Search (575 results, page 2 of 29)

  • × theme_ss:"Informetrie"
  • × year_i:[2010 TO 2020}
  1. Jovanovic, M.: ¬Eine kleine Frühgeschichte der Bibliometrie (2012) 0.02 
    0.018684933 = product of:
  0.09342466 = sum of:
    0.024966514 = weight(_text_:und in 326) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.024966514 = score(doc=326,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.06422601 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028978055 = queryNorm
        0.38872904 = fieldWeight in 326, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=326)
    0.038981467 = weight(_text_:informationswissenschaft in 326) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.038981467 = score(doc=326,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13053758 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028978055 = queryNorm
        0.29862255 = fieldWeight in 326, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=326)
    0.029476684 = sum of:
      0.005919926 = weight(_text_:information in 326) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.005919926 = score(doc=326,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
            0.028978055 = queryNorm
          0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 326, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=326)
      0.023556758 = weight(_text_:22 in 326) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.023556758 = score(doc=326,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.101476215 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.028978055 = 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)
  0.2 = coord(3/15)
    Abstract
    In der Bibliometrie werden meist zwei Größen vermessen: die Anzahl von Publikationen und Zitationen. Publiziert und zitiert haben Menschen bereits sehr früh in der Geschichte. Schon in der Antike sind bei überlieferten Werken Zitationen zu finden. Der englische Begriff "Bibliometrics" selbst wurde aber erst 1969 definiert. In dem folgenden Artikel wird eine kleine Frühgeschichte der Bibliometrie, einer Unterdisziplin der Informationswissenschaft, bis zu diesem wichtigen Jahr anhand von beispielhaften Studien und Arbeiten dargestellt. Es wird auf die Anfänge von Publikationen und Zitationen und den fachlichen Rahmen der Bibliometrie eingegangen. Der Ursprung der Bibliometriegeschichte selbst wird von unterschiedlichen Autoren unterschiedlich früh angesetzt. Die verschiedenen Ansätze werden vorgestellt und diskutiert. Der Artikel schließt mit einer Beschreibung der wachsenden Bedeutung dieses Fachs im heutigen Informationszeitalter.
    Date
    22. 7.2012 19:23:32
    Source
    Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 63(2012) H.2, S.71-80
  2. Riechert, M.; Schmitz, J.: Qualitätssicherung von Forschungsinformationen durch visuelle Repräsentation : das Fallbeispiel des "Informationssystems Promotionsnoten" (2017) 0.01 
    0.01469561 = product of:
  0.07347805 = sum of:
    0.022018395 = weight(_text_:und in 3724) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022018395 = score(doc=3724,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.06422601 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028978055 = queryNorm
        0.34282678 = fieldWeight in 3724, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3724)
    0.04547838 = weight(_text_:informationswissenschaft in 3724) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04547838 = score(doc=3724,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13053758 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028978055 = queryNorm
        0.348393 = fieldWeight in 3724, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3724)
    0.005981274 = product of:
      0.011962548 = sum of:
        0.011962548 = weight(_text_:information in 3724) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011962548 = score(doc=3724,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.028978055 = queryNorm
            0.23515764 = fieldWeight in 3724, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3724)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(3/15)
    Source
    Theorie, Semantik und Organisation von Wissen: Proceedings der 13. Tagung der Deutschen Sektion der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Wissensorganisation (ISKO) und dem 13. Internationalen Symposium der Informationswissenschaft der Higher Education Association for Information Science (HI) Potsdam (19.-20.03.2013): 'Theory, Information and Organization of Knowledge' / Proceedings der 14. Tagung der Deutschen Sektion der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Wissensorganisation (ISKO) und Natural Language & Information Systems (NLDB) Passau (16.06.2015): 'Lexical Resources for Knowledge Organization' / Proceedings des Workshops der Deutschen Sektion der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Wissensorganisation (ISKO) auf der SEMANTICS Leipzig (1.09.2014): 'Knowledge Organization and Semantic Web' / Proceedings des Workshops der Polnischen und Deutschen Sektion der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Wissensorganisation (ISKO) Cottbus (29.-30.09.2011): 'Economics of Knowledge Production and Organization'. Hrsg. von W. Babik, H.P. Ohly u. K. Weber
  3. Tunger, D.: Bibliometrie : quo vadis? (2017) 0.01 
    0.01469561 = product of:
  0.07347805 = sum of:
    0.022018395 = weight(_text_:und in 3519) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022018395 = score(doc=3519,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.06422601 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028978055 = queryNorm
        0.34282678 = fieldWeight in 3519, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3519)
    0.04547838 = weight(_text_:informationswissenschaft in 3519) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04547838 = score(doc=3519,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13053758 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028978055 = queryNorm
        0.348393 = fieldWeight in 3519, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3519)
    0.005981274 = product of:
      0.011962548 = sum of:
