Search (2448 results, page 1 of 123)

  • × year_i:[2010 TO 2020}
  1. Gödert, W.; Lepsky, K.: Informationelle Kompetenz : ein humanistischer Entwurf (2019) 0.13 
    0.13358983 = sum of:
  0.075675584 = product of:
    0.30270234 = sum of:
      0.30270234 = weight(_text_:3a in 5955) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.30270234 = score(doc=5955,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.4616562 = queryWeight, product of:
            8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05445336 = queryNorm
          0.65568775 = fieldWeight in 5955, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5955)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.05791425 = product of:
    0.08687137 = sum of:
      0.050109047 = weight(_text_:c in 5955) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.050109047 = score(doc=5955,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18783171 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05445336 = queryNorm
          0.2667763 = fieldWeight in 5955, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5955)
      0.036762327 = weight(_text_:h in 5955) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.036762327 = score(doc=5955,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.13528661 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05445336 = queryNorm
          0.27173662 = fieldWeight in 5955, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5955)
    0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Footnote
    Rez. in: Philosophisch-ethische Rezensionen vom 09.11.2019 (Jürgen Czogalla), Unter: https://philosophisch-ethische-rezensionen.de/rezension/Goedert1.html. In: B.I.T. online 23(2020) H.3, S.345-347 (W. Sühl-Strohmenger) [Unter: https%3A%2F%2Fwww.b-i-t-online.de%2Fheft%2F2020-03-rezensionen.pdf&usg=AOvVaw0iY3f_zNcvEjeZ6inHVnOK]. In: Open Password Nr. 805 vom 14.08.2020 (H.-C. Hobohm) [Unter: https://www.password-online.de/?mailpoet_router&endpoint=view_in_browser&action=view&data=WzE0MywiOGI3NjZkZmNkZjQ1IiwwLDAsMTMxLDFd].
  2. Burghardt, M.; Wolff, C.; Womser-Hacker, C.: Informationsinfrastruktur und informationswissenschaftliche Methoden in den digitalen Geisteswissenschaften (2015) 0.11 
    0.10607396 = product of:
  0.21214792 = sum of:
    0.21214792 = sum of:
      0.10123558 = weight(_text_:c in 1838) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.10123558 = score(doc=1838,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.18783171 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05445336 = queryNorm
          0.5389696 = fieldWeight in 1838, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
            0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1838)
      0.03713556 = weight(_text_:h in 1838) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03713556 = score(doc=1838,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.13528661 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05445336 = queryNorm
          0.27449545 = fieldWeight in 1838, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
            0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1838)
      0.07377679 = weight(_text_:22 in 1838) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.07377679 = score(doc=1838,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.19068639 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05445336 = queryNorm
          0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 1838, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1838)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    6.12.2015 17:22:08
    Source
    Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 66(2015) H.5/6, S.285-286
  3. Castle, C.: Getting the central RDM message across : a case study of central versus discipline-specific Research Data Services (RDS) at the University of Cambridge (2019) 0.10 
    0.096483774 = sum of:
  0.048030056 = product of:
    0.19212022 = sum of:
      0.19212022 = weight(_text_:author's in 5491) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.19212022 = score(doc=5491,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.36593494 = queryWeight, product of:
            6.7201533 = idf(docFreq=144, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05445336 = queryNorm
          0.52501196 = fieldWeight in 5491, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            6.7201533 = idf(docFreq=144, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5491)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.04845372 = product of:
    0.07268058 = sum of:
      0.03579218 = weight(_text_:c in 5491) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03579218 = score(doc=5491,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18783171 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05445336 = queryNorm
          0.1905545 = fieldWeight in 5491, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5491)
      0.036888395 = weight(_text_:22 in 5491) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.036888395 = score(doc=5491,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.19068639 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05445336 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5491, 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=5491)
    0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    RDS are usually cross-disciplinary, centralised services, which are increasingly provided at a university by the academic library and in collaboration with other RDM stakeholders, such as the Research Office. At research-intensive universities, research data is generated in a wide range of disciplines and sub-disciplines. This paper will discuss how providing discipline-specific RDM support is approached by such universities and academic libraries, and the advantages and disadvantages of these central and discipline-specific approaches. A descriptive case study on the author's experiences of collaborating with a central RDS at the University of Cambridge, as a subject librarian embedded in an academic department, is a major component of this paper. The case study describes how centralised RDM services offered by the Office of Scholarly Communication (OSC) have been adapted to meet discipline-specific needs in the Department of Chemistry. It will introduce the department and the OSC, and describe the author's role in delivering RDM training, as well as the Data Champions programme, and their membership of the RDM Project Group. It will describe the outcomes of this collaboration for the Department of Chemistry, and for the centralised service. Centralised and discipline-specific approaches to RDS provision have their own advantages and disadvantages. Supporting the discipline-specific RDM needs of researchers is proving particularly challenging for universities to address sustainably: it requires adequate financial resources and staff skilled (or re-skilled) in RDM. A mixed approach is the most desirable, cost-effective way of providing RDS, but this still has constraints.
