Search (176 results, page 4 of 9)

  • × theme_ss:"Informetrie"
  1. Samoylenko, I.; Chao, T.-C.; Liu, W.-C.; Chen, C.-M.: Visualizing the scientific world and its evolution (2006) 0.01 
    0.011671098 = product of:
  0.023342196 = sum of:
    0.023342196 = product of:
      0.04668439 = sum of:
        0.04668439 = weight(_text_:t in 5911) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04668439 = score(doc=5911,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17876579 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9394085 = idf(docFreq=2338, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04537884 = queryNorm
            0.26114836 = fieldWeight in 5911, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.9394085 = idf(docFreq=2338, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5911)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
  2. Zhang, C.-T.: Relationship of the h-index, g-index, and e-index (2010) 0.01 
    0.011671098 = product of:
  0.023342196 = sum of:
    0.023342196 = product of:
      0.04668439 = sum of:
        0.04668439 = weight(_text_:t in 3418) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04668439 = score(doc=3418,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17876579 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9394085 = idf(docFreq=2338, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04537884 = queryNorm
            0.26114836 = fieldWeight in 3418, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.9394085 = idf(docFreq=2338, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3418)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
  3. West, J.; Bergstrom, T.; Bergstrom, C.T.: Big Macs and Eigenfactor scores : don't let correlation coefficients fool you (2010) 0.01 
    0.011671098 = product of:
  0.023342196 = sum of:
    0.023342196 = product of:
      0.04668439 = sum of:
        0.04668439 = weight(_text_:t in 3982) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04668439 = score(doc=3982,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17876579 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9394085 = idf(docFreq=2338, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04537884 = queryNorm
            0.26114836 = fieldWeight in 3982, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.9394085 = idf(docFreq=2338, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3982)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
  4. Leydesdorff, L.; Opthof, T.: Scopus's source normalized impact per paper (SNIP) versus a journal impact factor based on fractional counting of citations (2010) 0.01 
    0.011671098 = product of:
  0.023342196 = sum of:
    0.023342196 = product of:
      0.04668439 = sum of:
        0.04668439 = weight(_text_:t in 4107) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04668439 = score(doc=4107,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17876579 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9394085 = idf(docFreq=2338, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04537884 = queryNorm
            0.26114836 = fieldWeight in 4107, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.9394085 = idf(docFreq=2338, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4107)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
  5. Bouyssou, D.; Marchant, T.: Ranking scientists and departments in a consistent manner (2011) 0.01 
    0.011671098 = product of:
  0.023342196 = sum of:
    0.023342196 = product of:
      0.04668439 = sum of:
        0.04668439 = weight(_text_:t in 4751) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04668439 = score(doc=4751,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17876579 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9394085 = idf(docFreq=2338, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04537884 = queryNorm
            0.26114836 = fieldWeight in 4751, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.9394085 = idf(docFreq=2338, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4751)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
  6. Heinze, T.; Heidler, R.; Heiberger, R.H.; Riebling, J.: New patterns of scientific growth : how research expanded after the invention of scanning tunneling microscopy and the discovery of Buckminsterfullerenes (2013) 0.01 
    0.011671098 = product of:
  0.023342196 = sum of:
    0.023342196 = product of:
      0.04668439 = sum of:
        0.04668439 = weight(_text_:t in 688) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04668439 = score(doc=688,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17876579 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9394085 = idf(docFreq=2338, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04537884 = queryNorm
            0.26114836 = fieldWeight in 688, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.9394085 = idf(docFreq=2338, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=688)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
  7. Leydesdorff, L.; Opthof, T.: Citation analysis with medical subject Headings (MeSH) using the Web of Knowledge : a new routine (2013) 0.01 
    0.011671098 = product of:
  0.023342196 = sum of:
    0.023342196 = product of:
      0.04668439 = sum of:
        0.04668439 = weight(_text_:t in 943) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04668439 = score(doc=943,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17876579 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9394085 = idf(docFreq=2338, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04537884 = queryNorm
            0.26114836 = fieldWeight in 943, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.9394085 = idf(docFreq=2338, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=943)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
  8. Song, M.; Kim, S.Y.; Zhang, G.; Ding, Y.; Chambers, T.: Productivity and influence in bioinformatics : a bibliometric analysis using PubMed central (2014) 0.01 
    0.011671098 = product of:
  0.023342196 = sum of:
