Search (107 results, page 1 of 6)

  • × theme_ss:"Informetrie"
  • × year_i:[1990 TO 2000}
  1. Kreider, J.: ¬The correlation of local citation data with citation data from Journal Citation Reports (1999) 0.27 
    0.26587605 = product of:
  0.39881408 = sum of:
    0.2417184 = weight(_text_:citation in 102) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.2417184 = score(doc=102,freq=22.0), product of:
        0.23445003 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04999695 = queryNorm
        1.0310018 = fieldWeight in 102, product of:
          4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
            22.0 = termFreq=22.0
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=102)
    0.15709569 = sum of:
      0.11645231 = weight(_text_:reports in 102) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.11645231 = score(doc=102,freq=6.0), product of:
          0.2251839 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.503953 = idf(docFreq=1329, maxDocs=44218)
            0.04999695 = queryNorm
          0.51714313 = fieldWeight in 102, product of:
            2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
              6.0 = termFreq=6.0
            4.503953 = idf(docFreq=1329, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=102)
      0.04064338 = weight(_text_:22 in 102) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04064338 = score(doc=102,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1750808 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.04999695 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 102, 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=102)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    University librarians continue to face the difficult task of determining which journals remain crucial for their collections during these times of static financial resources and escalating journal costs. One evaluative tool, Journal Citation Reports (JCR), recently has become available on CD-ROM, making it simpler for librarians to use its citation data as input for ranking journals. But many librarians remain unconvinced that the global citation data from the JCR bears enough correspondence to their local situation to be useful. In this project, I explore the correlation between global citation data available from JCR with local citation data generated specifically for the University of British Columbia, for 20 subject fields in the sciences and social sciences. The significant correlations obtained in this study suggest that large research-oriented university libraries could consider substituting global citation data for local citation data when evaluating their journals, with certain cautions.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
    Object
    Journal Citation Reports
  2. Osareh, F.: Bibliometrics, citation analysis and co-citation analysis : a review of literature II (1996) 0.22 
    0.22423057 = product of:
  0.33634585 = sum of:
    0.29152334 = weight(_text_:citation in 7105) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.29152334 = score(doc=7105,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.23445003 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04999695 = queryNorm
        1.2434349 = fieldWeight in 7105, product of:
          4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
            18.0 = termFreq=18.0
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=7105)
    0.044822514 = product of:
      0.08964503 = sum of:
        0.08964503 = weight(_text_:reports in 7105) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08964503 = score(doc=7105,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.2251839 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.503953 = idf(docFreq=1329, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04999695 = queryNorm
            0.39809695 = fieldWeight in 7105, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.503953 = idf(docFreq=1329, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=7105)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    Part 2 of a 2 part article reviewing the technique of bibliometrics and one of its most widely used methods, citation analysis. Reports on studies of author co-citation, periodical by periodical citation analysis and country by country citation analysis in addition to the mapping of science as an application of citation analysis. Considers the limitations, problems and reliability of citation analysis
    Theme
    Citation indexing
  3. Tsay, M.-Y.: From Science Citation Index to Journal Citation Reports, amd criteria for journals evaluation (1997) 0.20 
    0.19526169 = product of:
  0.29289252 = sum of:
    0.224962 = weight(_text_:citation in 657) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.224962 = score(doc=657,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.23445003 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04999695 = queryNorm
        0.9595307 = fieldWeight in 657, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=657)
    0.06793051 = product of:
      0.13586102 = sum of:
        0.13586102 = weight(_text_:reports in 657) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.13586102 = score(doc=657,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.2251839 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.503953 = idf(docFreq=1329, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04999695 = queryNorm
            0.60333365 = fieldWeight in 657, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              4.503953 = idf(docFreq=1329, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=657)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    Investigates the characteristics of Journal Citation Reports (JCR) through the study of the Science Citation Index (SCI). Other criteria for evaluating a journal are also discussed. The compilation process of SCI data, and the characteristics, applications and limitations of SCI are studied. A detailed description of JCR is provided including: journal ranking listing, citing journal listing, cited journal listing, subject category listing, source data, impact factor, immediacy index, cited half-life and citing half-life. The applications and limitations of JCR are also explored. In addition to the criteria listed in JCR, the size, circulation and influence of journals are also considered significant criteria fir evaluation purposes