    Date
    7. 9.2019 21:30:22
  4. Kattenbeck, M.; Müller, M.; Ohm, C.; Ludwig, B.: ¬Der Weg ist das Ziel : Fußgängernavigation ist Forschung zu Information Behavior (2015) 0.07 
    0.07299868 = product of:
  0.14599736 = sum of:
    0.14599736 = sum of:
      0.057267487 = weight(_text_:c in 1742) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.057267487 = score(doc=1742,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18783171 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05445336 = queryNorm
          0.3048872 = fieldWeight in 1742, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1742)
      0.029708447 = weight(_text_:h in 1742) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.029708447 = score(doc=1742,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.13528661 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05445336 = queryNorm
          0.21959636 = fieldWeight in 1742, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1742)
      0.05902143 = weight(_text_:22 in 1742) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.05902143 = score(doc=1742,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.19068639 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05445336 = queryNorm
          0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 1742, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1742)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    21. 3.2015 18:13:22
    Source
    Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 66(2015) H.1, S.45-55
  5. Suchenwirth, L.: Sacherschliessung in Zeiten von Corona : neue Herausforderungen und Chancen (2019) 0.07 
    0.07229189 = sum of:
  0.06486478 = product of:
    0.2594591 = sum of:
      0.2594591 = weight(_text_:3a in 484) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.2594591 = score(doc=484,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.4616562 = queryWeight, product of:
            8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05445336 = queryNorm
          0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 484, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=484)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.0074271113 = product of:
    0.022281334 = sum of:
      0.022281334 = weight(_text_:h in 484) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.022281334 = score(doc=484,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.13528661 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05445336 = queryNorm
          0.16469726 = fieldWeight in 484, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=484)
    0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Footnote
    https%3A%2F%2Fjournals.univie.ac.at%2Findex.php%2Fvoebm%2Farticle%2Fdownload%2F5332%2F5271%2F&usg=AOvVaw2yQdFGHlmOwVls7ANCpTii.
