Search (11 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Larivière, V."
  1. Larivière, V.; Gingras, Y.; Archambault, E.: ¬The decline in the concentration of citations, 1900-2007 (2009) 0.04
    0.040731445 = product of:
      0.08146289 = sum of:
        0.08146289 = sum of:
          0.021194918 = weight(_text_:2 in 2763) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.021194918 = score(doc=2763,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.1294644 = queryWeight, product of:
                2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
                0.05242341 = queryNorm
              0.16371232 = fieldWeight in 2763, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2763)
          0.060267974 = weight(_text_:22 in 2763) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.060267974 = score(doc=2763,freq=4.0), product of:
              0.18357785 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.05242341 = queryNorm
              0.32829654 = fieldWeight in 2763, product of:
                2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                  4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2763)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    This article challenges recent research (Evans, 2008) reporting that the concentration of cited scientific literature increases with the online availability of articles and journals. Using Thomson Reuters' Web of Science, the present article analyses changes in the concentration of citations received (2- and 5-year citation windows) by papers published between 1900 and 2005. Three measures of concentration are used: the percentage of papers that received at least one citation (cited papers); the percentage of papers needed to account for 20%, 50%, and 80% of the citations; and the Herfindahl-Hirschman index (HHI). These measures are used for four broad disciplines: natural sciences and engineering, medical fields, social sciences, and the humanities. All these measures converge and show that, contrary to what was reported by Evans, the dispersion of citations is actually increasing.
    Date
    22. 3.2009 19:22:35
  2. Haustein, S.; Sugimoto, C.; Larivière, V.: Social media in scholarly communication : Guest editorial (2015) 0.01
    0.0053269863 = product of:
      0.010653973 = sum of:
        0.010653973 = product of:
          0.021307945 = sum of:
            0.021307945 = weight(_text_:22 in 3809) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.021307945 = score(doc=3809,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.18357785 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05242341 = queryNorm
                0.116070345 = fieldWeight in 3809, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=3809)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    20. 1.2015 18:30:22
  3. Larivière, V.; Gingras, Y.: ¬The impact factor's Matthew Effect : a natural experiment in bibliometrics (2010) 0.01
    0.0052987295 = product of:
      0.010597459 = sum of:
        0.010597459 = product of:
          0.021194918 = sum of:
            0.021194918 = weight(_text_:2 in 3338) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.021194918 = score(doc=3338,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1294644 = queryWeight, product of:
                  2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05242341 = queryNorm
                0.16371232 = fieldWeight in 3338, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3338)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 61(2010) no.2, S.424-427
  4. Sugimoto, C.R.; Work, S.; Larivière, V.; Haustein, S.: Scholarly use of social media and altmetrics : A review of the literature (2017) 0.01
    0.0052987295 = product of:
      0.010597459 = sum of:
        0.010597459 = product of:
          0.021194918 = sum of:
            0.021194918 = weight(_text_:2 in 3781) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.021194918 = score(doc=3781,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1294644 = queryWeight, product of:
                  2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05242341 = queryNorm
                0.16371232 = fieldWeight in 3781, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3781)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Social media has become integrated into the fabric of the scholarly communication system in fundamental ways, principally through scholarly use of social media platforms and the promotion of new indicators on the basis of interactions with these platforms. Research and scholarship in this area has accelerated since the coining and subsequent advocacy for altmetrics-that is, research indicators based on social media activity. This review provides an extensive account of the state-of-the art in both scholarly use of social media and altmetrics. The review consists of 2 main parts: the first examines the use of social media in academia, reviewing the various functions these platforms have in the scholarly communication process and the factors that affect this use. The second part reviews empirical studies of altmetrics, discussing the various interpretations of altmetrics, data collection and methodological limitations, and differences according to platform. The review ends with a critical discussion of the implications of this transformation in the scholarly communication system.
