Search (134 results, page 1 of 7)

  • × theme_ss:"Informetrie"
  • × year_i:[2010 TO 2020}
  1. Li, J.; Shi, D.: Sleeping beauties in genius work : when were they awakened? (2016) 0.06 
    0.06425877 = product of:
  0.1927763 = sum of:
    0.1927763 = sum of:
      0.15702708 = weight(_text_:van in 2647) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.15702708 = score(doc=2647,freq=6.0), product of:
          0.24523866 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.5765896 = idf(docFreq=454, maxDocs=44218)
            0.04397646 = queryNorm
          0.64030313 = fieldWeight in 2647, product of:
            2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
              6.0 = termFreq=6.0
            5.5765896 = idf(docFreq=454, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2647)
      0.035749216 = weight(_text_:22 in 2647) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.035749216 = score(doc=2647,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.15399806 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.04397646 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2647, 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=2647)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    "Genius work," proposed by Avramescu, refers to scientific articles whose citations grow exponentially in an extended period, for example, over 50 years. Such articles were defined as "sleeping beauties" by van Raan, who quantitatively studied the phenomenon of delayed recognition. However, the criteria adopted by van Raan at times are not applicable and may confer recognition prematurely. To revise such deficiencies, this paper proposes two new criteria, which are applicable (but not limited) to exponential citation curves. We searched for genius work among articles of Nobel Prize laureates during the period of 1901-2012 on the Web of Science, finding 25 articles of genius work out of 21,438 papers including 10 (by van Raan's criteria) sleeping beauties and 15 nonsleeping-beauties. By our new criteria, two findings were obtained through empirical analysis: (a) the awakening periods for genius work depend on the increase rate b in the exponential function, and (b) lower b leads to a longer sleeping period.
    Date
    22. 1.2016 14:13:32
  2. Wan, X.; Liu, F.: Are all literature citations equally important? : automatic citation strength estimation and its applications (2014) 0.04 
    0.04279185 = product of:
  0.06418777 = sum of:
    0.046313167 = weight(_text_:f in 1350) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.046313167 = score(doc=1350,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17528075 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.985786 = idf(docFreq=2232, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04397646 = queryNorm
        0.26422277 = fieldWeight in 1350, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.985786 = idf(docFreq=2232, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1350)
    0.017874608 = product of:
      0.035749216 = sum of:
        0.035749216 = weight(_text_:22 in 1350) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.035749216 = score(doc=1350,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15399806 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04397646 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1350, 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=1350)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Date
    22. 8.2014 17:12:35
  3. Kronegger, L.; Mali, F.; Ferligoj, A.; Doreian, P.: Classifying scientific disciplines in Slovenia : a study of the evolution of collaboration structures (2015) 0.04 
    0.04279185 = product of:
  0.06418777 = sum of:
    0.046313167 = weight(_text_:f in 1639) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.046313167 = score(doc=1639,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17528075 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.985786 = idf(docFreq=2232, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04397646 = queryNorm
        0.26422277 = fieldWeight in 1639, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.985786 = idf(docFreq=2232, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1639)
    0.017874608 = product of:
      0.035749216 = sum of:
        0.035749216 = weight(_text_:22 in 1639) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.035749216 = score(doc=1639,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15399806 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04397646 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1639, 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=1639)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Date
    21. 1.2015 14:55:22
  4. Didegah, F.; Thelwall, M.: Co-saved, co-tweeted, and co-cited networks (2018) 0.04 
    0.04279185 = product of:
  0.06418777 = sum of:
    0.046313167 = weight(_text_:f in 4291) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.046313167 = score(doc=4291,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17528075 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.985786 = idf(docFreq=2232, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04397646 = queryNorm
        0.26422277 = fieldWeight in 4291, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.985786 = idf(docFreq=2232, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4291)
    0.017874608 = product of:
      0.035749216 = sum of:
        0.035749216 = weight(_text_:22 in 4291) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.035749216 = score(doc=4291,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15399806 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04397646 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4291, 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=4291)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Date
    28. 7.2018 10:00:22
  5. Metrics in research : for better or worse? (2016) 0.04 
    0.040730216 = product of:
  0.06109532 = sum of:
    0.030875444 = weight(_text_:f in 3312) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.030875444 = score(doc=3312,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17528075 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.985786 = idf(docFreq=2232, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04397646 = queryNorm
        0.17614852 = fieldWeight in 3312, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.985786 = idf(docFreq=2232, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3312)
    0.030219873 = product of:
      0.060439747 = sum of:
        0.060439747 = weight(_text_:van in 3312) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.060439747 = score(doc=3312,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.24523866 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.5765896 = idf(docFreq=454, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04397646 = queryNorm
            0.24645276 = fieldWeight in 3312, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.5765896 = idf(docFreq=454, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3312)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Content
    Inhalt: Metrics in Research - For better or worse? / Jozica Dolenc, Philippe Hünenberger Oliver Renn - A brief visual history of research metrics / Oliver Renn, Jozica Dolenc, Joachim Schnabl - Bibliometry: The wizard of O's / Philippe Hünenberger - The grip of bibliometrics - A student perspective / Matthias Tinzl - Honesty and transparency to taxpayers is the long-term fundament for stable university funding / Wendelin J. Stark - Beyond metrics: Managing the performance of your work / Charlie Rapple - Scientific profiling instead of bibliometrics: Key performance indicators of the future / Rafael Ball - More knowledge, less numbers / Carl Philipp Rosenau - Do we really need BIBLIO-metrics to evaluate individual researchers? / Rüdiger Mutz - Using research metrics responsibly and effectively as a researcher / Peter I. Darroch, Lisa H. Colledge - Metrics in research: More (valuable) questions than answers / Urs Hugentobler - Publication of research results: Use and abuse / Wilfred F. van Gunsteren - Wanted: Transparent algorithms, interpretation skills, common sense / Eva E. Wille - Impact factors, the h-index, and citation hype - Metrics in research from the point of view of a journal editor / Renato Zenobi - Rashomon or metrics in a publisher's world / Gabriella Karger - The impact factor and I: A love-hate relationship / Jean-Christophe Leroux - Personal experiences bringing altmetrics to the academic market / Ben McLeish - Fatally attracted by numbers? / Oliver Renn - On computable numbers / Gerd Folkers, Laura Folkers - ScienceMatters - Single observation science publishing and linking observations to create an internet of science / Lawrence Rajendran.
  6. Bartolucci, F.: On a possible decomposition of the h-index. (2012) 0.03 
    0.030875444 = product of:
  0.09262633 = sum of:
    0.09262633 = weight(_text_:f in 454) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09262633 = score(doc=454,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17528075 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.985786 = idf(docFreq=2232, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04397646 = queryNorm
        0.52844554 = fieldWeight in 454, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.985786 = idf(docFreq=2232, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=454)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  7. Freistetter, F.: Warum jeder (fast) jeden kennt (2017) 0.03 
    0.030875444 = product of:
  0.09262633 = sum of:
    0.09262633 = weight(_text_:f in 3679) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09262633 = score(doc=3679,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17528075 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.985786 = idf(docFreq=2232, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04397646 = queryNorm
        0.52844554 = fieldWeight in 3679, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.985786 = idf(docFreq=2232, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3679)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  8. Hjoerland, B.: Does informetrics need a theory? : a rejoinder to professor anthony van raan (2017) 0.03 
    0.030219873 = product of:
  0.09065962 = sum of:
    0.09065962 = product of:
      0.18131924 = sum of:
        0.18131924 = weight(_text_:van in 3967) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.18131924 = score(doc=3967,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.24523866 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.5765896 = idf(docFreq=454, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04397646 = queryNorm
            0.7393583 = fieldWeight in 3967, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.5765896 = idf(docFreq=454, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3967)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  9. Haustein, S.: Scientific interactions and research evaluation : from bibliometrics to Altmetrics (2015) 0.03 
    0.025729537 = product of:
  0.07718861 = sum of:
    0.07718861 = weight(_text_:f in 2981) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07718861 = score(doc=2981,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17528075 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.985786 = idf(docFreq=2232, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04397646 = queryNorm
        0.4403713 = fieldWeight in 2981, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.985786 = idf(docFreq=2232, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2981)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    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. Lewandowski, D.; Haustein, S.: What does the German-language information science community cite? (2015) 0.03 
    0.025729537 = product of:
  0.07718861 = sum of:
    0.07718861 = weight(_text_:f in 2987) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07718861 = score(doc=2987,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17528075 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.985786 = idf(docFreq=2232, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04397646 = queryNorm