    Object
    Science Citation Index
    Journal Citation Reports
    Theme
    Citation indexing
  4. Neth, M.: Citation analysis and the Web (1998) 0.18 
    0.18208592 = product of:
  0.27312887 = sum of:
    0.14727221 = weight(_text_:citation in 108) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.14727221 = score(doc=108,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.23445003 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04999695 = queryNorm
        0.62816036 = fieldWeight in 108, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=108)
    0.12585667 = sum of:
      0.07843939 = weight(_text_:reports in 108) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.07843939 = score(doc=108,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.2251839 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.503953 = idf(docFreq=1329, maxDocs=44218)
            0.04999695 = queryNorm
          0.34833482 = fieldWeight in 108, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.503953 = idf(docFreq=1329, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=108)
      0.047417276 = weight(_text_:22 in 108) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.047417276 = score(doc=108,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1750808 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.04999695 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 108, 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=108)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    Citation analysis has long been used by librarians as an important tool of collection development and the advent of Internet technology and especially the WWW adds a new facet to the role played by citation analysis. One of the reasons why librarians create WWW homepages is to provide users with further sources of interest or reference and to do this libraries include links from their own homepages to other information sources. Reports current research on the analysis of WWW pages as an introduction to an examination of the homepages of 25 art libraries to determine what sites are most often included. The types of linked sites are analyzed based on 3 criteria: location, focus and evidence that the link was evaluated before the connection was establisheds
    Date
    10. 1.1999 16:22:37
  5. Tonta, Y.: Scholarly communication and the use of networked information sources (1996) 0.17 
    0.17463975 = product of:
  0.2619596 = sum of:
    0.12623332 = weight(_text_:citation in 6389) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.12623332 = score(doc=6389,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.23445003 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04999695 = queryNorm
        0.5384232 = fieldWeight in 6389, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=6389)
    0.13572629 = sum of:
      0.09508291 = weight(_text_:reports in 6389) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.09508291 = score(doc=6389,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.2251839 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.503953 = idf(docFreq=1329, maxDocs=44218)
            0.04999695 = queryNorm
          0.4222456 = fieldWeight in 6389, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            4.503953 = idf(docFreq=1329, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=6389)
      0.04064338 = weight(_text_:22 in 6389) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04064338 = score(doc=6389,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1750808 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.04999695 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 6389, 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=6389)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    Examines the use of networked information sources in scholarly communication. Networked information sources are defined broadly to cover: documents and images stored on electronic network hosts; data files; newsgroups; listservs; online information services and electronic periodicals. Reports results of a survey to determine how heavily, if at all, networked information sources are cited in scholarly printed periodicals published in 1993 and 1994. 27 printed periodicals, representing a wide range of subjects and the most influential periodicals in their fields, were identified through the Science Citation Index and Social Science Citation Index Journal Citation Reports. 97 articles were selected for further review and references, footnotes and bibliographies were checked for references to networked information sources. Only 2 articles were found to contain such references. Concludes that, although networked information sources facilitate scholars' work to a great extent during the research process, scholars have yet to incorporate such sources in the bibliographies of their published articles
    Source
    IFLA journal. 22(1996) no.3, S.240-245
  6. Magri, M.; Solari, A.: ¬The SCI Journal Citation Reports : a potential tool for studying journals? (1996) 0.17 
    0.17203873 = product of:
  0.2580581 = sum of:
    0.1901276 = weight(_text_:citation in 5076) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.1901276 = score(doc=5076,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.23445003 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04999695 = queryNorm
        0.8109515 = fieldWeight in 5076, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5076)
    0.06793051 = product of:
      0.13586102 = sum of:
        0.13586102 = weight(_text_:reports in 5076) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.13586102 = score(doc=5076,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.2251839 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.503953 = idf(docFreq=1329, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04999695 = queryNorm
            0.60333365 = fieldWeight in 5076, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              4.503953 = idf(docFreq=1329, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5076)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    Analyses 6 indicators of the Science Citation Index Journals Citation Reports over a 19 year period: number of total citations, number of citations to the previous 2 years, number of source items, impact factor, immediacy index and cited half life. Proposes a box plot method to aggregate the values of each indicator so as to obtain at a glance portrayals of the JCR population from 1974 to 1993. This 'rereading' of the JCR, which presents the JCR product differently, makes it possible to shed new light on the large sub population of journals not at the top of the rankings