    0.023342196 = product of:
      0.04668439 = sum of:
        0.04668439 = weight(_text_:t in 1202) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04668439 = score(doc=1202,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17876579 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9394085 = idf(docFreq=2338, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04537884 = queryNorm
            0.26114836 = fieldWeight in 1202, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.9394085 = idf(docFreq=2338, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1202)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
  9. Härder, T.; Poetzsch-Heffter, A.: Bibliometrie: ein zweischneidiges Schwert (2013) 0.01 
    0.011671098 = product of:
  0.023342196 = sum of:
    0.023342196 = product of:
      0.04668439 = sum of:
        0.04668439 = weight(_text_:t in 3979) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04668439 = score(doc=3979,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17876579 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9394085 = idf(docFreq=2338, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04537884 = queryNorm
            0.26114836 = fieldWeight in 3979, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.9394085 = idf(docFreq=2338, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3979)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
  10. Tüür-Fröhlich, T.: ¬Eine "autoritative" Datenbank auf dem Prüfstand : der Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI) und seine Datenqualität (2018) 0.01 
    0.011671098 = product of:
  0.023342196 = sum of:
    0.023342196 = product of:
      0.04668439 = sum of:
        0.04668439 = weight(_text_:t in 4591) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04668439 = score(doc=4591,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17876579 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9394085 = idf(docFreq=2338, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04537884 = queryNorm
            0.26114836 = fieldWeight in 4591, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.9394085 = idf(docFreq=2338, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4591)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
  11. Tavakolizadeh-Ravari, M.: Analysis of the long term dynamics in thesaurus developments and its consequences (2017) 0.01 
    0.011003617 = product of:
  0.022007234 = sum of:
    0.022007234 = product of:
      0.04401447 = sum of:
        0.04401447 = weight(_text_:t in 3081) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04401447 = score(doc=3081,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.17876579 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9394085 = idf(docFreq=2338, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04537884 = queryNorm
            0.24621303 = fieldWeight in 3081, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.9394085 = idf(docFreq=2338, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3081)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    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."
  12. 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) 0.01 
    0.010868597 = product of:
  0.021737194 = sum of:
    0.021737194 = product of:
      0.043474387 = sum of:
        0.043474387 = weight(_text_:22 in 2808) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.043474387 = score(doc=2808,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.15890898 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04537884 = 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)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    30. 1.1999 17:22:22
  13. Levitt, J.M.; Thelwall, M.: Citation levels and collaboration within library and information science (2009) 0.01 
    0.010868597 = product of:
  0.021737194 = sum of:
    0.021737194 = product of:
      0.043474387 = sum of:
        0.043474387 = weight(_text_:22 in 2734) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.043474387 = score(doc=2734,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.15890898 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04537884 = queryNorm
            0.27358043 = fieldWeight in 2734, 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=2734)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Collaboration is a major research policy objective, but does it deliver higher quality research? This study uses citation analysis to examine the Web of Science (WoS) Information Science & Library Science subject category (IS&LS) to ascertain whether, in general, more highly cited articles are more highly collaborative than other articles. It consists of two investigations. The first investigation is a longitudinal comparison of the degree and proportion of collaboration in five strata of citation; it found that collaboration in the highest four citation strata (all in the most highly cited 22%) increased in unison over time, whereas collaboration in the lowest citation strata (un-cited articles) remained low and stable. Given that over 40% of the articles were un-cited, it seems important to take into account the differences found between un-cited articles and relatively highly cited articles when investigating collaboration in IS&LS. The second investigation compares collaboration for 35 influential information scientists; it found that their more highly cited articles on average were not more highly collaborative than their less highly cited articles. In summary, although collaborative research is conducive to high citation in general, collaboration has apparently not tended to be essential to the success of current and former elite information scientists.
    Date
    22. 3.2009 12:43:51
  14. Crespo, J.A.; Herranz, N.; Li, Y.; Ruiz-Castillo, J.: ¬The effect on citation inequality of differences in citation practices at the web of science subject category level (2014) 0.01 
    0.010868597 = product of:
  0.021737194 = sum of:
    0.021737194 = product of:
      0.043474387 = sum of:
        0.043474387 = weight(_text_:22 in 1291) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.043474387 = score(doc=1291,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.15890898 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04537884 = queryNorm
            0.27358043 = fieldWeight in 1291, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1291)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    This article studies the impact of differences in citation practices at the subfield, or Web of Science subject category level, using the model introduced in Crespo, Li, and Ruiz-Castillo (2013a), according to which the number of citations received by an article depends on its underlying scientific influence and the field to which it belongs. We use the same Thomson Reuters data set of about 4.4 million articles used in Crespo et al. (2013a) to analyze 22 broad fields. The main results are the following: First, when the classification system goes from 22 fields to 219 subfields the effect on citation inequality of differences in citation practices increases from ?14% at the field level to 18% at the subfield level. Second, we estimate a set of exchange rates (ERs) over a wide [660, 978] citation quantile interval to express the citation counts of articles into the equivalent counts in the all-sciences case. In the fractional case, for example, we find that in 187 of 219 subfields the ERs are reliable in the sense that the coefficient of variation is smaller than or equal to 0.10. Third, in the fractional case the normalization of the raw data using the ERs (or subfield mean citations) as normalization factors reduces the importance of the differences in citation practices from 18% to 3.8% (3.4%) of overall citation inequality. Fourth, the results in the fractional case are essentially replicated when we adopt a multiplicative approach.
  15. Yan, E.: Finding knowledge paths among scientific disciplines (2014) 0.01 
    0.010868597 = product of:
  0.021737194 = sum of:
    0.021737194 = product of:
      0.043474387 = sum of:
        0.043474387 = weight(_text_:22 in 1534) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.043474387 = score(doc=1534,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.15890898 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04537884 = queryNorm
            0.27358043 = fieldWeight in 1534, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1534)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    26.10.2014 20:22:22
  16. Zhu, Q.; Kong, X.; Hong, S.; Li, J.; He, Z.: Global ontology research progress : a bibliometric analysis (2015) 0.01 
    0.010868597 = product of:
  0.021737194 = sum of:
    0.021737194 = product of:
      0.043474387 = sum of:
        0.043474387 = weight(_text_:22 in 2590) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.043474387 = score(doc=2590,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.15890898 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04537884 = queryNorm
            0.27358043 = fieldWeight in 2590, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2590)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    20. 1.2015 18:30:22
    17. 9.2018 18:22:23
  17. Neth, M.: Citation analysis and the Web (1998) 0.01 
    0.010759362 = product of:
  0.021518724 = sum of:
    0.021518724 = product of:
      0.043037448 = sum of:
        0.043037448 = weight(_text_:22 in 108) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.043037448 = score(doc=108,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15890898 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04537884 = 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)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    10. 1.1999 16:22:37
  18. Haiqi, Z.: ¬The literature of Qigong : publication patterns and subject headings (1997) 0.01 
    0.010759362 = product of:
  0.021518724 = sum of:
    0.021518724 = product of:
      0.043037448 = sum of:
        0.043037448 = weight(_text_:22 in 862) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.043037448 = score(doc=862,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15890898 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04537884 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 862, 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=862)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Source
    International forum on information and documentation. 22(1997) no.3, S.38-44
  19. Avramescu, A.: Teoria difuziei informatiei stiintifice (1997) 0.01 
    0.010759362 = product of:
  0.021518724 = sum of:
    0.021518724 = product of:
      0.043037448 = sum of:
        0.043037448 = weight(_text_:22 in 3030) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.043037448 = score(doc=3030,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15890898 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04537884 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 3030, 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=3030)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    22. 2.1999 16:16:11
  20. Falkingham, L.T.; Reeves, R.: Context analysis : a technique for analysing research in a field, applied to literature on the management of R&D at the section level (1998) 0.01 
    0.010759362 = product of:
  0.021518724 = sum of:
    0.021518724 = product of:
      0.043037448 = sum of:
        0.043037448 = weight(_text_:22 in 3689) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.043037448 = score(doc=3689,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15890898 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04537884 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 3689, 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=3689)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    22. 5.1999 19:18:46

Authors

Years

Languages

  • e 159
  • d 15
  • m 1
  • ro 1
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 167
  • s 6
  • m 3
  • el 2
  • x 1
  • More… Less…

Themes

Subjects

Classifications