    Source
    Mitteilungen der Vereinigung Österreichischer Bibliothekarinnen und Bibliothekare. 73(2020) H.3/4, S.496-503
  6. Huang, M.-H.; Huang, W.-T.; Chang, C.-C.; Chen, D. Z.; Lin, C.-P.: The greater scattering phenomenon beyond Bradford's law in patent citation (2014) 0.07 
    0.07047003 = product of:
  0.14094006 = sum of:
    0.14094006 = sum of:
      0.07439265 = weight(_text_:c in 1352) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.07439265 = score(doc=1352,freq=6.0), product of:
          0.18783171 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05445336 = queryNorm
          0.3960601 = fieldWeight in 1352, product of:
            2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
              6.0 = termFreq=6.0
            3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1352)
      0.022281334 = weight(_text_:h in 1352) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.022281334 = score(doc=1352,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.13528661 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05445336 = queryNorm
          0.16469726 = fieldWeight in 1352, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1352)
      0.04426607 = weight(_text_:22 in 1352) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04426607 = score(doc=1352,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.19068639 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05445336 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1352, 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=1352)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    22. 8.2014 17:11:29
  7. Crispo, E.: ¬A new index to use in conjunction with the h-index to account for an author's relative contribution to publications with high impact (2015) 0.07 
    0.06692278 = sum of:
  0.04754733 = product of:
    0.19018932 = sum of:
      0.19018932 = weight(_text_:author's in 2264) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.19018932 = score(doc=2264,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.36593494 = queryWeight, product of:
            6.7201533 = idf(docFreq=144, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05445336 = queryNorm
          0.51973534 = fieldWeight in 2264, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            6.7201533 = idf(docFreq=144, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2264)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.019375449 = product of:
    0.058126345 = sum of:
      0.058126345 = weight(_text_:h in 2264) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.058126345 = score(doc=2264,freq=10.0), product of:
          0.13528661 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05445336 = queryNorm
          0.42965335 = fieldWeight in 2264, product of:
            3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
              10.0 = termFreq=10.0
            2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2264)
    0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    The h-index was devised to represent a scholar's contributions to his field with respect to the number of publications and citations. It does not, however, take into consideration the scholar's position in the authorship list. I recommend a new supplementary index to score academics, representing the relative contribution to the papers with impact, be reported alongside the h-index. I call this index the AP-index, and it is simply defined as the average position in which an academic appears in authorship lists, on articles that factor in to that academic's h-index.
    Object
    h-index
  8. Burghardt, M.; Hertlein, F.; Hinterleitner, B.; Lehenmeier, C.; Spröd, T.: ¬A crowdsourced approach for the documentation and transcription of graffiti in public restrooms (2015) 0.07 
    0.065921515 = product of:
  0.13184303 = sum of:
    0.13184303 = product of:
      0.19776455 = sum of:
        0.12398776 = weight(_text_:c in 2991) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.12398776 = score(doc=2991,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.18783171 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05445336 = queryNorm
            0.6601002 = fieldWeight in 2991, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2991)
        0.07377679 = weight(_text_:22 in 2991) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07377679 = score(doc=2991,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19068639 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05445336 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 2991, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2991)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    6. 6.2016 18:42:22
    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
  9. Verwer, K.: Freiheit und Verantwortung bei Hans Jonas (2011) 0.06 
    0.06486478 = product of:
  0.12972955 = sum of:
    0.12972955 = product of:
      0.5189182 = sum of:
        0.5189182 = weight(_text_:3a in 973) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.5189182 = score(doc=973,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.4616562 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05445336 = queryNorm
            1.1240361 = fieldWeight in 973, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=973)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Content
    Vgl.: http%3A%2F%2Fcreativechoice.org%2Fdoc%2FHansJonas.pdf&usg=AOvVaw1TM3teaYKgABL5H9yoIifA&opi=89978449.