    Object
    Journal Citation Reports
    Theme
    Citation indexing
  7. Leydesdorff, L.: ¬The generation of aggregated journal-journal citation maps on the basis of the CD-ROM version of the Science Citation Index (1994) 0.16 
    0.16499603 = product of:
  0.24749403 = sum of:
    0.20827433 = weight(_text_:citation in 8281) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.20827433 = score(doc=8281,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.23445003 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04999695 = queryNorm
        0.8883528 = fieldWeight in 8281, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=8281)
    0.039219696 = product of:
      0.07843939 = sum of:
        0.07843939 = weight(_text_:reports in 8281) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07843939 = score(doc=8281,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.2251839 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.503953 = idf(docFreq=1329, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04999695 = queryNorm
            0.34833482 = fieldWeight in 8281, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.503953 = idf(docFreq=1329, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=8281)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    Describes a method for the generation of journal-journal citation maps on the basis of the CD-ROM version of the Science Citation Index. Discusses sources of potential error from this data. Offers strategies to counteract such errors. Analyzes a number of scientometric periodical mappings in relation to mappings from previous studies which have used tape data and/or data from ISI's Journal Citation Reports. Compares the quality of these mappings with the quality of those for previous years in order to demonstrate the use of such mappings as indicators for dynamic developments in the sciences
    Object
    Science Citation Index
  8. Snyder, H.; Cronin, B.; Davenport, E.: What's the use of citation? : Citation analysis as a literature topic in selected disciplines of the social sciences (1995) 0.16 
    0.15983668 = product of:
  0.23975502 = sum of:
    0.20613813 = weight(_text_:citation in 1825) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.20613813 = score(doc=1825,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.23445003 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04999695 = queryNorm
        0.8792412 = fieldWeight in 1825, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1825)
    0.033616886 = product of:
      0.06723377 = sum of:
        0.06723377 = weight(_text_:reports in 1825) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06723377 = score(doc=1825,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.2251839 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.503953 = idf(docFreq=1329, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04999695 = queryNorm
            0.29857272 = fieldWeight in 1825, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.503953 = idf(docFreq=1329, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1825)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    Reports results of a study to investigate the place and role of citation analysis in selected disciplines in the social sciences, including library and information science. 5 core library and information science periodicals: Journal of documentation; Library quarterly; Journal of the American Society for Information Science; College and research libraries; and the Journal of information science, were studed to determine the percentage of articles devoted to citation analysis and develop an indictive typology to categorize the major foci of research being conducted under the rubric of citation analysis. Similar analysis was conducted for periodicals in other social sciences disciplines. Demonstrates how the rubric can be used to dertermine how citatiion analysis is applied within library and information science and other disciplines. By isolating citation from bibliometrics in general, this work is differentiated from other, previous studies. Analysis of data from a 10 year sample of transdisciplinary social sciences literature suggests that 2 application areas predominate: the validity of citation as an evaluation tool; and impact or performance studies of authors, periodicals, and institutions
    Theme
    Citation indexing
  9. Alvarez, P.; Pulgarin, A.: ¬The Rasch model : measuring the impact of scientific journals: analytical chemistry (1996) 0.14 
    0.14208907 = product of:
  0.2131336 = sum of:
    0.16831109 = weight(_text_:citation in 8505) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.16831109 = score(doc=8505,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.23445003 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04999695 = queryNorm
        0.71789753 = fieldWeight in 8505, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=8505)
    0.044822514 = product of:
      0.08964503 = sum of:
        0.08964503 = weight(_text_:reports in 8505) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08964503 = score(doc=8505,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.2251839 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.503953 = idf(docFreq=1329, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04999695 = queryNorm
            0.39809695 = fieldWeight in 8505, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.503953 = idf(docFreq=1329, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=8505)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    Focuses on a way to determine a ranking of science journals according to the number of citations-to and items-published data used by Science Citation Insitute of Citation Reports of the Institute for Science Information to determine journal ranking by impact factor. Applies latent traits theory to bibliometrics
    Theme
    Citation indexing