        0.011962548 = weight(_text_:information in 3519) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011962548 = score(doc=3519,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.028978055 = queryNorm
            0.23515764 = fieldWeight in 3519, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3519)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(3/15)
    Source
    Theorie, Semantik und Organisation von Wissen: Proceedings der 13. Tagung der Deutschen Sektion der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Wissensorganisation (ISKO) und dem 13. Internationalen Symposium der Informationswissenschaft der Higher Education Association for Information Science (HI) Potsdam (19.-20.03.2013): 'Theory, Information and Organization of Knowledge' / Proceedings der 14. Tagung der Deutschen Sektion der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Wissensorganisation (ISKO) und Natural Language & Information Systems (NLDB) Passau (16.06.2015): 'Lexical Resources for Knowledge Organization' / Proceedings des Workshops der Deutschen Sektion der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Wissensorganisation (ISKO) auf der SEMANTICS Leipzig (1.09.2014): 'Knowledge Organization and Semantic Web' / Proceedings des Workshops der Polnischen und Deutschen Sektion der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Wissensorganisation (ISKO) Cottbus (29.-30.09.2011): 'Economics of Knowledge Production and Organization'. Hrsg. von W. Babik, H.P. Ohly u. K. Weber
  4. Möller, T.: Woher stammt das Wissen über die Halbwertzeiten des Wissens? (2017) 0.01 
    0.01469561 = product of:
  0.07347805 = sum of:
    0.022018395 = weight(_text_:und in 3520) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022018395 = score(doc=3520,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.06422601 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028978055 = queryNorm
        0.34282678 = fieldWeight in 3520, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3520)
    0.04547838 = weight(_text_:informationswissenschaft in 3520) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04547838 = score(doc=3520,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13053758 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028978055 = queryNorm
        0.348393 = fieldWeight in 3520, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3520)
    0.005981274 = product of:
      0.011962548 = sum of:
        0.011962548 = weight(_text_:information in 3520) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011962548 = score(doc=3520,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.028978055 = queryNorm
            0.23515764 = fieldWeight in 3520, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3520)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(3/15)
    Source
    Theorie, Semantik und Organisation von Wissen: Proceedings der 13. Tagung der Deutschen Sektion der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Wissensorganisation (ISKO) und dem 13. Internationalen Symposium der Informationswissenschaft der Higher Education Association for Information Science (HI) Potsdam (19.-20.03.2013): 'Theory, Information and Organization of Knowledge' / Proceedings der 14. Tagung der Deutschen Sektion der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Wissensorganisation (ISKO) und Natural Language & Information Systems (NLDB) Passau (16.06.2015): 'Lexical Resources for Knowledge Organization' / Proceedings des Workshops der Deutschen Sektion der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Wissensorganisation (ISKO) auf der SEMANTICS Leipzig (1.09.2014): 'Knowledge Organization and Semantic Web' / Proceedings des Workshops der Polnischen und Deutschen Sektion der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Wissensorganisation (ISKO) Cottbus (29.-30.09.2011): 'Economics of Knowledge Production and Organization'. Hrsg. von W. Babik, H.P. Ohly u. K. Weber
  5. Mayr, P.: Information Retrieval-Mehrwertdienste für Digitale Bibliotheken: : Crosskonkordanzen und Bradfordizing (2010) 0.01 
    0.01395334 = product of:
  0.0697667 = sum of:
    0.041525397 = weight(_text_:buch in 4910) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.041525397 = score(doc=4910,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13472971 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.64937 = idf(docFreq=1149, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028978055 = queryNorm
        0.3082126 = fieldWeight in 4910, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.64937 = idf(docFreq=1149, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4910)
    0.0231145 = weight(_text_:und in 4910) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0231145 = score(doc=4910,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.06422601 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028978055 = queryNorm
        0.35989314 = fieldWeight in 4910, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4910)
    0.0051268064 = product of:
      0.010253613 = sum of:
        0.010253613 = weight(_text_:information in 4910) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.010253613 = score(doc=4910,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.028978055 = queryNorm
            0.20156369 = fieldWeight in 4910, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4910)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(3/15)
    Abstract
    In dieser Arbeit werden zwei Mehrwertdienste für Suchsysteme vorgestellt, die typische Probleme bei der Recherche nach wissenschaftlicher Literatur behandeln können. Die beiden Mehrwertdienste semantische Heterogenitätsbehandlung am Beispiel Crosskonkordanzen und Re-Ranking auf Basis von Bradfordizing, die in unterschiedlichen Phasen der Suche zum Einsatz kommen, werden in diesem Buch ausführlich beschrieben und evaluiert. Für die Tests wurden Fragestellungen und Daten aus zwei Evaluationsprojekten (CLEF und KoMoHe) verwendet. Die intellektuell bewerteten Dokumente stammen aus insgesamt sieben Fachdatenbanken der Fächer Sozialwissenschaften, Politikwissenschaft, Wirtschaftswissenschaften, Psychologie und Medizin. Die Ergebnisse dieser Arbeit sind in das GESIS-Projekt IRM eingeflossen.