  10. Hummel, P.: Millionen Fachartikel illegal im Netz verfügbar (2016) 0.06 
    0.06451334 = sum of:
  0.058324084 = product of:
    0.23329633 = sum of:
      0.23329633 = weight(_text_:2200 in 2871) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.23329633 = score(doc=2871,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.47954437 = queryWeight, product of:
            8.806516 = idf(docFreq=17, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05445336 = queryNorm
          0.48649582 = fieldWeight in 2871, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            8.806516 = idf(docFreq=17, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2871)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.00618926 = product of:
    0.01856778 = sum of:
      0.01856778 = weight(_text_:h in 2871) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.01856778 = score(doc=2871,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.13528661 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05445336 = queryNorm
          0.13724773 = fieldWeight in 2871, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2871)
    0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    Die Online-Plattform Sci-Hub überwindet die Paywalls der Verlage und baut eine riesige "Schattenbibliothek" der Wissenschaft auf. Auch Gerichte können sie bislang nicht stoppen. Das hatte sich Elsevier sicherlich anders vorgestellt. Der große Wissenschaftsverlag hat im Juni 2015 Klage gegen die Online-Plattformen Sci-Hub und LibGen eingereicht. Der Grund: Dort war eine riesige Anzahl akademischer Publikationen frei und kostenlos zugänglich gemacht worden. Sci-Hub bot Nutzern Zugriff auf Millionen Veröffentlichungen, viele davon urheberrechtlich geschützt. Seit nun letzte Woche die Website Bigthink.com ausführlich über das Verfahren gegen Sci-Hub vor einem US-Bundesbezirksgerichts in New York berichtet hat, verbreitet sich die Nachricht vom "Pirate Bay für die Wissenschaft" in den sozialen Netzwerken rasant. Eine bessere Werbemaßnahme als das Gerichtsverfahren hätte sich Sci-Hub kaum wünschen können. Elsevier ist einer der größten akademischen Verlage der Welt. Nach Presseberichten macht das Unternehmen mit seinen mehr als 2200 Journalen einen jährlichen Reinerlös von über einer Milliarde Dollar. Doch es sieht seine Geschäfte offenbar durch Sci-Hub bedroht. Mit aktuell mehr als 49 Millionen Veröffentlichungen, die 35 Terabyte an Daten umfassen, wie der (nicht verifizierte) Twitter-Account @Sci_Hub schreibt, umfasst die "Schattenbibliothek" wohl eine der größten je vorhandenen Sammlungen akademischer Literatur.
    Source
    Spektrum der Wissenschaft. 2016, H.2. [http://www.spektrum.de/news/sci-hub-millionen-fachartikel-illegal-im-netz-verfuegbar/1399718]
  11. Schlögl, C.: Internationale Sichtbarkeit der europäischen und insbesondere der deutschsprachigen Informationswissenschaft (2013) 0.06 
    0.06387384 = product of:
  0.12774768 = sum of:
    0.12774768 = sum of:
      0.050109047 = weight(_text_:c in 900) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.050109047 = score(doc=900,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18783171 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05445336 = queryNorm
          0.2667763 = fieldWeight in 900, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=900)
      0.025994891 = weight(_text_:h in 900) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.025994891 = score(doc=900,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.13528661 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05445336 = queryNorm
          0.19214681 = fieldWeight in 900, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=900)
      0.051643748 = weight(_text_:22 in 900) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.051643748 = score(doc=900,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.19068639 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05445336 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 900, 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=900)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    22. 3.2013 14:04:09
    Source
    Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 64(2013) H.1, S.1-8
  12. Norris, M.; Oppenheim, C.: ¬The h-index : a broad review of a new bibliometric indicator (2010) 0.06 
    0.06259909 = product of:
  0.12519819 = sum of:
    0.12519819 = sum of:
      0.03579218 = weight(_text_:c in 4147) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03579218 = score(doc=4147,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18783171 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05445336 = queryNorm
          0.1905545 = fieldWeight in 4147, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4147)
      0.05251761 = weight(_text_:h in 4147) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.05251761 = score(doc=4147,freq=16.0), product of:
          0.13528661 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05445336 = queryNorm
          0.3881952 = fieldWeight in 4147, product of:
            4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
              16.0 = termFreq=16.0
            2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4147)
      0.036888395 = weight(_text_:22 in 4147) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.036888395 = score(doc=4147,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.19068639 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05445336 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4147, 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=4147)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Purpose - This review aims to show, broadly, how the h-index has become a subject of widespread debate, how it has spawned many variants and diverse applications since first introduced in 2005 and some of the issues in its use. Design/methodology/approach - The review drew on a range of material published in 1990 or so sources published since 2005. From these sources, a number of themes were identified and discussed ranging from the h-index's advantages to which citation database might be selected for its calculation. Findings - The analysis shows how the h-index has quickly established itself as a major subject of interest in the field of bibliometrics. Study of the index ranges from its mathematical underpinning to a range of variants perceived to address the indexes' shortcomings. The review illustrates how widely the index has been applied but also how care must be taken in its application. Originality/value - The use of bibliometric indicators to measure research performance continues, with the h-index as its latest addition. The use of the h-index, its variants and many applications to which it has been put are still at the exploratory stage. The review shows the breadth and diversity of this research and the need to verify the veracity of the h-index by more studies.