  10. Campanario, J.M.: Using 'Citation Classics' to study the incidence of serendipity in scientific discovery (1996) 0.14 
    0.14208907 = product of:
  0.2131336 = sum of:
    0.16831109 = weight(_text_:citation in 6693) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.16831109 = score(doc=6693,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.23445003 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04999695 = queryNorm
        0.71789753 = fieldWeight in 6693, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6693)
    0.044822514 = product of:
      0.08964503 = sum of:
        0.08964503 = weight(_text_:reports in 6693) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08964503 = score(doc=6693,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.2251839 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.503953 = idf(docFreq=1329, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04999695 = queryNorm
            0.39809695 = fieldWeight in 6693, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.503953 = idf(docFreq=1329, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6693)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    Suggests that the literature on the role of chance, error or accident in scientific progress tends to be anecdotal, hagiographic and rarely systematic. In contrast, presents a new approach to this topic, the study of serendipity in scietific discovery. Bases the approach on the study of highly cited papers obtained from the 'Citation Classics' feature of 'Current Contents'. Reports on the analysis of 205 'Citation Classics' commentaries from the 400 most cited papers in the recent history of science, and presents the results of the analysis
  11. Zhang, Y.: ¬The impact of Internet-based electronic resources on formal scholarly communication in the area of library and information science : a citation analysis (1998) 0.13 
    0.12654515 = product of:
  0.18981771 = sum of:
    0.08589089 = weight(_text_:citation in 2808) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08589089 = score(doc=2808,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.23445003 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04999695 = queryNorm
        0.36635053 = fieldWeight in 2808, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2808)
    0.10392682 = sum of:
      0.05602814 = weight(_text_:reports in 2808) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.05602814 = score(doc=2808,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.2251839 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.503953 = idf(docFreq=1329, maxDocs=44218)
            0.04999695 = queryNorm
          0.24881059 = fieldWeight in 2808, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.503953 = idf(docFreq=1329, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2808)
      0.047898684 = weight(_text_:22 in 2808) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.047898684 = score(doc=2808,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.1750808 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.04999695 = queryNorm
          0.27358043 = fieldWeight in 2808, 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=2808)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    Internet based electronic resources are growing dramatically but there have been no empirical studies evaluating the impact of e-sources, as a whole, on formal scholarly communication. reports results of an investigation into how much e-sources have been used in formal scholarly communication, using a case study in the area of Library and Information Science (LIS) during the period 1994 to 1996. 4 citation based indicators were used in the study of the impact measurement. Concludes that, compared with the impact of print sources, the impact of e-sources on formal scholarly communication in LIS is small, as measured by e-sources cited, and does not increase significantly by year even though there is observable growth of these impact across the years. It is found that periodical format is related to the rate of citing e-sources, articles are more likely to cite e-sources than are print priodical articles. However, once authors cite electronic resource, there is no significant difference in the number of references per article by periodical format or by year. Suggests that, at this stage, citing e-sources may depend on authors rather than the periodical format in which authors choose to publish
    Date
    30. 1.1999 17:22:22
  12. Udofia, U.I.: Selecting veterinary medical periodicals through citation analysis (1997) 0.12 
    0.12432794 = product of:
  0.1864919 = sum of:
    0.14727221 = weight(_text_:citation in 785) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.14727221 = score(doc=785,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.23445003 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04999695 = queryNorm
        0.62816036 = fieldWeight in 785, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=785)
    0.039219696 = product of:
      0.07843939 = sum of:
        0.07843939 = weight(_text_:reports in 785) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07843939 = score(doc=785,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.2251839 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.503953 = idf(docFreq=1329, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04999695 = queryNorm
            0.34833482 = fieldWeight in 785, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.503953 = idf(docFreq=1329, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=785)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    Describes a study using citation analysis to select journals that could be used in the veterinary medical field. The study determines the principal journals to which a veterinary medical library should subscribe, thus obtaining the highest possible utility of materials. By using a database of 105 journals for a period of five years (1982-86), citation data were applied on the Bradford bibliography and Bradford-Zipf distribution to determine the ranking of journals in the field and the "core journals". Reports the results of the study which discovered that the Bulletin of Animal Health and Production in Africa is the most cited journal with 305 citations, and the core journals were eight in number, having 1,067 citations representing 66.2 per cent of the total citations.