    RSWK
    Dokumentationssprache / Heterogenität / Information Retrieval / Ranking / Evaluation
    Subject
    Dokumentationssprache / Heterogenität / Information Retrieval / Ranking / Evaluation
  6. Lewandowski, D.; Haustein, S.: What does the German-language information science community cite? (2015) 0.01 
    0.013389984 = product of:
  0.10042488 = sum of:
    0.0918802 = weight(_text_:informationswissenschaft in 2987) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0918802 = score(doc=2987,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.13053758 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028978055 = queryNorm
        0.70386016 = fieldWeight in 2987, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2987)
    0.008544678 = product of:
      0.017089356 = sum of:
        0.017089356 = weight(_text_:information in 2987) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017089356 = score(doc=2987,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.028978055 = queryNorm
            0.3359395 = fieldWeight in 2987, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2987)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.13333334 = coord(2/15)
    Field
    Informationswissenschaft
    Series
    Schriften zur Informationswissenschaft; Bd.66
    Source
    Re:inventing information science in the networked society: Proceedings of the 14th International Symposium on Information Science, Zadar/Croatia, 19th-21st May 2015. Eds.: F. Pehar, C. Schloegl u. C. Wolff
  7. Schlögl, C.; List, R,: Vergleiche von Zitaten, Downloads und Lesehäufigkeiten : am Beispiel von zwei Volkswirtschaftslehre-Zeitschriften (2018) 0.01 
    0.013381588 = product of:
  0.06690794 = sum of:
    0.024966514 = weight(_text_:und in 4236) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.024966514 = score(doc=4236,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.06422601 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028978055 = queryNorm
        0.38872904 = fieldWeight in 4236, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4236)
    0.038981467 = weight(_text_:informationswissenschaft in 4236) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.038981467 = score(doc=4236,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13053758 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028978055 = queryNorm
        0.29862255 = fieldWeight in 4236, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4236)
    0.002959963 = product of:
      0.005919926 = sum of:
        0.005919926 = weight(_text_:information in 4236) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.005919926 = score(doc=4236,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.028978055 = queryNorm
            0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 4236, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4236)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(3/15)
    Abstract
    Im vorliegenden Beitrag untersuchen wir die Beziehung zwischen Zitaten, Downloads und sog. Lesehäufigkeiten des sozialen Literaturverwaltungssystems "Mendeley" anhand der beiden Volkswirtschaftslehre-Zeitschriften "Journal of Environ­mental Economics and Management" und "Journal of Financial Economics". Trotz Ähnlichkeiten bei den Häufig­keitsverteilungen, konnten wir großteils nur mittlere (Rang)Korrelationen zwischen den drei Zeitschriftenindikatoren berechnen. In den drei Top-10 Rankings kam es zur Überschneidung von nur drei Publikationen. Deutliche Unterschiede gibt es bei den Alters- und Nutzerstrukturen. Während der Großteil der Mendeley-Nutzer Studierende sind, ist der Anteil der Professoren relativ gering. Durch die Mendeley-Profile kann ermittelt werden, aus welchen Disziplinen die Leser einer Zeitschrift kommen. Dies lässt vor allem bei interdisziplinären Zeitschriften wie "Journal of Financial Economics" interessante Rückschlüsse zu. Ähnlich wie bei Zitaten, gibt es auch bei Downloads und Lesehäufigkeiten disziplinspezifische Unterschiede.
    Footnote
    Teil eines Themenheftes: Themenheft: Düsseldorfer und Grazer Informationswissenschaft / Gastherausgeber: Wolfgang G. Stock, Christian Schlögl.
    Source
    Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 69(2018) H.1, S.121-128
  8. Stuart, D.: Web metrics for library and information professionals (2014) 0.01 
    0.012966189 = product of:
  0.064830944 = sum of:
    0.051586136 = weight(_text_:allgemeines in 2274) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.051586136 = score(doc=2274,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.16533206 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.705423 = idf(docFreq=399, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028978055 = queryNorm
        0.31201532 = fieldWeight in 2274, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.705423 = idf(docFreq=399, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=2274)
    0.0077846786 = weight(_text_:und in 2274) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0077846786 = score(doc=2274,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.06422601 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028978055 = queryNorm
        0.12120757 = fieldWeight in 2274, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=2274)
    0.0054601314 = product of:
      0.010920263 = sum of:
        0.010920263 = weight(_text_:information in 2274) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.010920263 = score(doc=2274,freq=20.0), product of:
            0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.028978055 = queryNorm
            0.21466857 = fieldWeight in 2274, product of:
              4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
                20.0 = termFreq=20.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=2274)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(3/15)
    Abstract
    This is a practical guide to using web metrics to measure impact and demonstrate value. The web provides an opportunity to collect a host of different metrics, from those associated with social media accounts and websites to more traditional research outputs. This book is a clear guide for library and information professionals as to what web metrics are available and how to assess and use them to make informed decisions and demonstrate value. As individuals and organizations increasingly use the web in addition to traditional publishing avenues and formats, this book provides the tools to unlock web metrics and evaluate the impact of this content. The key topics covered include: bibliometrics, webometrics and web metrics; data collection tools; evaluating impact on the web; evaluating social media impact; investigating relationships between actors; exploring traditional publications in a new environment; web metrics and the web of data; the future of web metrics and the library and information professional. The book will provide a practical introduction to web metrics for a wide range of library and information professionals, from the bibliometrician wanting to demonstrate the wider impact of a researcher's work than can be demonstrated through traditional citations databases, to the reference librarian wanting to measure how successfully they are engaging with their users on Twitter. It will be a valuable tool for anyone who wants to not only understand the impact of content, but demonstrate this impact to others within the organization and beyond.
    BK
    06.00 Information und Dokumentation: Allgemeines
    Classification
    06.00 Information und Dokumentation: Allgemeines
    Content
    1. Introduction. MetricsIndicators -- Web metrics and Ranganathan's laws of library science -- Web metrics for the library and information professional -- The aim of this book -- The structure of the rest of this book -- 2. Bibliometrics, webometrics and web metrics. Web metrics -- Information science metrics -- Web analytics -- Relational and evaluative metrics -- Evaluative web metrics -- Relational web metrics -- Validating the results -- 3. Data collection tools. The anatomy of a URL, web links and the structure of the web -- Search engines 1.0 -- Web crawlers -- Search engines 2.0 -- Post search engine 2.0: fragmentation -- 4. Evaluating impact on the web. Websites -- Blogs -- Wikis -- Internal metrics -- External metrics -- A systematic approach to content analysis -- 5. Evaluating social media impact. Aspects of social network sites -- Typology of social network sites -- Research and tools for specific sites and services -- Other social network sites -- URL shorteners: web analytic links on any site -- General social media impact -- Sentiment analysis -- 6. Investigating relationships between actors. Social network analysis methods -- Sources for relational network analysis -- 7. Exploring traditional publications in a new environment. More bibliographic items -- Full text analysis -- Greater context -- 8. Web metrics and the web of data. The web of data -- Building the semantic web -- Implications of the web of data for web metrics -- Investigating the web of data today -- SPARQL -- Sindice -- LDSpider: an RDF web crawler -- 9. The future of web metrics and the library and information professional. How far we have come -- The future of web metrics -- The future of the library and information professional and web metrics.
