Search (698 results, page 3 of 35)

  • × theme_ss:"Elektronisches Publizieren"
  1. Hrachovec, H.: Offen gesagt: Beschwerden eines Archivars (2018) 0.03
    0.025188856 = product of:
      0.05037771 = sum of:
        0.05037771 = sum of:
          0.00669738 = weight(_text_:a in 4443) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.00669738 = score(doc=4443,freq=4.0), product of:
              0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046056706 = queryNorm
              0.12611452 = fieldWeight in 4443, product of:
                2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                  4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4443)
          0.043680333 = weight(_text_:22 in 4443) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.043680333 = score(doc=4443,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16128273 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046056706 = 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)
    
    Date
    20. 9.2018 12:22:52
    Location
    A
    Type
    a
  2. Schirmbacher, P.: Möglichkeiten und Grenzen des elektronischen Publizierens auf der Basis der Open-Access-Prinzipien (2006) 0.02
    0.024208048 = product of:
      0.048416097 = sum of:
        0.048416097 = sum of:
          0.0047357627 = weight(_text_:a in 26) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.0047357627 = score(doc=26,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046056706 = queryNorm
              0.089176424 = fieldWeight in 26, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=26)
          0.043680333 = weight(_text_:22 in 26) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.043680333 = score(doc=26,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16128273 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046056706 = queryNorm
              0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 26, 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=26)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    27.10.2006 14:21:22
    Type
    a
  3. Müller, S.: Schattenbibliotheken : Welche Auswirkungen haben Sci-Hub und Co. auf Verlage und Bibliotheken? (2019) 0.02
    0.024208048 = product of:
      0.048416097 = sum of:
        0.048416097 = sum of:
          0.0047357627 = weight(_text_:a in 765) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.0047357627 = score(doc=765,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046056706 = queryNorm
              0.089176424 = fieldWeight in 765, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=765)
          0.043680333 = weight(_text_:22 in 765) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.043680333 = score(doc=765,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16128273 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046056706 = 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)
    
