Search (26 results, page 1 of 2)

  • × theme_ss:"Elektronisches Publizieren"
  • × year_i:[2010 TO 2020}
  1. Benoit, G.; Hussey, L.: Repurposing digital objects : case studies across the publishing industry (2011) 0.03
    0.028968427 = product of:
      0.11587371 = sum of:
        0.11587371 = sum of:
          0.07138696 = weight(_text_:management in 4198) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.07138696 = score(doc=4198,freq=6.0), product of:
              0.15810528 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046906993 = queryNorm
              0.45151538 = fieldWeight in 4198, product of:
                2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                  6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4198)
          0.04448675 = weight(_text_:22 in 4198) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.04448675 = score(doc=4198,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.1642603 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046906993 = queryNorm
              0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 4198, 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=4198)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    Large, data-rich organizations have tremendously large collections of digital objects to be "repurposed," to respond quickly and economically to publishing, marketing, and information needs. Some management typically assume that a content management system, or some other technique such as OWL and RDF, will automatically address the workflow and technical issues associated with this reuse. Four case studies show that the sources of some roadblocks to agile repurposing are as much managerial and organizational as they are technical in nature. The review concludes with suggestions on how digital object repurposing can be integrated given these organizations' structures.
    Date
    22. 1.2011 14:23:07
    Theme
    Content Management System
  2. Li, X.; Thelwall, M.; Kousha, K.: ¬The role of arXiv, RePEc, SSRN and PMC in formal scholarly communication (2015) 0.02
    0.015303934 = product of:
      0.061215736 = sum of:
        0.061215736 = sum of:
          0.029439485 = weight(_text_:management in 2593) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.029439485 = score(doc=2593,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.15810528 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046906993 = queryNorm
              0.18620178 = fieldWeight in 2593, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2593)
          0.03177625 = weight(_text_:22 in 2593) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.03177625 = score(doc=2593,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.1642603 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046906993 = queryNorm
              0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2593, 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=2593)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Date
    20. 1.2015 18:30:22
    Source
    Aslib journal of information management. 67(2015) no.6, S.614-635
  3. Ortega, J.L.: ¬The presence of academic journals on Twitter and its relationship with dissemination (tweets) and research impact (citations) (2017) 0.02
    0.015303934 = product of:
      0.061215736 = sum of:
        0.061215736 = sum of:
          0.029439485 = weight(_text_:management in 4410) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.029439485 = score(doc=4410,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.15810528 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046906993 = queryNorm
              0.18620178 = fieldWeight in 4410, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4410)
          0.03177625 = weight(_text_:22 in 4410) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.03177625 = score(doc=4410,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.1642603 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046906993 = queryNorm
              0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4410, 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=4410)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Date
    20. 1.2015 18:30:22
    Source
    Aslib journal of information management. 69(2017) no.6, S.674-687
  4. Rowley, J.; Johnson, F.; Sbaffi, L.; Frass, W.; Devine, E.: Academics' behaviors and attitudes towards open access publishing in scholarly journals (2017) 0.01
    0.012348781 = product of:
      0.049395125 = sum of:
        0.049395125 = weight(_text_:services in 3597) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.049395125 = score(doc=3597,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.17221296 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.6713707 = idf(docFreq=3057, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046906993 = queryNorm
            0.28682584 = fieldWeight in 3597, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.6713707 = idf(docFreq=3057, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3597)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    While there is significant progress with policy and a lively debate regarding the potential impact of open access publishing, few studies have examined academics' behavior and attitudes to open access publishing (OAP) in scholarly journals. This article seeks to address this gap through an international and interdisciplinary survey of academics. Issues covered include: use of and intentions regarding OAP, and perceptions regarding advantages and disadvantages of OAP, journal article publication services, peer review, and reuse. Despite reporting engagement in OAP, academics were unsure about their future intentions regarding OAP. Broadly, academics identified the potential for wider circulation as the key advantage of OAP, and were more positive about its benefits than they were negative about its disadvantages. As regards services, rigorous peer review, followed by rapid publication were most valued. Academics reported strong views on reuse of their work; they were relatively happy with noncommercial reuse, but not in favor of commercial reuse, adaptations, and inclusion in anthologies. Comparing science, technology, and medicine with arts, humanities, and social sciences showed a significant difference in attitude on a number of questions, but, in general, the effect size was small, suggesting that attitudes are relatively consistent across the academic community.