    Date
    8. 1.2011 19:22:13
    Object
    h-index
  13. Müller, L.; Szepanski, C.; Wetzel, T.; Hobohm, H.-C.: Towards a more data oriented medical research environment (2015) 0.06 
    0.060101427 = product of:
  0.120202854 = sum of:
    0.120202854 = product of:
      0.18030427 = sum of:
        0.14316872 = weight(_text_:c in 2996) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.14316872 = score(doc=2996,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.18783171 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05445336 = queryNorm
            0.762218 = fieldWeight in 2996, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2996)
        0.03713556 = weight(_text_:h in 2996) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03713556 = score(doc=2996,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13528661 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05445336 = queryNorm
            0.27449545 = fieldWeight in 2996, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2996)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    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
  14. Burrell, Q.L.: Formulae for the h-index : a lack of robustness in Lotkaian informetrics? (2013) 0.06 
    0.055609077 = sum of:
  0.040754855 = product of:
    0.16301942 = sum of:
      0.16301942 = weight(_text_:author's in 977) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.16301942 = score(doc=977,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.36593494 = queryWeight, product of:
            6.7201533 = idf(docFreq=144, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05445336 = queryNorm
          0.44548744 = fieldWeight in 977, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            6.7201533 = idf(docFreq=144, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=977)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.014854223 = product of:
    0.044562668 = sum of:
      0.044562668 = weight(_text_:h in 977) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.044562668 = score(doc=977,freq=8.0), product of:
          0.13528661 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05445336 = queryNorm
          0.32939452 = fieldWeight in 977, product of:
            2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
              8.0 = termFreq=8.0
            2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=977)
    0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    In one of the first attempts at providing a mathematical framework for the Hirsch index, Egghe and Rousseau (2006) assumed the standard Lotka model for an author's citation distribution to derive a delightfully simple closed formula for his/her h-index. More recently, the same authors (Egghe & Rousseau, 2012b) have presented a new (implicit) formula based on the so-called shifted Lotka function to allow for the objection that the original model makes no allowance for papers receiving zero citations. Here it is shown, through a small empirical study, that the formulae actually give very similar results whether or not the uncited papers are included. However, and more important, it is found that they both seriously underestimate the true h-index, and we suggest that the reason for this is that this is a context-the citation distribution of an author-in which straightforward Lotkaian informetrics is inappropriate. Indeed, the analysis suggests that even if we restrict attention to the upper tail of the citation distribution, a simple Lotka/Pareto-like model can give misleading results.
    Object
    h-index
  15. Zhang, Y.: Developing a holistic model for digital library evaluation (2010) 0.06 
    0.05551021 = sum of:
  0.040754855 = product of:
    0.16301942 = sum of:
      0.16301942 = weight(_text_:author's in 2360) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.16301942 = score(doc=2360,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.36593494 = queryWeight, product of:
            6.7201533 = idf(docFreq=144, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05445336 = queryNorm
          0.44548744 = fieldWeight in 2360, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            6.7201533 = idf(docFreq=144, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2360)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.014755357 = product of:
    0.04426607 = sum of:
      0.04426607 = weight(_text_:22 in 2360) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04426607 = score(doc=2360,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.19068639 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05445336 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2360, 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=2360)
    0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    This article reports the author's recent research in developing a holistic model for various levels of digital library (DL) evaluation in which perceived important criteria from heterogeneous stakeholder groups are organized and presented. To develop such a model, the author applied a three-stage research approach: exploration, confirmation, and verification. During the exploration stage, a literature review was conducted followed by an interview, along with a card sorting technique, to collect important criteria perceived by DL experts. Then the criteria identified were used for developing an online survey during the confirmation stage. Survey respondents (431 in total) from 22 countries rated the importance of the criteria. A holistic DL evaluation model was constructed using statistical techniques. Eventually, the verification stage was devised to test the reliability of the model in the context of searching and evaluating an operational DL. The proposed model fills two lacunae in the DL domain: (a) the lack of a comprehensive and flexible framework to guide and benchmark evaluations, and (b) the uncertainty about what divergence exists among heterogeneous DL stakeholders, including general users.