    Source
    B.I.T.online. 22(2019) H.5, S.397-404
    Type
    a
  4. Hammerl, M.; Kempf, K.; Schäffler, H.: E-Books in wissenschaftlichen Bibliotheken : Versuch einer Bestandsaufnahme (2008) 0.02
    0.024208048 = product of:
      0.048416097 = sum of:
        0.048416097 = sum of:
          0.0047357627 = weight(_text_:a in 1802) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.0047357627 = score(doc=1802,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046056706 = queryNorm
              0.089176424 = fieldWeight in 1802, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1802)
          0.043680333 = weight(_text_:22 in 1802) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.043680333 = score(doc=1802,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16128273 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046056706 = queryNorm
              0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 1802, 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=1802)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    11. 5.2008 19:13:22
    Type
    a
  5. Krüger, N.; Pianos, T.: Lernmaterialien für junge Forschende in den Wirtschaftswissenschaften als Open Educational Resources (OER) (2021) 0.02
    0.024208048 = product of:
      0.048416097 = sum of:
        0.048416097 = sum of:
          0.0047357627 = weight(_text_:a in 252) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.0047357627 = score(doc=252,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046056706 = queryNorm
              0.089176424 = fieldWeight in 252, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=252)
          0.043680333 = weight(_text_:22 in 252) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.043680333 = score(doc=252,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16128273 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046056706 = queryNorm
              0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 252, 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=252)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    22. 5.2021 12:43:05
    Type
    a
  6. Frandsen, T.F.; Wouters, P.: Turning working papers into journal articles : an exercise in microbibliometrics (2009) 0.02
    0.023691658 = product of:
      0.047383316 = sum of:
        0.047383316 = sum of:
          0.00994303 = weight(_text_:a in 2757) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.00994303 = score(doc=2757,freq=12.0), product of:
              0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046056706 = queryNorm
              0.18723148 = fieldWeight in 2757, product of:
                3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                  12.0 = termFreq=12.0
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2757)
          0.037440285 = weight(_text_:22 in 2757) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.037440285 = score(doc=2757,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16128273 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046056706 = queryNorm
              0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2757, 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=2757)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    This article focuses on the process of scientific and scholarly communication. Data on open access publications on the Internet not only provides a supplement to the traditional citation indexes but also enables analysis of the microprocesses and daily practices that constitute scientific communication. This article focuses on a stage in the life cycle of scientific and scholarly information that precedes the publication of formal research articles in the scientific and scholarly literature. Binomial logistic regression models are used to analyse precise mechanisms at work in the transformation of a working paper (WP) into a journal article (JA) in the field of economics. The study unveils a fine-grained process of adapting WPs to their new context as JAs by deleting and adding literature references, which perhaps can be best captured by the term sculpting.
    Date
    22. 3.2009 18:59:25
    Type
    a
  7. Oppenheim, C.: Electronic scholarly publishing and open access (2009) 0.02
    0.023258494 = product of:
      0.04651699 = sum of:
        0.04651699 = sum of:
          0.009076704 = weight(_text_:a in 3662) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.009076704 = score(doc=3662,freq=10.0), product of:
              0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046056706 = queryNorm
              0.1709182 = fieldWeight in 3662, product of:
                3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                  10.0 = termFreq=10.0
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3662)
          0.037440285 = weight(_text_:22 in 3662) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.037440285 = score(doc=3662,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16128273 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046056706 = queryNorm
              0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3662, 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=3662)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    A review of recent developments in electronic publishing, with a focus on Open Access (OA) is provided. It describes the two main types of OA, i.e. the `gold' OA journal route and the 'green' repository route, highlighting the advantages and disadvantages of the two, and the reactions of the publishing industry to these developments. Quality, cost and copyright issues are explored, as well as some of the business models of OA. It is noted that whilst so far there is no evidence that a shift to OA will lead to libraries cancelling subscriptions to toll-access journals, this may happen in the future, and that despite the apparently compelling reasons for authors to move to OA, so far few have shown themselves willing to do so. Conclusions about the future of scholarly publications are drawn.
    Date
    8. 7.2010 19:22:45
    Source
    Information science in transition, Ed.: A. Gilchrist
    Type
    a
  8. Medelsohn, L.D.: Chemistry journals : the transition from paper to electronic with lessons for other disciplines (2003) 0.02
    0.022235535 = product of:
      0.04447107 = sum of:
        0.04447107 = sum of:
          0.007030784 = weight(_text_:a in 1871) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.007030784 = score(doc=1871,freq=6.0), product of:
              0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046056706 = queryNorm
              0.13239266 = fieldWeight in 1871, product of:
                2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                  6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1871)
          0.037440285 = weight(_text_:22 in 1871) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.037440285 = score(doc=1871,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16128273 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046056706 = queryNorm
              0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1871, 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=1871)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Chemical information sciences-ranging from subjectspecific bibliometrics to sophisticated theoretical systems for modeling structures and reactions-have historically led in developing new technologies. Hundreds of papers are published or presented at conferences annually in this discipline. One of the more significant conferences at which important research has historically been presented is the Tri-Society Symposium an Chemical Information, an event jointly sponsored by the American Chemical Society, the American Society for Information Science and Technology, and the Special Libraries Association and held every four years. Eight years ago, the theme of this conference was the chemist's workstation; papers were presented an developments enabling chemists to access and process a variety of different types of chemical information from their desktop or laboratory bench. Several of these papers were subsequently published as a Perspectives issue.
    Date
    19.10.2003 17:17:22
    Type
    a
  9. Digital libraries: current issues : Digital Libraries Workshop DL 94, Newark, NJ, May 19-20, 1994. Selected papers (1995) 0.02
    0.021590449 = product of:
      0.043180898 = sum of:
        0.043180898 = sum of:
          0.005740611 = weight(_text_:a in 1385) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.005740611 = score(doc=1385,freq=4.0), product of:
              0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046056706 = queryNorm
              0.10809815 = fieldWeight in 1385, product of:
                2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                  4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1385)
          0.037440285 = weight(_text_:22 in 1385) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.037440285 = score(doc=1385,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16128273 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046056706 = queryNorm
              0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1385, 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=1385)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    This volume is the first book coherently summarizing the current issues in digital libraries research, design and management. It presents, in a homogeneous way, thoroughly revised versions of 15 papers accepted for the First International Workshop on Digital Libraries, DL '94, held at Rutgers University in May 1994; in addition there are two introductory chapters provided by the volume editors, as well as a comprehensive bibliography listing 262 entries. Besides introductory aspects, the topics addressed are administration and management, information retrieval and hypertext, classification and indexing, and prototypes and applications. The volume is intended for researchers and design professionals in the field, as well as for experts from libraries administration and scientific publishing.
    Date
    22. 1.1996 18:26:45
  10. Münch, V.: They have a dream (2019) 0.02
    0.021590449 = product of:
      0.043180898 = sum of:
        0.043180898 = sum of:
          0.005740611 = weight(_text_:a in 5631) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.005740611 = score(doc=5631,freq=4.0), product of:
              0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046056706 = queryNorm
              0.10809815 = fieldWeight in 5631, product of:
                2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                  4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5631)
          0.037440285 = weight(_text_:22 in 5631) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.037440285 = score(doc=5631,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16128273 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046056706 = 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)
    