  13. Egghe, L.; Rousseau, R.: Averaging and globalising quotients of informetric and scientometric data (1996) 0.12 
    0.120505325 = product of:
  0.18075798 = sum of:
    0.072880834 = weight(_text_:citation in 7659) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.072880834 = score(doc=7659,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.23445003 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04999695 = queryNorm
        0.31085873 = fieldWeight in 7659, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=7659)
    0.10787715 = sum of:
      0.06723377 = weight(_text_:reports in 7659) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.06723377 = score(doc=7659,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.2251839 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.503953 = idf(docFreq=1329, maxDocs=44218)
            0.04999695 = queryNorm
          0.29857272 = fieldWeight in 7659, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.503953 = idf(docFreq=1329, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=7659)
      0.04064338 = weight(_text_:22 in 7659) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04064338 = score(doc=7659,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1750808 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.04999695 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 7659, 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=7659)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    It is possible, using ISI's Journal Citation Report (JCR), to calculate average impact factors (AIF) for LCR's subject categories but it can be more useful to know the global Impact Factor (GIF) of a subject category and compare the 2 values. Reports results of a study to compare the relationships between AIFs and GIFs of subjects, based on the particular case of the average impact factor of a subfield versus the impact factor of this subfield as a whole, the difference being studied between an average of quotients, denoted as AQ, and a global average, obtained as a quotient of averages, and denoted as GQ. In the case of impact factors, AQ becomes the average impact factor of a field, and GQ becomes its global impact factor. Discusses a number of applications of this technique in the context of informetrics and scientometrics
    Source
    Journal of information science. 22(1996) no.3, S.165-170
  14. Kahl, M.: Zitatenanalyse mit den Journal Citation Reports des Institute for Scientific Information : ein Hilfsmittel für die Zeitschriftenauswahl in wissenschaftlichen Bibliotheken? (1995) 0.12 
    0.11714153 = product of:
  0.17571229 = sum of:
    0.12024725 = weight(_text_:citation in 1239) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.12024725 = score(doc=1239,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.23445003 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04999695 = queryNorm
        0.51289076 = fieldWeight in 1239, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1239)
    0.05546503 = product of:
      0.11093006 = sum of:
        0.11093006 = weight(_text_:reports in 1239) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11093006 = score(doc=1239,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.2251839 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.503953 = idf(docFreq=1329, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04999695 = queryNorm
            0.49261987 = fieldWeight in 1239, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.503953 = idf(docFreq=1329, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1239)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    Die Häufigkeit von Zitierungen wissenschaftlicher Publikationen kann in erster Näherung als Maßstab für ihre inhaltliche Qualität gelten. Die Journal Citation Reports (JCR) des ISI ordnen über die Auszählung von Referenzen aus mehreren tausend Fachzeitschriften durch diverse bibliometrische Indikatoren Zeitschriften einen bestimmten Wert zu. Der Aufbau der Datensammlung sowie die verwendeten Indikatoren werden näher beschrieben. 2 Methoden werden vorgestellt, mit denen in Anwendung der JCR eine Menge von Kernzeitschriften für ein Fachgebiet ermittelt werden kann. Probleme der Zuverlässigkeit bei der Sammlung und Verarbeitung der Zitierdaten durch die JCR werden dargestellt. Die Anwendbarkeit einer Zitatenanalyse für den Bestandsaufbau bei Fachzeitschriften wird untersucht. Sie kann zur Entscheidungsfindung beitragen, andere Methoden aber nicht ersetzen
  15. Shapiro, F.R.: Origins of bibliometrics, citation indexing and citation analysis : the neglected legal literature (1992) 0.10 
    0.09818148 = product of:
  0.29454443 = sum of:
    0.29454443 = weight(_text_:citation in 4262) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.29454443 = score(doc=4262,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.23445003 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04999695 = queryNorm
        1.2563207 = fieldWeight in 4262, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4262)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Theme
    Citation indexing
  16. Theories of citation? (1998) 0.10 
    0.09818148 = product of:
  0.29454443 = sum of:
    0.29454443 = weight(_text_:citation in 3836) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.29454443 = score(doc=3836,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.23445003 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04999695 = queryNorm
        1.2563207 = fieldWeight in 3836, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=3836)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    Thematic issue devoted to 'Theories of citation?'