  16. Hjoerland, B.: ¬The importance of theories of knowledge : indexing and information retrieval as an example (2011) 0.06 
    0.05551021 = sum of:
  0.040754855 = product of:
    0.16301942 = sum of:
      0.16301942 = weight(_text_:author's in 4359) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.16301942 = score(doc=4359,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.36593494 = queryWeight, product of:
            6.7201533 = idf(docFreq=144, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05445336 = queryNorm
          0.44548744 = fieldWeight in 4359, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            6.7201533 = idf(docFreq=144, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4359)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.014755357 = product of:
    0.04426607 = sum of:
      0.04426607 = weight(_text_:22 in 4359) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04426607 = score(doc=4359,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.19068639 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05445336 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4359, 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=4359)
    0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    A recent study in information science (IS), raises important issues concerning the value of human indexing and basic theories of indexing and information retrieval, as well as the use of quantitative and qualitative approaches in IS and the underlying theories of knowledge informing the field. The present article uses L&E as the point of departure for demonstrating in what way more social and interpretative understandings may provide fruitful improvements for research in indexing, knowledge organization, and information retrieval. The artcle is motivated by the observation that philosophical contributions tend to be ignored in IS if they are not directly formed as criticisms or invitations to dialogs. It is part of the author's ongoing publication of articles about philosophical issues in IS and it is intended to be followed by analyzes of other examples of contributions to core issues in IS. Although it is formulated as a criticism of a specific paper, it should be seen as part of a general discussion of the philosophical foundation of IS and as a support to the emerging social paradigm in this field.
    Date
    17. 3.2011 19:22:55
  17. Clavier, V.; Paganelli, C.: Including authorial stance in the indexing of scientific documents (2012) 0.06 
    0.055071726 = sum of:
  0.040754855 = product of:
    0.16301942 = sum of:
      0.16301942 = weight(_text_:author's in 320) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.16301942 = score(doc=320,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.36593494 = queryWeight, product of:
            6.7201533 = idf(docFreq=144, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05445336 = queryNorm
          0.44548744 = fieldWeight in 320, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            6.7201533 = idf(docFreq=144, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=320)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.014316872 = product of:
    0.042950615 = sum of:
      0.042950615 = weight(_text_:c in 320) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.042950615 = score(doc=320,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18783171 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05445336 = queryNorm
          0.22866541 = fieldWeight in 320, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=320)
    0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    This article argues that authorial stance should be taken into account in the indexing of scientific documents. Authorial stance has been widely studied in linguistics and is a typical feature of scientific writing that reveals the uniqueness of each author's perspective, their scientific contribution, and their thinking. We argue that authorial stance guides the reading of scientific documents and that it can be used to characterize the knowledge contained in such documents. Our research has previously shown that people reading dissertations are interested both in a topic and in a document's authorial stance. Now, we would like to propose a two-tiered indexing system. Dissertations would first be divided into paragraphs; then, each information unit would be defined by topic and by the markers of authorial stance present in the document.