  9. Haustein, S.: Scientific interactions and research evaluation : from bibliometrics to Altmetrics (2015) 0.01 
    0.009592776 = product of:
  0.07194582 = sum of:
    0.064969115 = weight(_text_:informationswissenschaft in 2981) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.064969115 = score(doc=2981,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13053758 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028978055 = queryNorm
        0.49770427 = fieldWeight in 2981, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2981)
    0.0069766995 = product of:
      0.013953399 = sum of:
        0.013953399 = weight(_text_:information in 2981) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.013953399 = score(doc=2981,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.028978055 = queryNorm
            0.27429342 = fieldWeight in 2981, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2981)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.13333334 = coord(2/15)
    Series
    Schriften zur Informationswissenschaft; Bd.66
    Source
    Re:inventing information science in the networked society: Proceedings of the 14th International Symposium on Information Science, Zadar/Croatia, 19th-21st May 2015. Eds.: F. Pehar, C. Schloegl u. C. Wolff
  10. Scientometrics pioneer Eugene Garfield dies : Eugene Garfield, founder of the Institute for Scientific Information and The Scientist, has passed away at age 91 (2017) 0.01 
    0.009300052 = product of:
  0.04650026 = sum of:
    0.021319222 = weight(_text_:und in 3460) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021319222 = score(doc=3460,freq=30.0), product of:
        0.06422601 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028978055 = queryNorm
        0.33194062 = fieldWeight in 3460, product of:
          5.477226 = tf(freq=30.0), with freq of:
            30.0 = termFreq=30.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3460)
    0.02273919 = weight(_text_:informationswissenschaft in 3460) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02273919 = score(doc=3460,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13053758 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028978055 = queryNorm
        0.1741965 = fieldWeight in 3460, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3460)
    0.0024418447 = product of:
      0.0048836893 = sum of:
        0.0048836893 = weight(_text_:information in 3460) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0048836893 = score(doc=3460,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.028978055 = queryNorm
            0.0960027 = fieldWeight in 3460, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3460)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(3/15)
    Content
    Vgl. auch Open Password, Nr.167 vom 01.03.2017 :"Eugene Garfield, Begründer und Pionier der Zitationsindexierung und der Ziationsanalyse, ohne den die Informationswissenschaft heute anders aussähe, ist im Alter von 91 Jahren gestorben. Er hinterlässt Frau, drei Söhne, eine Tochter, eine Stieftochter, zwei Enkeltöchter und zwei Großelternkinder. Garfield machte seinen ersten Abschluss als Bachelor in Chemie an der Columbia University in New York City im Jahre 1949. 1954 sattelte er einen Abschluss in Bibliothekswissenschaft drauf. 1961 sollte er im Fach strukturelle Linguistik promovieren. Als Chemie-Student war er nach eigenen Angaben weder besonders gut noch besonders glücklich. Sein "Erweckungserlebnis" hatte er auf einer Tagung der American Chemical Society, als er entdeckte, dass sich mit der Suche nach Literatur womöglich ein Lebensunterhalt bestreiten lasse. "So I went to the Chairman of the meeting and said: "How do you get a job in this racket?" Ab 1955 war Garfield zunächst als Berater für pharmazeutische Unternehmen tätig. Dort spezialisierte er sich auf Fachinformationen, indem er Inhalte relevanter Fachzeitschriften erarbeitete. 1955 schlug er in "Science" seine bahnbrechende Idee vor, Zitationen wissenschaftlicher Veröffentlichungen systematisch zu erfassen und Zusammenhänge zwischen Zitaten deutlich zu machen. 1960 gründete Garfield das Institute für Scientific Informationen, dessen CEO er bis 1992 blieb. 1964 brachte er den Scientific Information Index heraus. Weitere Maßgrößen wie der Social Science Index (ab 1973), der Arts and Humanities Citation Index (ab 1978) und der Journal Citation Index folgten. Diese Verzeichnisse wurden in dem "Web of Science" zusammengefasst und als Datenbank elektronisch zugänglich gemacht. Damit wurde es den Forschern ermöglich, die für sie relevante Literatur "at their fingertips" zu finden und sich in ihr zurechtzufinden. Darüber hinaus wurde es mit Hilfe der Rankings von Garfields Messgrößen möglich, die relative wissenschaftliche Bedeutung wissenschaftlicher Beiträge, Autoren, wissenschaftlicher Einrichtungen, Regionen und Länder zu messen.
