available contexts to reduce the complexity: geometrical representations of dynamic operations are reflected in corresponding theories of citation. The specific contexts represented in the modern citation can be deconstructed from the perspective of the cultural evolution of scientific communication
- Source
- Scientometrics. 43(1998) no.1, S.5-25
-
Haridasan, S.; Kulshrestha, V.K.: Citation analysis of scholarly communication in the journal Knowledge Organization (2007)
0.03
0.03224187 = sum of:
0.029841485 = product of:
0.11936594 = sum of:
0.11936594 = weight(_text_:authors in 863) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.11936594 = score(doc=863,freq=12.0), product of:
0.2418733 = queryWeight, product of:
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.053056188 = queryNorm
0.49350607 = fieldWeight in 863, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=863)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.0024003836 = product of:
0.004800767 = sum of:
0.004800767 = weight(_text_:s in 863) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.004800767 = score(doc=863,freq=6.0), product of:
0.057684682 = queryWeight, product of:
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.053056188 = queryNorm
0.0832243 = fieldWeight in 863, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=863)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Purpose - Citation analysis is one of the popular methods employed for identification of core documents and complex relationship between citing and cited documents for a particular scholarly community in a geographical proximity. The present citation study is to understand the information needs, use pattern and use behaviour of library and information science researchers particularly engaged in the field of knowledge organization. Design/methodology/approach - The data relating to all the references appended to the articles during the period under study were collected and tabulated. Findings - Citation analysis of the journal for the period under study reveals that the average number of citations is around 21 per article. The major source of information is books and documents published during the later half of the century (1982-91). Authors from the USA, UK and Germany are the major contributors to the journal. India is ranked seventh in terms of contributions. Research limitations/implications - The study undertaken is limited to nine years, i.e. 1993-2001. The model citation index of the journal is analyzed using the first seven core authors. Practical implications - Ranking of periodicals helps to identify the core periodicals cited in the journal Knowledge Organization. Ranking of authors is done to know the eminent personalities in the subject, whose work is used by the authors to refine their ideas on the subject or topic. Originality/value - Model Citation Index for the first seven most cited authors was worked out and it reveals the historical relationship of cited and citing documents. This model citation index can be used to identify, the most cited authors as researchers currently working on special problems, to determine whether a paper has been cited, whether there has been a review of a subject, whether a concept has been applied, a theory confirmed or a method improved.
- Content
- Vgl..: Burton, P.F.: On reading "The banning of books in libraries". In: Library review. 56(2007) no.3, S.197-199.
- Source
- Library review. 56(2007) no.4, S.299-310
-
Case, D.O.; Higgins, G.M.: How can we investigate citation behavior? : A study of reasons for citing literature in communication (2000)
0.03
0.032189168 = sum of:
0.03045684 = product of:
0.12182736 = sum of:
0.12182736 = weight(_text_:authors in 4775) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.12182736 = score(doc=4775,freq=8.0), product of:
0.2418733 = queryWeight, product of:
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.053056188 = queryNorm
0.50368255 = fieldWeight in 4775, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4775)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.0017323275 = product of:
0.003464655 = sum of:
0.003464655 = weight(_text_:s in 4775) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.003464655 = score(doc=4775,freq=2.0), product of:
0.057684682 = queryWeight, product of:
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.053056188 = queryNorm
0.060061958 = fieldWeight in 4775, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4775)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Authors' motivation for citing documents are addressed through a literature review and an empirical study. Replicating an investigation in psychology, the works of 2 highly-cited authors in the discipline of communication were identified, and all of the authros who cited them during the period 1995-1997 were surveyed. The instrument posed 32 questions about why a certain document was cited, plus questions about the citer's relationship to the cited author and document. Most findings were similar to the psychology study, including a tendency to cite 'concept markers' representing a genre of work. Authors in communication were more likely to have an interpersonal connection to cited authors, and to cite literatire reviews - their most common reason for citation. 3 types of judgements about cited works were found to best predict citation: (1) that the work was novel, well-known, and a concept-marker; (2) that citing it might promote the authority of one's own work; and (3) that the work deserved criticism. Suggestions are made for further research, especially regarding the anomalous role of creativity in cited works
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 51(2000) no.7, S.635-645
-
Nicolaisen, J.: Citation analysis (2007)
0.03
0.028753523 = product of:
0.057507046 = sum of:
0.057507046 = product of:
0.11501409 = sum of:
0.11501409 = weight(_text_:22 in 6091) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.11501409 = score(doc=6091,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18579373 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.053056188 = 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)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 13. 7.2008 19:53:22
-
Baird, L.M.; Oppenheim, C.: Do citations matter? (1994)
0.03
0.027922278 = sum of:
0.025843486 = product of:
0.103373945 = sum of:
0.103373945 = weight(_text_:authors in 6896) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.103373945 = score(doc=6896,freq=4.0), product of:
0.2418733 = queryWeight, product of:
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.053056188 = queryNorm
0.42738882 = fieldWeight in 6896, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=6896)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.0020787928 = product of:
0.0041575856 = sum of:
0.0041575856 = weight(_text_:s in 6896) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0041575856 = score(doc=6896,freq=2.0), product of:
0.057684682 = queryWeight, product of:
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.053056188 = queryNorm