  5. Larivière, V.; Archambault, V.; Gingras, Y.; Vignola-Gagné, E.: ¬The place of serials in referencing practices : comparing natural sciences and engineering with social sciences and humanities (2006) 0.00
    0.004415608 = product of:
      0.008831216 = sum of:
        0.008831216 = product of:
          0.017662432 = sum of:
            0.017662432 = weight(_text_:2 in 5107) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.017662432 = score(doc=5107,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1294644 = queryWeight, product of:
                  2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05242341 = queryNorm
                0.13642694 = fieldWeight in 5107, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5107)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    2. 7.2006 19:07:24
  6. Larivière, V.; Archambault, E.; Gingras, Y.: Long-term variations in the aging of scientific literature : from exponential growth to steady-state science (1900-2004) (2008) 0.00
    0.004415608 = product of:
      0.008831216 = sum of:
        0.008831216 = product of:
          0.017662432 = sum of:
            0.017662432 = weight(_text_:2 in 1357) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.017662432 = score(doc=1357,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1294644 = queryWeight, product of:
                  2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05242341 = queryNorm
                0.13642694 = fieldWeight in 1357, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1357)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 59(2008) no.2, S.288-296
  7. Lisée, C.; Larivière, V.; Archambault, E.: Conference proceedings as a source of scientific information : a bibliometric analysis (2008) 0.00
    0.004415608 = product of:
      0.008831216 = sum of:
        0.008831216 = product of:
          0.017662432 = sum of:
            0.017662432 = weight(_text_:2 in 2356) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.017662432 = score(doc=2356,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1294644 = queryWeight, product of:
                  2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05242341 = queryNorm
                0.13642694 = fieldWeight in 2356, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2356)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    While several authors have argued that conference proceedings are an important source of scientific knowledge, the extent of their importance has not been measured in a systematic manner. This article examines the scientific impact and aging of conference proceedings compared to those of scientific literature in general. It shows that the relative importance of proceedings is diminishing over time and currently represents only 1.7% of references made in the natural sciences and engineering, and 2.5% in the social sciences and humanities. Although the scientific impact of proceedings is losing ground to other types of scientific literature in nearly all fields, it has grown from 8% of the references in engineering papers in the early 1980s to its current 10%. Proceedings play a particularly important role in computer sciences, where they account for close to 20% of the references. This article also shows that not unexpectedly, proceedings age faster than cited scientific literature in general. The evidence thus shows that proceedings have a relatively limited scientific impact, on average representing only about 2% of total citations, that their relative importance is shrinking, and that they become obsolete faster than the scientific literature in general.
  8. Larivière, V.; Gingras, Y.: On the prevalence and scientific impact of duplicate publications in different scientific fields (1980-2007) (2010) 0.00
    0.004415608 = product of:
      0.008831216 = sum of:
        0.008831216 = product of:
          0.017662432 = sum of:
            0.017662432 = weight(_text_:2 in 3622) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.017662432 = score(doc=3622,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1294644 = queryWeight, product of:
                  2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05242341 = queryNorm
                0.13642694 = fieldWeight in 3622, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3622)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Source
    Journal of documentation. 66(2010) no.2, S.179-190
  9. Larivière, V.; Macaluso, B.: Improving the coverage of social science and humanities researchers' output : the case of the Érudit journal platform (2011) 0.00
    0.004415608 = product of:
      0.008831216 = sum of:
        0.008831216 = product of:
          0.017662432 = sum of:
            0.017662432 = weight(_text_:2 in 4943) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.017662432 = score(doc=4943,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1294644 = queryWeight, product of:
                  2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05242341 = queryNorm
                0.13642694 = fieldWeight in 4943, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4943)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    In non-English-speaking countries the measurement of research output in the social sciences and humanities (SSH) using standard bibliographic databases suffers from a major drawback: the underrepresentation of articles published in local, non-English, journals. Using papers indexed (1) in a local database of periodicals (Érudit) and (2) in the Web of Science, assigned to the population of university professors in the province of Québec, this paper quantifies, for individual researchers and departments, the importance of papers published in local journals. It also analyzes differences across disciplines and between French-speaking and English-speaking universities. The results show that, while the addition of papers published in local journals to bibliometric measures has little effect when all disciplines are considered and for anglophone universities, it increases the output of researchers from francophone universities in the social sciences and humanities by almost a third. It also shows that there is very little relation, at the level of individual researchers or departments, between the output indexed in the Web of Science and the output retrieved from the Érudit database; a clear demonstration that the Web of Science cannot be used as a proxy for the "overall" production of SSH researchers in Québec. The paper concludes with a discussion on these disciplinary and language differences, as well as on their implications for rankings of universities.
  10. Siler, K.; Larivière, V.: Varieties of diffusion in academic publishing : how status and legitimacy influence growth trajectories of new innovations (2024) 0.00
    0.004415608 = product of:
      0.008831216 = sum of:
        0.008831216 = product of:
          0.017662432 = sum of:
            0.017662432 = weight(_text_:2 in 1206) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.017662432 = score(doc=1206,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1294644 = queryWeight, product of:
                  2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05242341 = queryNorm
                0.13642694 = fieldWeight in 1206, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1206)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 75(2023) no.2, S.132-151
  11. Kozlowski, D.; Andersen, J.P.; Larivière, V.: ¬The decrease in uncited articles and its effect on the concentration of citations (2024) 0.00
    0.004415608 = product of:
      0.008831216 = sum of:
        0.008831216 = product of:
          0.017662432 = sum of:
            0.017662432 = weight(_text_:2 in 1208) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.017662432 = score(doc=1208,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1294644 = queryWeight, product of:
                  2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05242341 = queryNorm
                0.13642694 = fieldWeight in 1208, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  2.4695914 = idf(docFreq=10170, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1208)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 75(2023) no.2, S.188-197