    Garfield wandte sich im Zusammenhang mit seinen Messgrößen gegen "Bibliographic Negligence" und "Citation Amnesia", Er schrieb 2002: "There will never be a perfect solution to the problem of acknowledging intellectual debts. But a beginning can be made if journal editors will demand a signed pledge from authors that they have searched Medline, Science Citation Index, or other appropriate print and electronic databases." Er warnte aber auch vor einen unsachgemäßen Umgang mit seinen Messgößen und vor übertriebenen Erwartungen an sie in Zusammenhang mit Karriereentscheidungen über Wissenschaftler und Überlebensentscheidungen für wissenschaftliche Einrichtungen. 1982 übernahm die Thomson Corporation ISI für 210 Millionen Dollar. In der heutigen Nachfolgeorganisation Clarivate Analytics sind mehr als 4000 Mitarbeitern in über hundert Ländern beschäftigt. Garfield gründete auch eine Zeitung für Wissenschaftler, speziell für Biowissenschaftler, "The Scientist", die weiterbesteht und als kostenfreier Pushdienst bezogen werden kann. In seinen Beiträgen zur Wissenschaftspolitik kritisierte er beispielsweise die Wissenschaftsberater von Präsident Reagen 1986 als "Advocats of the administration´s science policies, rather than as objective conduits for communication between the president and the science community." Seinen Beitrag, mit dem er darum warb, die Förderung von UNESCO-Forschungsprogrammen fortzusetzen, gab er den Titel: "Let´s stand up für Global Science". Das ist auch in Trump-Zeiten ein guter Titel, da die US-Regierung den Wahrheitsbegriff, auf der Wissenschaft basiert, als bedeutungslos verwirft und sich auf Nationalismus und Abschottung statt auf internationale Kommunikation, Kooperation und gemeinsame Ausschöpfung von Interessen fokussiert."
  11. Chang, Y.-W.; Huang, M.-H.: ¬A study of the evolution of interdisciplinarity in library and information science : using three bibliometric methods (2012) 0.01 
    0.008087983 = product of:
  0.06065987 = sum of:
    0.032484557 = weight(_text_:informationswissenschaft in 4959) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.032484557 = score(doc=4959,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13053758 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028978055 = queryNorm
        0.24885213 = fieldWeight in 4959, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4959)
    0.028175311 = sum of:
      0.008544678 = weight(_text_:information in 4959) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.008544678 = score(doc=4959,freq=6.0), product of:
          0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
            0.028978055 = queryNorm
          0.16796975 = fieldWeight in 4959, product of:
            2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
              6.0 = termFreq=6.0
            1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4959)
      0.019630633 = weight(_text_:22 in 4959) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.019630633 = score(doc=4959,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.101476215 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.028978055 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4959, 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=4959)
  0.13333334 = coord(2/15)
    Abstract
    This study uses three bibliometric methods: direct citation, bibliographic coupling, and co-authorship analysis, to investigate interdisciplinary changes in library and information science (LIS) from 1978 to 2007. The results reveal that LIS researchers most frequently cite publications in their own discipline. In addition, half of all co-authors of LIS articles are affiliated with LIS-related institutes. The results confirm that the degree of interdisciplinarity within LIS has increased, particularly co-authorship. However, the study found sources of direct citations in LIS articles are widely distributed across 30 disciplines, but co-authors of LIS articles are distributed across only 25 disciplines. The degree of interdisciplinarity was found ranging from 0.61 to 0.82 with citation to references in all articles being the highest and that of co-authorship being the lowest. Percentages of contribution attributable to LIS show a decreasing tendency based on the results of direct citation and co-authorship analysis, but an increasing tendency based on those of bibliographic coupling analysis. Such differences indicate each of the three bibliometric methods has its strength and provides insights respectively for viewing various aspects of interdisciplinarity, suggesting the use of no single bibliometric method can reveal all aspects of interdisciplinarity due to its multifaceted nature.
    Field
    Informationswissenschaft
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 63(2012) no.1, S.22-33
  12. Vogler, E.; Schindler, C.; Botte, A.; Rittberger, M.: Are altmetrics effective in transdisciplinary research fields? : altmetric coverage of outputs in educational research (2017) 0.01 
    0.0076742205 = product of:
  0.05755665 = sum of:
    0.05197529 = weight(_text_:informationswissenschaft in 3557) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05197529 = score(doc=3557,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13053758 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028978055 = queryNorm
        0.3981634 = fieldWeight in 3557, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3557)
    0.0055813594 = product of:
      0.011162719 = sum of:
        0.011162719 = weight(_text_:information in 3557) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011162719 = score(doc=3557,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.028978055 = queryNorm
            0.21943474 = fieldWeight in 3557, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3557)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.13333334 = coord(2/15)
    Series
    Schriften zur Informationswissenschaft; Bd. 70
    Source
    Everything changes, everything stays the same? - Understanding information spaces : Proceedings of the 15th International Symposium of Information Science (ISI 2017), Berlin/Germany, 13th - 15th March 2017. Eds.: M. Gäde, V. Trkulja u. V. Petras
  13. Castanha, R.C.G.; Wolfram, D.: ¬The domain of knowledge organization : a bibliometric analysis of prolific authors and their intellectual space (2018) 0.01 
    0.007606462 = product of:
  0.057048462 = sum of:
    0.032484557 = weight(_text_:informationswissenschaft in 4150) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.032484557 = score(doc=4150,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13053758 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028978055 = queryNorm
        0.24885213 = fieldWeight in 4150, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4150)
    0.024563905 = sum of:
      0.0049332716 = weight(_text_:information in 4150) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0049332716 = score(doc=4150,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
            0.028978055 = queryNorm
          0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 4150, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4150)
      0.019630633 = weight(_text_:22 in 4150) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.019630633 = score(doc=4150,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.101476215 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.028978055 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4150, 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=4150)
  0.13333334 = coord(2/15)
    Abstract
    The domain of knowledge organization (KO) represents a foundational area of information science. One way to better understand the intellectual structure of the KO domain is to apply bibliometric methods to key contributors to the literature. This study analyzes the most prolific contributing authors to the journal Knowledge Organization, the sources they cite and the citations they receive for the period 1993 to 2016. The analyses were conducted using visualization outcomes of citation, co-citation and author bibliographic coupling analysis to reveal theoretical points of reference among authors and the most prominent research themes that constitute this scientific community. Birger Hjørland was the most cited author, and was situated at or near the middle of each of the maps based on different citation relationships. The proximities between authors resulting from the different citation relationships demonstrate how authors situate themselves intellectually through the citations they give and how other authors situate them through the citations received. There is a consistent core of theoretical references as well among the most productive authors. We observed a close network of scholarly communication between the authors cited in this core, which indicates the actual role of the journal Knowledge Organization as a space for knowledge construction in the area of knowledge organization.