        0.4403713 = fieldWeight in 2987, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.985786 = idf(docFreq=2232, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2987)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    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
  11. Waltman, L.; Eck, N.J. van; Raan, A.F.J. van: Universality of citation distributions revisited (2012) 0.02 
    0.024930123 = product of:
  0.074790366 = sum of:
    0.074790366 = product of:
      0.14958073 = sum of:
        0.14958073 = weight(_text_:van in 4963) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.14958073 = score(doc=4963,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.24523866 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.5765896 = idf(docFreq=454, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04397646 = queryNorm
            0.60993946 = fieldWeight in 4963, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              5.5765896 = idf(docFreq=454, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4963)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  12. Waltman, L.; Calero-Medina, C.; Kosten, J.; Noyons, E.C.M.; Tijssen, R.J.W.; Eck, N.J. van; Leeuwen, T.N. van; Raan, A.F.J. van; Visser, M.S.; Wouters, P.: ¬The Leiden ranking 2011/2012 : data collection, indicators, and interpretation (2012) 0.02 
    0.021809315 = product of:
  0.065427944 = sum of:
    0.065427944 = product of:
      0.13085589 = sum of:
        0.13085589 = weight(_text_:van in 514) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.13085589 = score(doc=514,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.24523866 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.5765896 = idf(docFreq=454, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04397646 = queryNorm
            0.5335859 = fieldWeight in 514, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              5.5765896 = idf(docFreq=454, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=514)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  13. Eck, N.J. van; Waltman, L.; Dekker, R.; Berg, J. van den: ¬A comparison of two techniques for bibliometric mapping : multidimensional scaling and VOS (2010) 0.02 
    0.021368679 = product of:
  0.06410603 = sum of:
    0.06410603 = product of:
      0.12821206 = sum of:
        0.12821206 = weight(_text_:van in 4112) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.12821206 = score(doc=4112,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.24523866 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.5765896 = idf(docFreq=454, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04397646 = queryNorm
            0.5228053 = fieldWeight in 4112, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              5.5765896 = idf(docFreq=454, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4112)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  14. Jonkers, K.; Derrick, G.E.: ¬The bibliometric bandwagon : characteristics of bibliometric articles outside the field literature (2012) 0.02 
    0.021368679 = product of:
  0.06410603 = sum of:
    0.06410603 = product of:
      0.12821206 = sum of:
        0.12821206 = weight(_text_:van in 261) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.12821206 = score(doc=261,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.24523866 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.5765896 = idf(docFreq=454, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04397646 = queryNorm
            0.5228053 = fieldWeight in 261, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              5.5765896 = idf(docFreq=454, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=261)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    The controversial use of bibliometrics in scientific decision making has necessitated the need for researchers to remain informed and engaged about bibliometrics. Glänzel and Schoepflin () first raised the issue of bibliometric standards in bibliometric research and this concern has been echoed by several additional bibliometric researchers over time (Braun, ; Glänzel, ; Abbott, Cyranoski, Jones, Maher, Schiermeier, & Van Noorden, ; Lane, ; Nature, ; van Noorden, ; Wallin, ). We compare the characteristics of articles published within and outside the Library and Information Science (LIS) field, including the relative impact and the affiliation of the contributing authors. We find that although the visibility of bibliometric articles within LIS is higher, it is not significant. However, a statistically significant growth in the number of articles written by authors without a bibliometric affiliation was found. This article provides an independent empirical investigation of publication trends potentially underlying Glänzel and Schoepflin's () concerns regarding the misuse of bibliometric results, and the inaccurate dissemination of concepts, results, and methods outside of the bibliometric field.
  15. Ye, F.Y.: ¬A theoretical approach to the unification of informetric models by wave-heat equations (2011) 0.02 
    0.02058363 = product of:
  0.06175089 = sum of:
    0.06175089 = weight(_text_:f in 4464) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06175089 = score(doc=4464,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17528075 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.985786 = idf(docFreq=2232, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04397646 = queryNorm
        0.35229704 = fieldWeight in 4464, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.985786 = idf(docFreq=2232, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4464)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    A simple distribution function f(x, t)=p(x+q)**-ße**alpha*t obeys wave and heat equations, that constructs a theoretical approach to the unification of informetric models, with which we can unify all informetric laws. While its space-type distributions deduce naturally Lotka-type laws in size approaches and Zipf-type laws in rank approaches, its time-type distributions introduce the mechanism of Price-type and Brookes-type laws.
