-
Zhang, J.; Yu, Q.; Zheng, F.; Long, C.; Lu, Z.; Duan, Z.: Comparing keywords plus of WOS and author keywords : a case study of patient adherence research (2016)
0.09
0.089730985 = product of:
0.17946197 = sum of:
0.17946197 = product of:
0.35892394 = sum of:
0.35892394 = weight(_text_:plus in 2857) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.35892394 = score(doc=2857,freq=16.0), product of:
0.3101809 = queryWeight, product of:
6.1714344 = idf(docFreq=250, maxDocs=44218)
0.05026075 = queryNorm
1.157144 = fieldWeight in 2857, product of:
4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
16.0 = termFreq=16.0
6.1714344 = idf(docFreq=250, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2857)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Bibliometric analysis based on literature in the Web of Science (WOS) has become an increasingly popular method for visualizing the structure of scientific fields. Keywords Plus and Author Keywords are commonly selected as units of analysis, despite the limited research evidence demonstrating the effectiveness of Keywords Plus. This study was conceived to evaluate the efficacy of Keywords Plus as a parameter for capturing the content and scientific concepts presented in articles. Using scientific papers about patient adherence that were retrieved from WOS, a comparative assessment of Keywords Plus and Author Keywords was performed at the scientific field level and the document level, respectively. Our search yielded more Keywords Plus terms than Author Keywords, and the Keywords Plus terms were more broadly descriptive. Keywords Plus is as effective as Author Keywords in terms of bibliometric analysis investigating the knowledge structure of scientific fields, but it is less comprehensive in representing an article's content.
-
Milojevic, S.; Sugimoto, C.R.; Yan, E.; Ding, Y.: ¬The cognitive structure of Library and Information Science : analysis of article title words (2011)
0.03
0.026437245 = product of:
0.05287449 = sum of:
0.05287449 = product of:
0.10574898 = sum of:
0.10574898 = weight(_text_:plus in 4608) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.10574898 = score(doc=4608,freq=2.0), product of:
0.3101809 = queryWeight, product of:
6.1714344 = idf(docFreq=250, maxDocs=44218)
0.05026075 = queryNorm
0.3409268 = fieldWeight in 4608, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
6.1714344 = idf(docFreq=250, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4608)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- This study comprises a suite of analyses of words in article titles in order to reveal the cognitive structure of Library and Information Science (LIS). The use of title words to elucidate the cognitive structure of LIS has been relatively neglected. The present study addresses this gap by performing (a) co-word analysis and hierarchical clustering, (b) multidimensional scaling, and (c) determination of trends in usage of terms. The study is based on 10,344 articles published between 1988 and 2007 in 16 LIS journals. Methodologically, novel aspects of this study are: (a) its large scale, (b) removal of non-specific title words based on the "word concentration" measure (c) identification of the most frequent terms that include both single words and phrases, and (d) presentation of the relative frequencies of terms using "heatmaps". Conceptually, our analysis reveals that LIS consists of three main branches: the traditionally recognized library-related and information-related branches, plus an equally distinct bibliometrics/scientometrics branch. The three branches focus on: libraries, information, and science, respectively. In addition, our study identifies substructures within each branch. We also tentatively identify "information seeking behavior" as a branch that is establishing itself separate from the three main branches. Furthermore, we find that cognitive concepts in LIS evolve continuously, with no stasis since 1992. The most rapid development occurred between 1998 and 2001, influenced by the increased focus on the Internet. The change in the cognitive landscape is found to be driven by the emergence of new information technologies, and the retirement of old ones.