    Field
    Informationswissenschaft
    Source
    Knowledge organization. 45(2018) no.1, S.13-22
  14. Tavakolizadeh-Ravari, M.: Analysis of the long term dynamics in thesaurus developments and its consequences (2017) 0.01 
    0.007552784 = product of:
  0.056645878 = sum of:
    0.019893795 = weight(_text_:und in 3081) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019893795 = score(doc=3081,freq=20.0), product of:
        0.06422601 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028978055 = queryNorm
        0.3097467 = fieldWeight in 3081, product of:
          4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
            20.0 = termFreq=20.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3081)
    0.036752082 = weight(_text_:informationswissenschaft in 3081) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.036752082 = score(doc=3081,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.13053758 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028978055 = queryNorm
        0.28154406 = fieldWeight in 3081, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3081)
  0.13333334 = coord(2/15)
    Abstract
    Die Arbeit analysiert die dynamische Entwicklung und den Gebrauch von Thesaurusbegriffen. Zusätzlich konzentriert sie sich auf die Faktoren, die die Zahl von Indexbegriffen pro Dokument oder Zeitschrift beeinflussen. Als Untersuchungsobjekt dienten der MeSH und die entsprechende Datenbank "MEDLINE". Die wichtigsten Konsequenzen sind: 1. Der MeSH-Thesaurus hat sich durch drei unterschiedliche Phasen jeweils logarithmisch entwickelt. Solch einen Thesaurus sollte folgenden Gleichung folgen: "T = 3.076,6 Ln (d) - 22.695 + 0,0039d" (T = Begriffe, Ln = natürlicher Logarithmus und d = Dokumente). Um solch einen Thesaurus zu konstruieren, muss man demnach etwa 1.600 Dokumente von unterschiedlichen Themen des Bereiches des Thesaurus haben. Die dynamische Entwicklung von Thesauri wie MeSH erfordert die Einführung eines neuen Begriffs pro Indexierung von 256 neuen Dokumenten. 2. Die Verteilung der Thesaurusbegriffe erbrachte drei Kategorien: starke, normale und selten verwendete Headings. Die letzte Gruppe ist in einer Testphase, während in der ersten und zweiten Kategorie die neu hinzukommenden Deskriptoren zu einem Thesauruswachstum führen. 3. Es gibt ein logarithmisches Verhältnis zwischen der Zahl von Index-Begriffen pro Aufsatz und dessen Seitenzahl für die Artikeln zwischen einer und einundzwanzig Seiten. 4. Zeitschriftenaufsätze, die in MEDLINE mit Abstracts erscheinen erhalten fast zwei Deskriptoren mehr. 5. Die Findablity der nicht-englisch sprachigen Dokumente in MEDLINE ist geringer als die englische Dokumente. 6. Aufsätze der Zeitschriften mit einem Impact Factor 0 bis fünfzehn erhalten nicht mehr Indexbegriffe als die der anderen von MEDINE erfassten Zeitschriften. 7. In einem Indexierungssystem haben unterschiedliche Zeitschriften mehr oder weniger Gewicht in ihrem Findability. Die Verteilung der Indexbegriffe pro Seite hat gezeigt, dass es bei MEDLINE drei Kategorien der Publikationen gibt. Außerdem gibt es wenige stark bevorzugten Zeitschriften."
    Footnote
    Dissertation, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin - Institut für Bibliotheks- und Informationswissenschaft.
    Imprint
    Berlin : Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin / Institut für Bibliotheks- und Informationswissenschaft
    Theme
    Konzeption und Anwendung des Prinzips Thesaurus
  15. Cabanac, G.: Shaping the landscape of research in information systems from the perspective of editorial boards : a scientometric study of 77 leading journals (2012) 0.01 
    0.0059868526 = product of:
  0.044901393 = sum of:
    0.038981467 = weight(_text_:informationswissenschaft in 242) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.038981467 = score(doc=242,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13053758 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028978055 = queryNorm
        0.29862255 = fieldWeight in 242, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=242)
    0.005919926 = product of:
      0.011839852 = sum of:
        0.011839852 = weight(_text_:information in 242) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011839852 = score(doc=242,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.028978055 = queryNorm
            0.23274569 = fieldWeight in 242, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=242)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.13333334 = coord(2/15)
    Abstract
    Characteristics of the Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology and 76 other journals listed in the InformationSystems category of the Journal Citation Reports-Science edition 2009 were analyzed. Besides reporting usual bibliographic indicators, we investigated the human cornerstone of any peer-reviewed journal: its editorial board. Demographic data about the 2,846 gatekeepers serving in information systems (IS) editorial boards were collected. We discuss various scientometric indicators supported by descriptive statistics. Our findings reflect the great variety of IS journals in terms of research output, author communities, editorial boards, and gatekeeper demographics (e.g., diversity in gender and location), seniority, authority, and degree of involvement in editorial boards. We believe that these results may help the general public and scholars (e.g., readers, authors, journal gatekeepers, policy makers) to revise and increase their knowledge of scholarly communication in the IS field. The EB_IS_2009 dataset supporting this scientometric study is released as online supplementary material to this article to foster further research on editorial boards.