  5. Costas, R.; Perianes-Rodríguez, A.; Ruiz-Castillo, J.: On the quest for currencies of science : field "exchange rates" for citations and Mendeley readership (2017) 0.01
    0.012243148 = product of:
      0.04897259 = sum of:
        0.04897259 = sum of:
          0.023551589 = weight(_text_:management in 4051) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.023551589 = score(doc=4051,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.15810528 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046906993 = queryNorm
              0.14896142 = fieldWeight in 4051, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
                0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4051)
          0.025421001 = weight(_text_:22 in 4051) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.025421001 = score(doc=4051,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.1642603 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046906993 = queryNorm
              0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 4051, 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=4051)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Date
    20. 1.2015 18:30:22
    Source
    Aslib journal of information management. 69(2017) no.5, S.557-575
  6. Engels, T.C.E; Istenic Starcic, A.; Kulczycki, E.; Pölönen, J.; Sivertsen, G.: Are book publications disappearing from scholarly communication in the social sciences and humanities? (2018) 0.01
    0.012243148 = product of:
      0.04897259 = sum of:
        0.04897259 = sum of:
          0.023551589 = weight(_text_:management in 4631) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.023551589 = score(doc=4631,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.15810528 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046906993 = queryNorm
              0.14896142 = fieldWeight in 4631, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
                0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4631)
          0.025421001 = weight(_text_:22 in 4631) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.025421001 = score(doc=4631,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.1642603 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046906993 = queryNorm
              0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 4631, 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=4631)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Date
    20. 1.2015 18:30:22
    Source
    Aslib journal of information management. 70(2018) no.6, S.592-607
  7. Fallaw, C.; Dunham, E.; Wickes, E.; Strong, D.; Stein, A.; Zhang, Q.; Rimkus, K.; ill Ingram, B.; Imker, H.J.: Overly honest data repository development (2016) 0.01
    0.012224671 = product of:
      0.048898686 = sum of:
        0.048898686 = weight(_text_:services in 3371) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.048898686 = score(doc=3371,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17221296 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.6713707 = idf(docFreq=3057, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046906993 = queryNorm
            0.28394312 = fieldWeight in 3371, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.6713707 = idf(docFreq=3057, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3371)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    After a year of development, the library at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign has launched a repository, called the Illinois Data Bank (https://databank.illinois.edu/), to provide Illinois researchers with a free, self-serve publishing platform that centralizes, preserves, and provides persistent and reliable access to Illinois research data. This article presents a holistic view of development by discussing our overarching technical, policy, and interface strategies. By openly presenting our design decisions, the rationales behind those decisions, and associated challenges this paper aims to contribute to the library community's work to develop repository services that meet growing data preservation and sharing needs.