-
Marx, W.; Bornmann, L.: On the problems of dealing with bibliometric data (2014)
0.02
0.02042891 = product of:
0.04085782 = sum of:
0.04085782 = product of:
0.08171564 = sum of:
0.08171564 = weight(_text_:22 in 1239) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08171564 = score(doc=1239,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17600457 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05026075 = queryNorm
0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 1239, 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=1239)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 18. 3.2014 19:13:22
-
Bornmann, L.; Mutz, R.: From P100 to P100' : a new citation-rank approach (2014)
0.01
0.013619275 = product of:
0.02723855 = sum of:
0.02723855 = product of:
0.0544771 = sum of:
0.0544771 = weight(_text_:22 in 1431) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0544771 = score(doc=1431,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17600457 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05026075 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 1431, 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=1431)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 8.2014 17:05:18
-
Ohly, P.: Dimensions of globality : a bibliometric analysis (2016)
0.01
0.013619275 = product of:
0.02723855 = sum of:
0.02723855 = product of:
0.0544771 = sum of:
0.0544771 = weight(_text_:22 in 4942) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0544771 = score(doc=4942,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17600457 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05026075 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 4942, 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=4942)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 20. 1.2019 11:22:31
-
Crespo, J.A.; Herranz, N.; Li, Y.; Ruiz-Castillo, J.: ¬The effect on citation inequality of differences in citation practices at the web of science subject category level (2014)
0.01
0.012037852 = product of:
0.024075704 = sum of:
0.024075704 = product of:
0.048151407 = sum of:
0.048151407 = weight(_text_:22 in 1291) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.048151407 = score(doc=1291,freq=4.0), product of:
0.17600457 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05026075 = queryNorm
0.27358043 = fieldWeight in 1291, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1291)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- This article studies the impact of differences in citation practices at the subfield, or Web of Science subject category level, using the model introduced in Crespo, Li, and Ruiz-Castillo (2013a), according to which the number of citations received by an article depends on its underlying scientific influence and the field to which it belongs. We use the same Thomson Reuters data set of about 4.4 million articles used in Crespo et al. (2013a) to analyze 22 broad fields. The main results are the following: First, when the classification system goes from 22 fields to 219 subfields the effect on citation inequality of differences in citation practices increases from ?14% at the field level to 18% at the subfield level. Second, we estimate a set of exchange rates (ERs) over a wide [660, 978] citation quantile interval to express the citation counts of articles into the equivalent counts in the all-sciences case. In the fractional case, for example, we find that in 187 of 219 subfields the ERs are reliable in the sense that the coefficient of variation is smaller than or equal to 0.10. Third, in the fractional case the normalization of the raw data using the ERs (or subfield mean citations) as normalization factors reduces the importance of the differences in citation practices from 18% to 3.8% (3.4%) of overall citation inequality. Fourth, the results in the fractional case are essentially replicated when we adopt a multiplicative approach.
-
Yan, E.: Finding knowledge paths among scientific disciplines (2014)
0.01
0.012037852 = product of:
0.024075704 = sum of:
0.024075704 = product of:
0.048151407 = sum of:
0.048151407 = weight(_text_:22 in 1534) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.048151407 = score(doc=1534,freq=4.0), product of:
0.17600457 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05026075 = queryNorm
0.27358043 = fieldWeight in 1534, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1534)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 26.10.2014 20:22:22
-
Zhu, Q.; Kong, X.; Hong, S.; Li, J.; He, Z.: Global ontology research progress : a bibliometric analysis (2015)
0.01
0.012037852 = product of:
0.024075704 = sum of:
0.024075704 = product of:
0.048151407 = sum of:
0.048151407 = weight(_text_:22 in 2590) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.048151407 = score(doc=2590,freq=4.0), product of:
0.17600457 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05026075 = queryNorm
0.27358043 = fieldWeight in 2590, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2590)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 20. 1.2015 18:30:22
17. 9.2018 18:22:23
-
Campanario, J.M.: Large increases and decreases in journal impact factors in only one year : the effect of journal self-citations (2011)
0.01
0.011916866 = product of:
0.023833731 = sum of:
0.023833731 = product of:
0.047667462 = sum of:
0.047667462 = weight(_text_:22 in 4187) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.047667462 = score(doc=4187,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17600457 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05026075 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 4187, 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=4187)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 1.2011 12:53:00
-
Ding, Y.: Applying weighted PageRank to author citation networks (2011)
0.01
0.011916866 = product of:
0.023833731 = sum of:
0.023833731 = product of:
0.047667462 = sum of:
0.047667462 = weight(_text_:22 in 4188) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.047667462 = score(doc=4188,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17600457 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05026075 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 4188, 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=4188)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 1.2011 13:02:21
-
Schlögl, C.: Internationale Sichtbarkeit der europäischen und insbesondere der deutschsprachigen Informationswissenschaft (2013)
0.01
0.011916866 = product of:
0.023833731 = sum of:
0.023833731 = product of:
0.047667462 = sum of:
0.047667462 = weight(_text_:22 in 900) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.047667462 = score(doc=900,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17600457 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05026075 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 900, 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=900)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 3.2013 14:04:09