    Field
    Informationswissenschaft
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 63(2012) no.5, S.977-996
  16. Tuomaala, O.; Järvelin, K.; Vakkari, P.: Evolution of library and information science, 1965-2005 : content analysis of journal articles (2014) 0.01 
    0.005470565 = product of:
  0.041029237 = sum of:
    0.032484557 = weight(_text_:informationswissenschaft in 1309) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.032484557 = score(doc=1309,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13053758 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028978055 = queryNorm
        0.24885213 = fieldWeight in 1309, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1309)
    0.008544678 = product of:
      0.017089356 = sum of:
        0.017089356 = weight(_text_:information in 1309) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017089356 = score(doc=1309,freq=24.0), product of:
            0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.028978055 = queryNorm
            0.3359395 = fieldWeight in 1309, product of:
              4.8989797 = tf(freq=24.0), with freq of:
                24.0 = termFreq=24.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1309)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.13333334 = coord(2/15)
    Abstract
    This article first analyzes library and information science (LIS) research articles published in core LIS journals in 2005. It also examines the development of LIS from 1965 to 2005 in light of comparable data sets for 1965, 1985, and 2005. In both cases, the authors report (a) how the research articles are distributed by topic and (b) what approaches, research strategies, and methods were applied in the articles. In 2005, the largest research areas in LIS by this measure were information storage and retrieval, scientific communication, library and information-service activities, and information seeking. The same research areas constituted the quantitative core of LIS in the previous years since 1965. Information retrieval has been the most popular area of research over the years. The proportion of research on library and information-service activities decreased after 1985, but the popularity of information seeking and of scientific communication grew during the period studied. The viewpoint of research has shifted from library and information organizations to end users and development of systems for the latter. The proportion of empirical research strategies was high and rose over time, with the survey method being the single most important method. However, attention to evaluation and experiments increased considerably after 1985. Conceptual research strategies and system analysis, description, and design were quite popular, but declining. The most significant changes from 1965 to 2005 are the decreasing interest in library and information-service activities and the growth of research into information seeking and scientific communication.
    Field
    Informationswissenschaft
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 65(2014) no.7, S.1446-1462
  17. Dobrota, M.; Dobrota, M.: ARWU ranking uncertainty and sensitivity : what if the award factor was Excluded? (2016) 0.01 
    0.0051884186 = product of:
  0.03891314 = sum of:
    0.009436456 = weight(_text_:und in 2652) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009436456 = score(doc=2652,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06422601 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028978055 = queryNorm
        0.14692576 = fieldWeight in 2652, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2652)
    0.029476684 = sum of:
      0.005919926 = weight(_text_:information in 2652) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.005919926 = score(doc=2652,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
            0.028978055 = queryNorm
          0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 2652, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2652)
      0.023556758 = weight(_text_:22 in 2652) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.023556758 = score(doc=2652,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.101476215 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.028978055 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2652, 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=2652)
  0.13333334 = coord(2/15)
    Date
    22. 1.2016 14:40:53
    Footnote
    Autoren: Milan Dobrota und Marina Dobrota
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 67(2016) no.2, S.480-482
  18. Zhao, D.; Strotmann, A.: ¬The knowledge base and research front of information science 2006-2010 : an author cocitation and bibliographic coupling analysis (2014) 0.00 
    0.0049890443 = product of:
  0.03741783 = sum of:
    0.032484557 = weight(_text_:informationswissenschaft in 1259) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.032484557 = score(doc=1259,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13053758 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028978055 = queryNorm
        0.24885213 = fieldWeight in 1259, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1259)
    0.0049332716 = product of:
      0.009866543 = sum of:
        0.009866543 = weight(_text_:information in 1259) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.009866543 = score(doc=1259,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.028978055 = queryNorm
            0.19395474 = fieldWeight in 1259, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1259)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.13333334 = coord(2/15)
    Abstract
    This study continues a long history of author cocitation analysis (and more recently, author bibliographic coupling analysis) of the intellectual structure of information science (IS) into the time period 2006 to 2010 (IS 2006-2010). We find that web technologies continue to drive developments, especially at the research front, although perhaps more indirectly than before. A broadening of perspectives is visible in IS 2006-2010, where network science becomes influential and where full-text analysis methods complement traditional computer science influences. Research in the areas of the h-index and mapping of science appears to have been highlights of IS 2006-2011. This study tests and confirms a forecast made previously by comparing knowledge-base and research-front findings for IS 2001-2005, which expected both the information retrieval (IR) systems and webometrics specialties to shrink in 2006 to 2010. A corresponding comparison of the knowledge base and research front of IS 2006-2010 suggests a continuing decline of the IR systems specialty in the near future, but also a considerable (re)growth of the webometrics area after a period of decline from 2001 to 2005 and 2006 to 2010, with the latter due perhaps in part to its contribution to an emerging web science.
