Search (6 results, page 1 of 1)

0.024415439 = product of:
  0.048830878 = sum of:
    0.048830878 = product of:
      0.097661756 = sum of:
        0.097661756 = weight(_text_:22 in 5666) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.097661756 = score(doc=5666,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18030031 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05148746 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 5666, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=5666)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Footnote

Rez. in: Journal of library and information science 22(1996) no.2, S.116-117 (L.C. Smith)

0.01395168 = product of:
  0.02790336 = sum of:
    0.02790336 = product of:
      0.05580672 = sum of:
        0.05580672 = weight(_text_:22 in 4654) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05580672 = score(doc=4654,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18030031 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05148746 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 4654, 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=4654)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

22. 1.2017 17:12:50

0.013174374 = product of:
  0.026348747 = sum of:
    0.026348747 = product of:
      0.052697495 = sum of:
        0.052697495 = weight(_text_:y in 3805) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.052697495 = score(doc=3805,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.24777827 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.8124003 = idf(docFreq=976, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05148746 = queryNorm
            0.21268006 = fieldWeight in 3805, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.8124003 = idf(docFreq=976, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3805)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

0.008359788 = product of:
  0.016719576 = sum of:
    0.016719576 = product of:
      0.066878304 = sum of:
        0.066878304 = weight(_text_:authors in 3801) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.066878304 = score(doc=3801,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.23472176 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05148746 = queryNorm
            0.28492588 = fieldWeight in 3801, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3801)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

Frontmatter -- -- Foreword -- -- Prologue -- -- Contents -- -- Introduction -- -- Part I: Critical informetrics -- -- The Incessant Chattering of Texts -- -- Informetrics Needs a Foundation in the Theory of Science -- -- Part II: Citation theories -- -- Referencing as Cooperation or Competition -- -- Semiotics and Citations -- -- Data Citation as a Bibliometric Oxymoron -- -- Part III: Statistical theories -- -- TypeToken Theory and Bibliometrics -- -- From a Success Index to a Success Multiplier -- -- From Matthew to Hirsch: A Success-Breeds-Success Story -- -- Informations Magic Numbers: The Numerology of Information Science -- -- Part IV: Authorship theories -- -- Authors as Persons and Authors as Bundles of Words -- -- The Angle Sum Theory: Exploring the Literature on Acknowledgments in Scholarly Communication -- -- The Flesh of Science: Somatics and Semiotics -- -- Part V: Knowledge organization theories -- -- Informetric Analyses of Knowledge Organization Systems (KOSs) -- -- Information, Meaning, and Intellectual Organization in Networks of Inter-Human Communication -- -- Modeling the Structure and Dynamics of Science Using Books -- -- Part VI: Altmetric theories -- -- Webometrics and Altmetrics: Home Birth vs. Hospital Birth -- -- Scientific Revolution in Scientometrics: The Broadening of Impact from Citation to Societal -- -- Altmetrics as Traces of the Computerization of the Research Process -- -- Interpreting Altmetrics: Viewing Acts on Social Media through the Lens of Citation and Social Theories -- -- Biographical information for the editor and contributors -- -- Index

0.007389079 = product of:
  0.014778158 = sum of:
    0.014778158 = product of:
      0.05911263 = sum of:
        0.05911263 = weight(_text_:authors in 5226) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05911263 = score(doc=5226,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.23472176 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05148746 = queryNorm
            0.25184128 = fieldWeight in 5226, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5226)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Aims to inform researchers about metrics so that they become aware of the evaluative techniques being applied to their scientific output. Understanding these concepts will help them during their funding initiatives, and in hiring and tenure. The book not only describes what indicators do (or are designed to do, which is not always the same thing), but also gives precise mathematical formulae so that indicators can be properly understood and evaluated. Metrics have become a critical issue in science, with widespread international discussion taking place on the subject across scientific journals and organizations. As researchers should know the publication-citation context, the mathematical formulae of indicators being used by evaluating committees and their consequences, and how such indicators might be misused, this book provides an ideal tome on the topic. Provides researchers with a detailed understanding of bibliometric indicators and their applications. Empowers researchers looking to understand the indicators relevant to their work and careers. Presents an informed and rounded picture of bibliometrics, including the strengths and shortcomings of particular indicators. Supplies the mathematics behind bibliometric indicators so they can be properly understood. Written by authors with longstanding expertise who are considered global leaders in the field of bibliometrics

0.0059112627 = product of:
  0.011822525 = sum of:
    0.011822525 = product of:
      0.0472901 = sum of:
        0.0472901 = weight(_text_:authors in 3137) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0472901 = score(doc=3137,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.23472176 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05148746 = queryNorm
            0.20147301 = fieldWeight in 3137, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3137)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

"Thomson Reuters' citation indexes i.e. SCI, SSCI and AHCI are said to be "authoritative". Due to the huge influence of these databases on global academic evaluation of productivity and impact, Terje Tüür-Fröhlich decided to conduct case studies on the data quality of Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI) records. Tüür-Fröhlich investigated articles from social science and law. The main findings: SSCI records contain tremendous amounts of "trivial errors", not only misspellings and typos as previously mentioned in bibliometrics and scientometrics literature. But Tüür-Fröhlich's research documented fatal errors which have not been mentioned in the scientometrics literature yet at all. Tüür-Fröhlich found more than 80 fatal mutations and mutilations of Pierre Bourdieu (e.g. "Atkinson" or "Pierre, B. and "Pierri, B."). SSCI even generated zombie references (phantom authors and works) by data fields' confusion - a deadly sin for a database producer - as fragments of Patent Laws were indexed as fictional author surnames/initials. Additionally, horrific OCR-errors (e.g. "nuxure" instead of "Nature" as journal title) were identified. Tüür-Fröhlich´s extensive quantitative case study of an article of the Harvard Law Review resulted in a devastating finding: only 1% of all correct references from the original article were indexed by SSCI without any mistake or error. Many scientific communication experts and database providers' believe that errors in databanks are of less importance: There are many errors, yes - but they would counterbalance each other, errors would not result in citation losses and would not bear any effect on retrieval and evaluation outcomes. Terje Tüür-Fröhlich claims the contrary: errors and inconsistencies are not evenly distributed but linked with languages biases and publication cultures."