  16. Cobo, M.J.; López-Herrera, A.G.; Herrera-Viedma, E.; Herrera, F.: Science mapping software tools : review, analysis, and cooperative study among tools (2011) 0.02 
    0.02058363 = product of:
  0.06175089 = sum of:
    0.06175089 = weight(_text_:f in 4486) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06175089 = score(doc=4486,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17528075 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.985786 = idf(docFreq=2232, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04397646 = queryNorm
        0.35229704 = fieldWeight in 4486, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.985786 = idf(docFreq=2232, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4486)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  17. Bartolucci, F.: ¬A comparison between the g-index and the h-index based on concentration (2015) 0.02 
    0.02058363 = product of:
  0.06175089 = sum of:
    0.06175089 = weight(_text_:f in 2350) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06175089 = score(doc=2350,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17528075 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.985786 = idf(docFreq=2232, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04397646 = queryNorm
        0.35229704 = fieldWeight in 2350, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.985786 = idf(docFreq=2232, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2350)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  18. Biagetti, M.T.; Iacono, A.; Trombone, A.: Testing library catalog analysis as a bibliometric indicator for research evaluation in social sciences and humanities (2018) 0.02 
    0.02058363 = product of:
  0.06175089 = sum of:
    0.06175089 = weight(_text_:f in 4868) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06175089 = score(doc=4868,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17528075 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.985786 = idf(docFreq=2232, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04397646 = queryNorm
        0.35229704 = fieldWeight in 4868, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.985786 = idf(docFreq=2232, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4868)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Source
    Challenges and opportunities for knowledge organization in the digital age: proceedings of the Fifteenth International ISKO Conference, 9-11 July 2018, Porto, Portugal / organized by: International Society for Knowledge Organization (ISKO), ISKO Spain and Portugal Chapter, University of Porto - Faculty of Arts and Humanities, Research Centre in Communication, Information and Digital Culture (CIC.digital) - Porto. Eds.: F. Ribeiro u. M.E. Cerveira
  19. Botting, N.; Dipper, L.; Hilari, K.: ¬The effect of social media promotion on academic article uptake (2017) 0.02 
    0.018193532 = product of:
  0.05458059 = sum of:
    0.05458059 = weight(_text_:f in 3522) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05458059 = score(doc=3522,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.17528075 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.985786 = idf(docFreq=2232, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04397646 = queryNorm
        0.31138954 = fieldWeight in 3522, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.985786 = idf(docFreq=2232, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3522)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    Important emerging measures of academic impact are article download and citation rates. Yet little is known about the influences on these and ways in which academics might manage this approach to dissemination. Three groups of papers by academics in a center for speech-language-science (available through a university repository) were compared. The first group of target papers were blogged, and the blogs were systematically tweeted. The second group of connected control papers were nonblogged papers that we carefully matched for author, topic, and year of publication. The third group were papers by different staff members on a variety of topics-Unrelated Control Papers. The results suggest an effect of social media on download rate, which was limited not just to Target Papers but also generalized to Connected Control Papers. Unrelated Control Papers showed no increase over the same amount of time (main effect of time, F(1,27)?=?55.6, p?<?.001); Significant Group×Time Interaction, F(2,27)?=?7.9, p?=?.002). The effect on citation rates was less clear but followed the same trend. The only predictor of the 2015 citation rate was downloads after blogging (r?=?0.450, p?=?.012). These preliminary results suggest that promotion of academic articles via social media may enhance download and citation rate and that this has implications for impact strategies.
  20. Cobo, M.J.; López-Herrera, A.G.; Herrera-Viedma, E.; Herrera, F.: SciMAT: A new science mapping analysis software tool (2012) 0.02 
    0.018010676 = product of:
  0.054032028 = sum of:
    0.054032028 = weight(_text_:f in 373) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.054032028 = score(doc=373,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17528075 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.985786 = idf(docFreq=2232, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04397646 = queryNorm
        0.3082599 = fieldWeight in 373, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.985786 = idf(docFreq=2232, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=373)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Authors

Languages

  • e 127
  • d 6
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 130
  • el 3
  • m 3
  • s 3
  • More… Less…

Themes

Subjects

Classifications