    Field
    Informationswissenschaft
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 65(2014) no.5, S.995-1006
  19. Tüür-Fröhlich, T.: Closed vs. Open Access : Szientometrische Untersuchung dreier sozialwissenschaftlicher Zeitschriften aus der Genderperspektive (2011) 0.00 
    0.0046122675 = product of:
  0.034592003 = sum of:
    0.031138714 = weight(_text_:und in 4505) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.031138714 = score(doc=4505,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.06422601 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028978055 = queryNorm
        0.4848303 = fieldWeight in 4505, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4505)
    0.00345329 = product of:
      0.00690658 = sum of:
        0.00690658 = weight(_text_:information in 4505) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.00690658 = score(doc=4505,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.028978055 = queryNorm
            0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 4505, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4505)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.13333334 = coord(2/15)
    Abstract
    Der Artikel ist Teil einer größeren Untersuchung zu den Potentialen von Open Access Publishing zur Erhöhung der Publikations- und damit Karrierechancen von Sozialwissenschaftlerinnen. Es werden drei inhaltlich und methodisch ähnliche sozialwissenschaftliche Zeitschriften verglichen: das Open-Access-Journal "Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung" ("FQS") und die zwei Closed-Access-/Hybridjournale "Zeitschrift für qualitative Forschung" und "Sozialer Sinn". Erhoben wird (a) der jeweilige Frauenanteil unter Redaktions- und Beiratsmitgliedern dieser drei Zeitschriften (N=184 insgesamt), (b) aufwändig rekonstruiert und analysiert wird die Genderstruktur der Autorenschaften aller in den drei Zeitschriften zwischen 2000 und 2008 veröffentlichten Beiträge (Totalerhebung, N=1557 insgesamt).
    Source
    Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 62(2011) H.4, S.173-176
  20. Tüür-Fröhlich, T.: Blackbox SSCI : Datenerfassung und Datenverarbeitung bei der kommerziellen Indexierung von Zitaten (2019) 0.00 
    0.004251994 = product of:
  0.031889956 = sum of:
    0.02942332 = weight(_text_:und in 5779) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02942332 = score(doc=5779,freq=28.0), product of:
        0.06422601 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028978055 = queryNorm
        0.45812157 = fieldWeight in 5779, product of:
          5.2915025 = tf(freq=28.0), with freq of:
            28.0 = termFreq=28.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5779)
    0.0024666358 = product of:
      0.0049332716 = sum of:
        0.0049332716 = weight(_text_:information in 5779) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0049332716 = score(doc=5779,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.028978055 = queryNorm
            0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 5779, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5779)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.13333334 = coord(2/15)
    Abstract
    Zahlreiche Autoren, Autorinnen und kritische Initiativen (z. B. DORA) kritisieren den zu hohen und schädlichen Einfluss quantitativer Daten, welche akademische Instanzen für Evaluationszwecke heranziehen. Wegen des großen Einflusses der globalen Zitatdatenbanken von Thomson Reuters (bzw. Clarivate Analytics) auf die Bewertung der wissenschaftlichen Leistungen von Forscherinnen und Forschern habe ich extensive qualitative und quantitative Fallstudien zur Datenqualität des Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI) durchgeführt, d. h. die Originaleinträge mit den SSCI-Datensätzen verglichen. Diese Fallstudien zeigten schwerste - nie in der Literatur erwähnte - Fehler, Verstümmelungen, Phantomautoren, Phantomwerke (Fehlerrate in der Fallstudie zu Beebe 2010, Harvard Law Review: 99 Prozent). Über die verwendeten Datenerfassungs- und Indexierungsverfahren von TR bzw. Clarivate Analytics ist nur wenig bekannt. Ein Ergebnis meiner Untersuchungen: Bei der Indexierung von Verweisen in Fußnoten (wie in den Rechtswissenschaften, gerade auch der USA, vorgeschrieben) scheinen die verwendeten Textanalyse-Anwendungen und -Algorithmen völlig überfordert. Eine Qualitätskontrolle scheint nicht stattzufinden. Damit steht der Anspruch des SSCI als einer multidisziplinären Datenbank zur Debatte. Korrekte Zitate in den Fußnoten des Originals können zu Phantom-Autoren, Phantom-Werken und Phantom-Referenzen degenerieren. Das bedeutet: Sämtliche Zeitschriften und Disziplinen, deren Zeitschriften und Büchern dieses oder ähnliche Zitierverfahren verwenden (Oxford-Style), laufen Gefahr, aufgrund starker Zitatverluste falsch, d. h. unterbewertet, zu werden. Wie viele UBOs (Unidentifiable Bibliographic Objects) sich in den Datenbanken SCI, SSCI und AHCI befinden, wäre nur mit sehr aufwändigen Prozeduren zu klären. Unabhängig davon handelt es sich, wie bei fast allen in meinen Untersuchungen gefundenen fatalen Fehlern, eindeutig um endogene Fehler in den Datenbanken, die nicht, wie oft behauptet, angeblich falsch zitierenden Autorinnen und Autoren zugeschrieben werden können, sondern erst im Laufe der Dateneingabe und -verarbeitung entstehen.
    Source
    Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 70(2019) H.5/6, S.241-248

Authors

Languages

  • e 539
  • d 35
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 564
  • el 10
  • m 7
  • s 2
  • x 1
  • More… Less…

Themes

Subjects

Classifications