  8. Wolchover, N.: Wie ein Aufsehen erregender Beweis kaum Beachtung fand (2017) 0.01
    0.011234601 = product of:
      0.044938404 = sum of:
        0.044938404 = product of:
          0.08987681 = sum of:
            0.08987681 = weight(_text_:22 in 3582) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.08987681 = score(doc=3582,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.1642603 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046906993 = queryNorm
                0.54716086 = fieldWeight in 3582, 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=3582)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Date
    22. 4.2017 10:42:05
    22. 4.2017 10:48:38
  9. Ginther, C.; Lackner, K.: Predatory Publishing : Herausforderung für Wissenschaftler/innen und Bibliotheken (2019) 0.01
    0.010478289 = product of:
      0.041913155 = sum of:
        0.041913155 = weight(_text_:services in 5330) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.041913155 = score(doc=5330,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17221296 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.6713707 = idf(docFreq=3057, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046906993 = queryNorm
            0.2433798 = fieldWeight in 5330, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.6713707 = idf(docFreq=3057, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5330)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    Predatory Publishing ist seit der umfangreichen internationalen Medienberichterstattung im Sommer 2018 auch der breiten Öffentlichkeit ein Begriff. Zeitschriften, Radio und Fernsehen in zahlreichen Ländern, darunter auch im deutschen Sprachraum, berichteten über mehrere Wochen ausführlich zu diesen betrügerischen Geschäftspraktiken. Das Problem ist in Fachkreisen jedoch bereits seit einigen Jahren bekannt und nimmt seither immer stärker zu. Die Publikationsservices an der Universität Graz beraten und informieren seit 2017 die Wissenschaftlerinnen und Wissenschaftler, aber auch die Studierenden zum Thema Predatory Publishing. Der folgende Beitrag bietet bietet im ersten Abschnitt wesentliche Informationen zu Predatory Publishing sowie damit in Zusammenhang stehend, auch die im Zuge der Medienkampagne 2018 kolportierten Themen Fake Science und Fake News, und wendet sich in den folgenden zwei Abschnitten der Praxis zu, wenn es zum einen um die Grundlagen der Auseinandersetzung mit Predatory Publishing an Universitäten geht und zum anderen die Aufklärungsarbeit und Services an der Universität Graz durch Mitarbeiter/innen der Universitätsbibliothek als Fallbeispiel aus der Praxis vorgestellt werden.
  10. Loos, A.: ¬Die Million ist geknackt (2015) 0.01
    0.009532874 = product of:
      0.038131498 = sum of:
        0.038131498 = product of:
          0.076262996 = sum of:
            0.076262996 = weight(_text_:22 in 4208) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.076262996 = score(doc=4208,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1642603 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046906993 = queryNorm
                0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 4208, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4208)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Date
    7. 4.2015 17:22:03
  11. Salminen, A.; Jauhiainen, E.; Nurmeksela, R.: ¬A life cycle model of XML documents (2014) 0.01
    0.008831846 = product of:
      0.035327382 = sum of:
        0.035327382 = product of:
          0.070654765 = sum of:
            0.070654765 = weight(_text_:management in 1553) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.070654765 = score(doc=1553,freq=8.0), product of:
                0.15810528 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046906993 = queryNorm
                0.44688427 = fieldWeight in 1553, product of:
                  2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                    8.0 = termFreq=8.0
                  3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1553)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    Electronic documents produced in business processes are valuable information resources for organizations. In many cases they have to be accessible long after the life of the business processes or information systems in connection with which they were created. To improve the management and preservation of documents, organizations are deploying Extensible Markup Language (XML) as a standardized format for documents. The goal of this paper is to increase understanding of XML document management and provide a framework to enable the analysis and description of the management of XML documents throughout their life. We followed the design science approach. We introduce a document life cycle model consisting of five phases. For each of the phases we describe the typical activities related to the management of XML documents. Furthermore, we also identify the typical actors, systems, and types of content items associated with the activities of the phases. We demonstrate the use of the model in two case studies: one concerning the State Budget Proposal of the Finnish government and the other concerning a faculty council meeting agenda at a university.