    Source
    B.I.T.online. 22(2019) H.1, S.25-39
    Type
    a
  11. Rusch-Feja, D.: ¬Die Open Archives Initiative (OAI) : Neue Zugangsformen zu wissenschaftlichen Arbeiten? (2001) 0.02
    0.020749755 = product of:
      0.04149951 = sum of:
        0.04149951 = sum of:
          0.0040592253 = weight(_text_:a in 1133) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.0040592253 = score(doc=1133,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046056706 = queryNorm
              0.07643694 = fieldWeight in 1133, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1133)
          0.037440285 = weight(_text_:22 in 1133) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.037440285 = score(doc=1133,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16128273 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046056706 = queryNorm
              0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1133, 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=1133)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    22. 4.2002 12:23:54
    Type
    a
  12. Kasperek, G.: Recherchieren - auch mal mit dem Mut zur Lücke : Literaturbezogene Arbeitsweisen bei Naturwissenschaftlern am Beispiel der Biologie (2009) 0.02
    0.020749755 = product of:
      0.04149951 = sum of:
        0.04149951 = sum of:
          0.0040592253 = weight(_text_:a in 3020) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.0040592253 = score(doc=3020,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046056706 = queryNorm
              0.07643694 = fieldWeight in 3020, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3020)
          0.037440285 = weight(_text_:22 in 3020) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.037440285 = score(doc=3020,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16128273 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046056706 = queryNorm
              0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3020, 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=3020)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    22. 7.2009 13:41:12
    Type
    a
  13. Heller, L.: Literatur- und Informationsversorgung in der Spitzenforschung (2009) 0.02
    0.020749755 = product of:
      0.04149951 = sum of:
        0.04149951 = sum of:
          0.0040592253 = weight(_text_:a in 3022) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.0040592253 = score(doc=3022,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046056706 = queryNorm
              0.07643694 = fieldWeight in 3022, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3022)
          0.037440285 = weight(_text_:22 in 3022) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.037440285 = score(doc=3022,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16128273 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046056706 = queryNorm
              0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3022, 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=3022)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    22. 7.2009 13:40:29
    Type
    a
  14. Strecker, D.: Nutzung der Schattenbibliothek Sci-Hub in Deutschland (2019) 0.02
    0.020749755 = product of:
      0.04149951 = sum of:
        0.04149951 = sum of:
          0.0040592253 = weight(_text_:a in 596) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.0040592253 = score(doc=596,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046056706 = queryNorm
              0.07643694 = fieldWeight in 596, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=596)
          0.037440285 = weight(_text_:22 in 596) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.037440285 = score(doc=596,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16128273 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046056706 = 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)
    
    Date
    1. 1.2020 13:22:34
    Type
    a
  15. Moed, H.F.; Halevi, G.: On full text download and citation distributions in scientific-scholarly journals (2016) 0.02
    0.01974305 = product of:
      0.0394861 = sum of:
        0.0394861 = sum of:
          0.008285859 = weight(_text_:a in 2646) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.008285859 = score(doc=2646,freq=12.0), product of:
              0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046056706 = queryNorm
              0.15602624 = fieldWeight in 2646, product of:
                3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                  12.0 = termFreq=12.0
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2646)
          0.03120024 = weight(_text_:22 in 2646) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.03120024 = score(doc=2646,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16128273 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046056706 = 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)
    