0.072074346 = fieldWeight in 6896, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=6896)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Citation indexes are based on the principle of authors citing previous articles of relevance. The paper demonstrates the long history of citing for precedent and notes how ISI's citation indexes differ from 'Shephards Citations'. The paper analyses some of the criticisms of citations counting, and some of the uses for which citation analysis has been employed. The paper also examines the idea of the development of an Acknowledgement Index, and concludes such an index is unlikely to be commercially viable. The paper describes a citation study of Eugene Garfield, and concludes that he may be the most heavily cited information scientist, that he is a heavy self-citer, and that the reasons why other authors cite Garfield are different from the reasons why he cites himself. The paper concludes that citation studies remain a valid methgod of analysis of individuals', institutions', or journals' impact, but need to be used with caution and in conjunction with other measures
- Source
- Journal of information science. 20(1994) no.1, S.2-15
-
Raan, A.F.J. van: ¬The influence of international collaboration on the impact of research results (1998)
0.03
0.027922278 = sum of:
0.025843486 = product of:
0.103373945 = sum of:
0.103373945 = weight(_text_:authors in 5120) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.103373945 = score(doc=5120,freq=4.0), product of:
0.2418733 = queryWeight, product of:
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.053056188 = queryNorm
0.42738882 = fieldWeight in 5120, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5120)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.0020787928 = product of:
0.0041575856 = sum of:
0.0041575856 = weight(_text_:s in 5120) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0041575856 = score(doc=5120,freq=2.0), product of:
0.057684682 = queryWeight, product of:
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.053056188 = queryNorm
0.072074346 = fieldWeight in 5120, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5120)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- There is an ongoing discussion on the influence of international collaboration on impact as measured by citation based indicators. Collaboration generally involves more authors than 'no collaboration' work and it is obvious that the phenomenon of self citation will be stronger (there are more authors to cite themselves). Thus it can be seen as an important 'amplifier' of measured impact. Asserts, however, that this effect should not be considered as the only or even major explanation of higher impact in the comparison between 'no collaboration' and international collaboration. Using data of an extensive bibliometric study of astronomical research in the Netherlands, proves that higher rates of self citation in international collaboration do not play any significant role as 'impact amplifier'. The central point is that proper impact measurement must involve corrections for self citations
- Source
- Scientometrics. 42(1998) no.3, S.423-428
-
Aksnes, D.W.: Citation rates and perceptions of scientific contribution (2006)
0.03
0.027922278 = sum of:
0.025843486 = product of:
0.103373945 = sum of:
0.103373945 = weight(_text_:authors in 4925) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.103373945 = score(doc=4925,freq=4.0), product of:
0.2418733 = queryWeight, product of:
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.053056188 = queryNorm
0.42738882 = fieldWeight in 4925, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4925)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.0020787928 = product of:
0.0041575856 = sum of:
0.0041575856 = weight(_text_:s in 4925) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0041575856 = score(doc=4925,freq=2.0), product of:
0.057684682 = queryWeight, product of:
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.053056188 = queryNorm
0.072074346 = fieldWeight in 4925, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4925)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- In this study scientists were asked about their own publication history and their citation counts. The study shows that the citation counts of the publications correspond reasonably well with the authors' own assessments of scientific contribution. Generally, citations proved to have the highest accuracy in identifying either major or minor contributions. Nevertheless, according to these judgments, citations are not a reliable indicator of scientific contribution at the level of the individual article. In the construction of relative citation indicators, the average citation rate of the subfield appears to be slightly more appropriate as a reference standard than the journal citation rate. The study confirms that review articles are cited more frequently than other publication types. Compared to the significance authors attach to these articles they appear to be considerably "overcited." However, there were only marginal differences in the citation rates between empirical, methods, and theoretical contributions.
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 57(2006) no.2, S.169-185
-
Garfield, E.: Recollections of Irving H. Sher 1924-1996 : Polymath/information scientist extraordinaire (2001)
0.03
0.027584592 = product of:
0.055169184 = sum of:
0.055169184 = sum of:
0.004850517 = weight(_text_:s in 6920) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.004850517 = score(doc=6920,freq=2.0), product of:
0.057684682 = queryWeight, product of:
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.053056188 = queryNorm
0.08408674 = fieldWeight in 6920, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6920)
0.050318666 = weight(_text_:22 in 6920) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.050318666 = score(doc=6920,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18579373 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.053056188 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 6920, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6920)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 16.12.2001 14:01:22
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and technology. 52(2001) no.14, S.1197-1202
-
Van der Veer Martens, B.; Goodrum, G.: ¬The diffusion of theories : a functional approach (2006)
0.03
0.027584592 = product of:
0.055169184 = sum of:
0.055169184 = sum of:
0.004850517 = weight(_text_:s in 5269) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.004850517 = score(doc=5269,freq=2.0), product of:
0.057684682 = queryWeight, product of:
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.053056188 = queryNorm
0.08408674 = fieldWeight in 5269, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5269)
0.050318666 = weight(_text_:22 in 5269) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.050318666 = score(doc=5269,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18579373 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.053056188 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 5269, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5269)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 7.2006 15:20:01
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 57(2006) no.3, S.330-341