    Theme
    Citation indexing
  17. Moed, H.F.; Leeuwen, T.N. van; Reedijk, J.: ¬A new classification system to describe the ageing of scientific journals and their impact factors (1998) 0.09 
    0.087370396 = product of:
  0.1310556 = sum of:
    0.10864434 = weight(_text_:citation in 4719) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10864434 = score(doc=4719,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.23445003 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04999695 = queryNorm
        0.46340084 = fieldWeight in 4719, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4719)
    0.022411257 = product of:
      0.044822514 = sum of:
        0.044822514 = weight(_text_:reports in 4719) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.044822514 = score(doc=4719,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.2251839 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.503953 = idf(docFreq=1329, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04999695 = queryNorm
            0.19904847 = fieldWeight in 4719, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.503953 = idf(docFreq=1329, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4719)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    During the past decades, journal impact data obtained from the Journal Citation Reports (JCR) have gained relevance in library management, research management and research evaluation. Hence, both information scientists and bibliometricians share the responsibility towards the users of the JCR to analyse the reliability and validity of its measures thoroughly, to indicate pitfalls and to suggest possible improvements. In this article, ageing patterns are examined in 'formal' use or impact of all scientific journals processed for the Science Citation Index (SCI) during 1981-1995. A new classification system of journals in terms of their ageing characteristics is introduced. This system has been applied to as many as 3,098 journals covered by the Science Citation Index. Following an earlier suggestion by Glnzel and Schoepflin, a maturing and a decline phase are distinguished. From an analysis across all subfields it has been concluded that ageing characteristics are primarily specific to the individual journal rather than to the subfield, while the distribution of journals in terms of slowly or rapidly maturing or declining types is specific to the subfield. It is shown that the cited half life (CHL), printed in the JCR, is an inappropriate measure of decline of journal impact. Following earlier work by Line and others, a more adequate parameter of decline is calculated taking into account the size of annual volumes during a range of fifteen years. For 76 per cent of SCI journals the relative difference between this new parameter and the ISI CHL exceeds 5 per cent. The current JCR journal impact factor is proven to be biased towards journals revealing a rapid maturing and decline in impact. Therefore, a longer term impact factor is proposed, as well as a normalised impact statistic, taking into account citation characteristics of the research subfield covered by a journal and the type of documents published in it. When these new measures are combined with the proposed ageing classification system, they provide a significantly improved picture of a journal's impact to that obtained from the JCR.
    Theme
    Citation indexing
  18. Kostoff, R.N.: ¬The use and misuse of citation analysis in research evaluation (1998) 0.09 
    0.08569981 = product of:
  0.25709942 = sum of:
    0.25709942 = weight(_text_:citation in 4129) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.25709942 = score(doc=4129,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.23445003 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04999695 = queryNorm
        1.0966065 = fieldWeight in 4129, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4129)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    Leydesdorff, in his 1998 paper 'Theories of citation?', addresses the history of citations and citation analysis, and the transformation of a reference mechanism into a purportedly quantitative measure of research impact/quality. Examines different facets of citations and citation analysis, and discusses the validity of citation analysis as a useful measure of research impact/quality
    Footnote
    Contribution to a thematic issue devoted to 'Theories of citation?'
    Theme
    Citation indexing
  19. Tijssen, R.J.W.; Wijk, E. van: ¬The global science base of information and communication technologies : bibliometric analysis of ICT research papers (1998) 0.08 
    0.08284669 = product of:
  0.12427004 = sum of:
    0.09717445 = weight(_text_:citation in 3691) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09717445 = score(doc=3691,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.23445003 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04999695 = queryNorm
        0.4144783 = fieldWeight in 3691, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3691)
    0.027095586 = product of:
      0.054191172 = sum of:
        0.054191172 = weight(_text_:22 in 3691) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.054191172 = score(doc=3691,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1750808 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04999695 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 3691, 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=3691)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    International bibliographic databases and related biblimetric indicators together provide an analytical framework and appropriate measure to cover both the 'supply side' - research capabilities and outputs - and 'demand side' - collaboration, diffusion and citation impact - related to information and communication technologies (ICT) research. Presents results of such a bibliometric study describing macro level features of this ICT knowledge base
    Date
    22. 5.1999 19:26:54
  20. Wang, P.; White, M.D.: ¬A qualitative study of scholars' citation behaviour (1996) 0.08 
    0.08283156 = product of:
  0.12424734 = sum of:
    0.08502764 = weight(_text_:citation in 7352) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08502764 = score(doc=7352,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.23445003 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04999695 = queryNorm
        0.3626685 = fieldWeight in 7352, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=7352)
    0.039219696 = product of:
      0.07843939 = sum of:
        0.07843939 = weight(_text_:reports in 7352) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07843939 = score(doc=7352,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.2251839 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.503953 = idf(docFreq=1329, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04999695 = queryNorm
            0.34833482 = fieldWeight in 7352, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.503953 = idf(docFreq=1329, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=7352)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    Identifies aspects of citing behaviour by directly questioning researchers about decisions to cite or not to cite specific docuements. Finds the existence of meta-level concerns which may indictae documentation styles which influence a decision to cite a document in addition to situation factors related to its actual use during research. Reports the preliminary results of the citing decisions in an empirical, longitudinal study of document use by academic economists and gradutae students during several phases of their research projects

Authors

Languages

Types

  • a 103
  • s 3
  • m 1
  • More… Less…

Themes