  18. Zhang, C.; Bu, Y.; Ding, Y.; Xu, J.: Understanding scientific collaboration : homophily, transitivity, and preferential attachment (2018) 0.06 
    0.055071726 = sum of:
  0.040754855 = product of:
    0.16301942 = sum of:
      0.16301942 = weight(_text_:author's in 4011) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.16301942 = score(doc=4011,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.36593494 = queryWeight, product of:
            6.7201533 = idf(docFreq=144, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05445336 = queryNorm
          0.44548744 = fieldWeight in 4011, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            6.7201533 = idf(docFreq=144, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4011)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.014316872 = product of:
    0.042950615 = sum of:
      0.042950615 = weight(_text_:c in 4011) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.042950615 = score(doc=4011,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18783171 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05445336 = queryNorm
          0.22866541 = fieldWeight in 4011, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4011)
    0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    Scientific collaboration is essential in solving problems and breeding innovation. Coauthor network analysis has been utilized to study scholars' collaborations for a long time, but these studies have not simultaneously taken different collaboration features into consideration. In this paper, we present a systematic approach to analyze the differences in possibilities that two authors will cooperate as seen from the effects of homophily, transitivity, and preferential attachment. Exponential random graph models (ERGMs) are applied in this research. We find that different types of publications one author has written play diverse roles in his/her collaborations. An author's tendency to form new collaborations with her/his coauthors' collaborators is strong, where the more coauthors one author had before, the more new collaborators he/she will attract. We demonstrate that considering the authors' attributes and homophily effects as well as the transitivity and preferential attachment effects of the coauthorship network in which they are embedded helps us gain a comprehensive understanding of scientific collaboration.
  19. Erickson, L.B.; Wisniewski, P.; Xu, H.; Carroll, J.M.; Rosson, M.B.; Perkins, D.F.: ¬The boundaries between : parental involvement in a teen's online world (2016) 0.05 
    0.054749012 = product of:
  0.109498024 = sum of:
    0.109498024 = sum of:
      0.042950615 = weight(_text_:c in 2932) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.042950615 = score(doc=2932,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18783171 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05445336 = queryNorm
          0.22866541 = fieldWeight in 2932, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2932)
      0.022281334 = weight(_text_:h in 2932) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.022281334 = score(doc=2932,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.13528661 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05445336 = queryNorm
          0.16469726 = fieldWeight in 2932, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2932)
      0.04426607 = weight(_text_:22 in 2932) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04426607 = score(doc=2932,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.19068639 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05445336 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2932, 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=2932)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    The increasing popularity of the Internet and social media is creating new and unique challenges for parents and adolescents regarding the boundaries between parental control and adolescent autonomy in virtual spaces. Drawing on developmental psychology and Communication Privacy Management (CPM) theory, we conduct a qualitative study to examine the challenge between parental concern for adolescent online safety and teens' desire to independently regulate their own online experiences. Analysis of 12 parent-teen pairs revealed five distinct challenges: (a) increased teen autonomy and decreased parental control resulting from teens' direct and unmediated access to virtual spaces, (b) the shift in power to teens who are often more knowledgeable about online spaces and technology, (c) the use of physical boundaries by parents as a means to control virtual spaces, (d) an increase in indirect boundary control strategies such as covert monitoring, and (e) the blurring of lines in virtual spaces between parents' teens and teens' friends.
    Date
    7. 5.2016 20:05:22
  20. Informationswissenschaft zwischen virtueller Infrastruktur und materiellen Lebenswelten : Proceedings des 13. Internationalen Symposiums für Informationswissenschaft (ISI 2013), Potsdam, 19.-22. März 2013. (2013) 0.05 
    0.054749012 = product of:
  0.109498024 = sum of:
    0.109498024 = sum of:
      0.042950615 = weight(_text_:c in 2979) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.042950615 = score(doc=2979,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18783171 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05445336 = queryNorm
          0.22866541 = fieldWeight in 2979, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2979)
      0.022281334 = weight(_text_:h in 2979) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.022281334 = score(doc=2979,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.13528661 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05445336 = queryNorm
          0.16469726 = fieldWeight in 2979, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2979)
      0.04426607 = weight(_text_:22 in 2979) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04426607 = score(doc=2979,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.19068639 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05445336 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2979, 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=2979)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Editor
    Hobohm, H.-C.

Authors

Languages

  • e 1370
  • d 1048
  • a 1
  • hu 1
  • i 1
  • sp 1
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 2179
  • m 177
  • el 176
  • s 59
  • x 20
  • r 10
  • b 7
  • p 3
  • i 1
  • n 1
  • v 1
  • z 1
  • More… Less…

Themes

Subjects

Classifications