  12. Schleim, S.: Warum die Wissenschaft nicht frei ist (2017) 0.01
    0.0063552503 = product of:
      0.025421001 = sum of:
        0.025421001 = product of:
          0.050842002 = sum of:
            0.050842002 = weight(_text_:22 in 3882) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.050842002 = score(doc=3882,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1642603 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046906993 = queryNorm
                0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 3882, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3882)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Date
    9.10.2017 15:48:22
  13. Müller, S.: Schattenbibliotheken : Welche Auswirkungen haben Sci-Hub und Co. auf Verlage und Bibliotheken? (2019) 0.01
    0.0055608437 = product of:
      0.022243375 = sum of:
        0.022243375 = product of:
          0.04448675 = sum of:
            0.04448675 = weight(_text_:22 in 765) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.04448675 = score(doc=765,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1642603 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046906993 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 765, 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=765)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Source
    B.I.T.online. 22(2019) H.5, S.397-404
  14. Schmale, W.: Strategische Optionen für universitäre Repositorien in den Digital Humanities (2018) 0.01
    0.0055608437 = product of:
      0.022243375 = sum of:
        0.022243375 = product of:
          0.04448675 = sum of:
            0.04448675 = weight(_text_:22 in 3909) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.04448675 = score(doc=3909,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1642603 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046906993 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 3909, 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=3909)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Date
    20. 9.2018 12:22:39
  15. Hrachovec, H.: Offen gesagt: Beschwerden eines Archivars (2018) 0.01
    0.0055608437 = product of:
      0.022243375 = sum of:
        0.022243375 = product of:
          0.04448675 = sum of:
            0.04448675 = weight(_text_:22 in 4443) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.04448675 = score(doc=4443,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1642603 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046906993 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 4443, 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=4443)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Date
    20. 9.2018 12:22:52
  16. Münch, V.: They have a dream (2019) 0.00
    0.004766437 = product of:
      0.019065749 = sum of:
        0.019065749 = product of:
          0.038131498 = sum of:
            0.038131498 = weight(_text_:22 in 5631) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.038131498 = score(doc=5631,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1642603 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046906993 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 5631, 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=5631)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Source
    B.I.T.online. 22(2019) H.1, S.25-39
  17. Strecker, D.: Nutzung der Schattenbibliothek Sci-Hub in Deutschland (2019) 0.00
    0.004766437 = product of:
      0.019065749 = sum of:
        0.019065749 = product of:
          0.038131498 = sum of:
            0.038131498 = weight(_text_:22 in 596) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.038131498 = score(doc=596,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1642603 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046906993 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 596, 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=596)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Date
    1. 1.2020 13:22:34
  18. Geschuhn, K.; Sikora, A.: Management von Article Processing Charges : Herausforderungen für Bibliotheken (2015) 0.00
    0.004415923 = product of:
      0.017663691 = sum of:
        0.017663691 = product of:
          0.035327382 = sum of:
            0.035327382 = weight(_text_:management in 2147) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.035327382 = score(doc=2147,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15810528 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046906993 = queryNorm
                0.22344214 = fieldWeight in 2147, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2147)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
  19. Walters, W.H.; Linvill, A.C.: Bibliographic index coverage of open-access journals in six subject areas (2011) 0.00
    0.003972031 = product of:
      0.015888125 = sum of:
        0.015888125 = product of:
          0.03177625 = sum of:
            0.03177625 = weight(_text_:22 in 4635) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03177625 = score(doc=4635,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1642603 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046906993 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4635, 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=4635)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    We investigate the extent to which open-access (OA) journals and articles in biology, computer science, economics, history, medicine, and psychology are indexed in each of 11 bibliographic databases. We also look for variations in index coverage by journal subject, journal size, publisher type, publisher size, date of first OA issue, region of publication, language of publication, publication fee, and citation impact factor. Two databases, Biological Abstracts and PubMed, provide very good coverage of the OA journal literature, indexing 60 to 63% of all OA articles in their disciplines. Five databases provide moderately good coverage (22-41%), and four provide relatively poor coverage (0-12%). OA articles in biology journals, English-only journals, high-impact journals, and journals that charge publication fees of $1,000 or more are especially likely to be indexed. Conversely, articles from OA publishers in Africa, Asia, or Central/South America are especially unlikely to be indexed. Four of the 11 databases index commercially published articles at a substantially higher rate than articles published by universities, scholarly societies, nonprofit publishers, or governments. Finally, three databases-EBSCO Academic Search Complete, ProQuest Research Library, and Wilson OmniFile-provide less comprehensive coverage of OA articles than of articles in comparable subscription journals.
  20. Moed, H.F.; Halevi, G.: On full text download and citation distributions in scientific-scholarly journals (2016) 0.00
    0.003972031 = product of:
      0.015888125 = sum of:
        0.015888125 = product of:
          0.03177625 = sum of:
            0.03177625 = weight(_text_:22 in 2646) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03177625 = score(doc=2646,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1642603 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046906993 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2646, 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=2646)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Date
    22. 1.2016 14:11:17