    Abstract
    A statistical analysis of full text downloads of articles in Elsevier's ScienceDirect covering all disciplines reveals large differences in download frequencies, their skewness, and their correlation with Scopus-based citation counts, between disciplines, journals, and document types. Download counts tend to be 2 orders of magnitude higher and less skewedly distributed than citations. A mathematical model based on the sum of two exponentials does not adequately capture monthly download counts. The degree of correlation at the article level within a journal is similar to that at the journal level in the discipline covered by that journal, suggesting that the differences between journals are, to a large extent, discipline specific. Despite the fact that in all studied journals download and citation counts per article positively correlate, little overlap may exist between the set of articles appearing in the top of the citation distribution and that with the most frequently downloaded ones. Usage and citation leaks, bulk downloading, differences between reader and author populations in a subject field, the type of document or its content, differences in obsolescence patterns between downloads and citations, and different functions of reading and citing in the research process all provide possible explanations of differences between download and citation distributions.
    Date
    22. 1.2016 14:11:17
    Type
    a
  16. Walters, W.H.; Linvill, A.C.: Bibliographic index coverage of open-access journals in six subject areas (2011) 0.02
    0.017992042 = product of:
      0.035984084 = sum of:
        0.035984084 = sum of:
          0.0047838427 = weight(_text_:a in 4635) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.0047838427 = score(doc=4635,freq=4.0), product of:
              0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046056706 = queryNorm
              0.090081796 = fieldWeight in 4635, product of:
                2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                  4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4635)
          0.03120024 = weight(_text_:22 in 4635) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.03120024 = score(doc=4635,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16128273 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046056706 = 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)
    