-
Vieira, E.S.; Cabral, J.A.S.; Gomes, J.A.N.F.: Definition of a model based on bibliometric indicators for assessing applicants to academic positions (2014)
0.01
0.011916866 = product of:
0.023833731 = sum of:
0.023833731 = product of:
0.047667462 = sum of:
0.047667462 = weight(_text_:22 in 1221) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.047667462 = score(doc=1221,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17600457 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05026075 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 1221, 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=1221)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 18. 3.2014 18:22:21
-
Ajiferuke, I.; Lu, K.; Wolfram, D.: ¬A comparison of citer and citation-based measure outcomes for multiple disciplines (2010)
0.01
0.010214455 = product of:
0.02042891 = sum of:
0.02042891 = product of:
0.04085782 = sum of:
0.04085782 = weight(_text_:22 in 4000) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04085782 = score(doc=4000,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17600457 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05026075 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4000, 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=4000)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 28. 9.2010 12:54:22
-
Albarrán, P.; Ruiz-Castillo, J.: References made and citations received by scientific articles (2011)
0.01
0.010214455 = product of:
0.02042891 = sum of:
0.02042891 = product of:
0.04085782 = sum of:
0.04085782 = weight(_text_:22 in 4185) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04085782 = score(doc=4185,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17600457 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05026075 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4185, 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=4185)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- This article studies massive evidence about references made and citations received after a 5-year citation window by 3.7 million articles published in 1998 to 2002 in 22 scientific fields. We find that the distributions of references made and citations received share a number of basic features across sciences. Reference distributions are rather skewed to the right while citation distributions are even more highly skewed: The mean is about 20 percentage points to the right of the median, and articles with a remarkable or an outstanding number of citations represent about 9% of the total. Moreover, the existence of a power law representing the upper tail of citation distributions cannot be rejected in 17 fields whose articles represent 74.7% of the total. Contrary to the evidence in other contexts, the value of the scale parameter is above 3.5 in 13 of the 17 cases. Finally, power laws are typically small, but capture a considerable proportion of the total citations received.
-
D'Angelo, C.A.; Giuffrida, C.; Abramo, G.: ¬A heuristic approach to author name disambiguation in bibliometrics databases for large-scale research assessments (2011)
0.01
0.010214455 = product of:
0.02042891 = sum of:
0.02042891 = product of:
0.04085782 = sum of:
0.04085782 = weight(_text_:22 in 4190) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04085782 = score(doc=4190,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17600457 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05026075 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4190, 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=4190)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 1.2011 13:06:52
-
Hicks, D.; Wang, J.: Coverage and overlap of the new social sciences and humanities journal lists (2011)
0.01
0.010214455 = product of:
0.02042891 = sum of:
0.02042891 = product of:
0.04085782 = sum of:
0.04085782 = weight(_text_:22 in 4192) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04085782 = score(doc=4192,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17600457 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05026075 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4192, 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=4192)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 1.2011 13:21:28
-
Jovanovic, M.: ¬Eine kleine Frühgeschichte der Bibliometrie (2012)
0.01
0.010214455 = product of:
0.02042891 = sum of:
0.02042891 = product of:
0.04085782 = sum of:
0.04085782 = weight(_text_:22 in 326) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04085782 = score(doc=326,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17600457 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05026075 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 326, 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=326)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 7.2012 19:23:32
-
¬Die deutsche Zeitschrift für Dokumentation, Informationswissenschaft und Informationspraxis von 1950 bis 2011 : eine vorläufige Bilanz in vier Abschnitten (2012)
0.01
0.010214455 = product of:
0.02042891 = sum of:
0.02042891 = product of:
0.04085782 = sum of:
0.04085782 = weight(_text_:22 in 402) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04085782 = score(doc=402,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17600457 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05026075 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 402, 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=402)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 7.2012 19:35:26
-
Frandsen, T.F.; Nicolaisen, J.: ¬The ripple effect : citation chain reactions of a nobel prize (2013)
0.01
0.010214455 = product of:
0.02042891 = sum of:
0.02042891 = product of:
0.04085782 = sum of:
0.04085782 = weight(_text_:22 in 654) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04085782 = score(doc=654,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17600457 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05026075 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 654, 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=654)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 3.2013 16:21:09
-
Bornmann, L.: How to analyze percentile citation impact data meaningfully in bibliometrics : the statistical analysis of distributions, percentile rank classes, and top-cited papers (2013)
0.01
0.010214455 = product of:
0.02042891 = sum of:
0.02042891 = product of:
0.04085782 = sum of:
0.04085782 = weight(_text_:22 in 656) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04085782 = score(doc=656,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17600457 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05026075 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 656, 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=656)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 3.2013 19:44:17