    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.
    Type
    a
  17. Li, X.; Thelwall, M.; Kousha, K.: ¬The role of arXiv, RePEc, SSRN and PMC in formal scholarly communication (2015) 0.02
    0.017992042 = product of:
      0.035984084 = sum of:
        0.035984084 = sum of:
          0.0047838427 = weight(_text_:a in 2593) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.0047838427 = score(doc=2593,freq=4.0), product of:
              0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046056706 = queryNorm
              0.090081796 = fieldWeight in 2593, product of:
                2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                  4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2593)
          0.03120024 = weight(_text_:22 in 2593) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.03120024 = score(doc=2593,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16128273 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046056706 = 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)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose The four major Subject Repositories (SRs), arXiv, Research Papers in Economics (RePEc), Social Science Research Network (SSRN) and PubMed Central (PMC), are all important within their disciplines but no previous study has systematically compared how often they are cited in academic publications. In response, the purpose of this paper is to report an analysis of citations to SRs from Scopus publications, 2000-2013. Design/methodology/approach Scopus searches were used to count the number of documents citing the four SRs in each year. A random sample of 384 documents citing the four SRs was then visited to investigate the nature of the citations. Findings Each SR was most cited within its own subject area but attracted substantial citations from other subject areas, suggesting that they are open to interdisciplinary uses. The proportion of documents citing each SR is continuing to increase rapidly, and the SRs all seem to attract substantial numbers of citations from more than one discipline. Research limitations/implications Scopus does not cover all publications, and most citations to documents found in the four SRs presumably cite the published version, when one exists, rather than the repository version. Practical implications SRs are continuing to grow and do not seem to be threatened by institutional repositories and so research managers should encourage their continued use within their core disciplines, including for research that aims at an audience in other disciplines. Originality/value This is the first simultaneous analysis of Scopus citations to the four most popular SRs.
    Date
    20. 1.2015 18:30:22
    Type
    a
  18. Ortega, J.L.: ¬The presence of academic journals on Twitter and its relationship with dissemination (tweets) and research impact (citations) (2017) 0.02
    0.017992042 = product of:
      0.035984084 = sum of:
        0.035984084 = sum of:
          0.0047838427 = weight(_text_:a in 4410) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.0047838427 = score(doc=4410,freq=4.0), product of:
              0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046056706 = queryNorm
              0.090081796 = fieldWeight in 4410, product of:
                2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                  4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4410)
          0.03120024 = weight(_text_:22 in 4410) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.03120024 = score(doc=4410,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16128273 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046056706 = 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)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose The purpose of this paper is to analyze the relationship between dissemination of research papers on Twitter and its influence on research impact. Design/methodology/approach Four types of journal Twitter accounts (journal, owner, publisher and no Twitter account) were defined to observe differences in the number of tweets and citations. In total, 4,176 articles from 350 journals were extracted from Plum Analytics. This altmetric provider tracks the number of tweets and citations for each paper. Student's t-test for two-paired samples was used to detect significant differences between each group of journals. Regression analysis was performed to detect which variables may influence the getting of tweets and citations. Findings The results show that journals with their own Twitter account obtain more tweets (46 percent) and citations (34 percent) than journals without a Twitter account. Followers is the variable that attracts more tweets (ß=0.47) and citations (ß=0.28) but the effect is small and the fit is not good for tweets (R2=0.46) and insignificant for citations (R2=0.18). Originality/value This is the first study that tests the performance of research journals on Twitter according to their handles, observing how the dissemination of content in this microblogging network influences the citation of their papers.
    Date
    20. 1.2015 18:30:22
    Type
    a
  19. Somers, J.: Torching the modern-day library of Alexandria : somewhere at Google there is a database containing 25 million books and nobody is allowed to read them. (2017) 0.02
    0.017720532 = product of:
      0.035441063 = sum of:
        0.035441063 = sum of:
          0.010480874 = weight(_text_:a in 3608) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.010480874 = score(doc=3608,freq=30.0), product of:
              0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046056706 = queryNorm
              0.19735932 = fieldWeight in 3608, product of:
                5.477226 = tf(freq=30.0), with freq of:
                  30.0 = termFreq=30.0
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3608)
          0.02496019 = weight(_text_:22 in 3608) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.02496019 = score(doc=3608,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16128273 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046056706 = queryNorm
              0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 3608, 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=3608)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    You were going to get one-click access to the full text of nearly every book that's ever been published. Books still in print you'd have to pay for, but everything else-a collection slated to grow larger than the holdings at the Library of Congress, Harvard, the University of Michigan, at any of the great national libraries of Europe-would have been available for free at terminals that were going to be placed in every local library that wanted one. At the terminal you were going to be able to search tens of millions of books and read every page of any book you found. You'd be able to highlight passages and make annotations and share them; for the first time, you'd be able to pinpoint an idea somewhere inside the vastness of the printed record, and send somebody straight to it with a link. Books would become as instantly available, searchable, copy-pasteable-as alive in the digital world-as web pages. It was to be the realization of a long-held dream. "The universal library has been talked about for millennia," Richard Ovenden, the head of Oxford's Bodleian Libraries, has said. "It was possible to think in the Renaissance that you might be able to amass the whole of published knowledge in a single room or a single institution." In the spring of 2011, it seemed we'd amassed it in a terminal small enough to fit on a desk. "This is a watershed event and can serve as a catalyst for the reinvention of education, research, and intellectual life," one eager observer wrote at the time. On March 22 of that year, however, the legal agreement that would have unlocked a century's worth of books and peppered the country with access terminals to a universal library was rejected under Rule 23(e)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. When the library at Alexandria burned it was said to be an "international catastrophe." When the most significant humanities project of our time was dismantled in court, the scholars, archivists, and librarians who'd had a hand in its undoing breathed a sigh of relief, for they believed, at the time, that they had narrowly averted disaster.
    Type
    a
  20. Bayer, M.: ¬Die Gier der Bits und Bytes auf Gutenberg : Elektronisches Publizieren, Drucken und das papierlose E-Book melden sich in Frankfurt zu Wort (2000) 0.02
    0.017291464 = product of:
      0.034582928 = sum of:
        0.034582928 = sum of:
          0.0033826875 = weight(_text_:a in 5391) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.0033826875 = score(doc=5391,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046056706 = queryNorm
              0.06369744 = fieldWeight in 5391, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5391)
          0.03120024 = weight(_text_:22 in 5391) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.03120024 = score(doc=5391,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16128273 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046056706 = queryNorm
              0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5391, 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=5391)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    3. 5.1997 8:44:22
    Type
    a

Years

Languages

  • e 380
  • d 311
  • f 2
  • es 1
  • sp 1
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 654
  • el 54
  • m 25
  • s 12
  • r 5
  • b 2
  • d 1
  • p 1
  • More… Less…

Subjects

Classifications