-
H-Index auch im Web of Science (2008)
0.05
0.04872582 = product of:
0.09745164 = sum of:
0.09745164 = sum of:
0.049419634 = weight(_text_:h in 590) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.049419634 = score(doc=590,freq=14.0), product of:
0.113413334 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.045649286 = queryNorm
0.435748 = fieldWeight in 590, product of:
3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
14.0 = termFreq=14.0
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=590)
0.010922924 = weight(_text_:d in 590) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.010922924 = score(doc=590,freq=2.0), product of:
0.0867278 = queryWeight, product of:
1.899872 = idf(docFreq=17979, maxDocs=44218)
0.045649286 = queryNorm
0.1259449 = fieldWeight in 590, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.899872 = idf(docFreq=17979, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=590)
0.03710909 = weight(_text_:22 in 590) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03710909 = score(doc=590,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15985602 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045649286 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 590, 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=590)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Content
- "Zur Kurzmitteilung "Latest enhancements in Scopus: ... h-Index incorporated in Scopus" in den letzten Online-Mitteilungen (Online-Mitteilungen 92, S.31) ist zu korrigieren, dass der h-Index sehr wohl bereits im Web of Science enthalten ist. Allerdings findet man/frau diese Information nicht in der "cited ref search", sondern neben der Trefferliste einer Quick Search, General Search oder einer Suche über den Author Finder in der rechten Navigationsleiste unter dem Titel "Citation Report". Der "Citation Report" bietet für die in der jeweiligen Trefferliste angezeigten Arbeiten: - Die Gesamtzahl der Zitierungen aller Arbeiten in der Trefferliste - Die mittlere Zitationshäufigkeit dieser Arbeiten - Die Anzahl der Zitierungen der einzelnen Arbeiten, aufgeschlüsselt nach Publikationsjahr der zitierenden Arbeiten - Die mittlere Zitationshäufigkeit dieser Arbeiten pro Jahr - Den h-Index (ein h-Index von x sagt aus, dass x Arbeiten der Trefferliste mehr als x-mal zitiert wurden; er ist gegenüber sehr hohen Zitierungen einzelner Arbeiten unempfindlicher als die mittlere Zitationshäufigkeit)."
- Date
- 6. 4.2008 19:04:22
- Language
- d
- Object
- H-Index
- Source
- Mitteilungen der Vereinigung Österreichischer Bibliothekarinnen und Bibliothekare. 61(2008) H.1, S.124-125
-
Thelwall, M.; Ruschenburg, T.: Grundlagen und Forschungsfelder der Webometrie (2006)
0.04
0.044473916 = product of:
0.08894783 = sum of:
0.08894783 = sum of:
0.024905154 = weight(_text_:h in 77) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.024905154 = score(doc=77,freq=2.0), product of:
0.113413334 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.045649286 = queryNorm
0.21959636 = fieldWeight in 77, 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=77)
0.014563899 = weight(_text_:d in 77) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014563899 = score(doc=77,freq=2.0), product of:
0.0867278 = queryWeight, product of:
1.899872 = idf(docFreq=17979, maxDocs=44218)
0.045649286 = queryNorm
0.16792654 = fieldWeight in 77, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.899872 = idf(docFreq=17979, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=77)
0.049478784 = weight(_text_:22 in 77) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.049478784 = score(doc=77,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15985602 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045649286 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 77, 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=77)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 4.12.2006 12:12:22
- Language
- d
- Source
- Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 57(2006) H.8, S.401-406
-
Ball, R.: Wissenschaftsindikatoren im Zeitalter digitaler Wissenschaft (2007)
0.03
0.0277962 = product of:
0.0555924 = sum of:
0.0555924 = sum of:
0.015565722 = weight(_text_:h in 875) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.015565722 = score(doc=875,freq=2.0), product of:
0.113413334 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.045649286 = queryNorm
0.13724773 = fieldWeight in 875, 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=875)
0.009102437 = weight(_text_:d in 875) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.009102437 = score(doc=875,freq=2.0), product of:
0.0867278 = queryWeight, product of:
1.899872 = idf(docFreq=17979, maxDocs=44218)
0.045649286 = queryNorm
0.104954086 = fieldWeight in 875, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.899872 = idf(docFreq=17979, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=875)
0.03092424 = weight(_text_:22 in 875) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03092424 = score(doc=875,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15985602 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045649286 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 875, 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=875)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 23.12.2007 19:22:21
- Language
- d
- Source
- B.I.T.online. 10(2007) H.2, S.xxx-xxx
-
Hayer, L.: Lazarsfeld zitiert : eine bibliometrische Analyse (2008)
0.03
0.0277962 = product of:
0.0555924 = sum of:
0.0555924 = sum of:
0.015565722 = weight(_text_:h in 1934) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.015565722 = score(doc=1934,freq=2.0), product of:
0.113413334 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.045649286 = queryNorm
0.13724773 = fieldWeight in 1934, 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=1934)
0.009102437 = weight(_text_:d in 1934) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.009102437 = score(doc=1934,freq=2.0), product of:
0.0867278 = queryWeight, product of:
1.899872 = idf(docFreq=17979, maxDocs=44218)
0.045649286 = queryNorm
0.104954086 = fieldWeight in 1934, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.899872 = idf(docFreq=17979, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1934)
0.03092424 = weight(_text_:22 in 1934) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03092424 = score(doc=1934,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15985602 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045649286 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1934, 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=1934)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 6.2008 12:54:12
- Language
- d
- Source
- Mitteilungen der Vereinigung Österreichischer Bibliothekarinnen und Bibliothekare. 61(2008) H.2, S.14-20
-
Rostaing, H.; Barts, N.; Léveillé, V.: Bibliometrics: representation instrument of the multidisciplinary positioning of a scientific area : Implementation for an Advisory Scientific Committee (2007)
0.02
0.024794646 = product of:
0.04958929 = sum of:
0.04958929 = product of:
0.07438394 = sum of:
0.024905154 = weight(_text_:h in 1144) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.024905154 = score(doc=1144,freq=2.0), product of:
0.113413334 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.045649286 = queryNorm
0.21959636 = fieldWeight in 1144, 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=1144)
0.049478784 = weight(_text_:22 in 1144) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.049478784 = score(doc=1144,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15985602 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045649286 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 1144, 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=1144)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 30.12.2007 11:22:39
-
Bornmann, L.; Daniel, H.-D.: What do we know about the h index? (2007)
0.02
0.02479351 = product of:
0.04958702 = sum of:
0.04958702 = product of:
0.074380524 = sum of:
0.06163711 = weight(_text_:h in 477) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06163711 = score(doc=477,freq=16.0), product of:
0.113413334 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.045649286 = queryNorm
0.54347324 = fieldWeight in 477, product of:
4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
16.0 = termFreq=16.0
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=477)
0.012743411 = weight(_text_:d in 477) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.012743411 = score(doc=477,freq=2.0), product of:
0.0867278 = queryWeight, product of:
1.899872 = idf(docFreq=17979, maxDocs=44218)
0.045649286 = queryNorm
0.14693572 = fieldWeight in 477, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.899872 = idf(docFreq=17979, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=477)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Jorge Hirsch recently proposed the h index to quantify the research output of individual scientists. The new index has attracted a lot of attention in the scientific community. The claim that the h index in a single number provides a good representation of the scientific lifetime achievement of a scientist as well as the (supposed) simple calculation of the h index using common literature databases lead to the danger of improper use of the index. We describe the advantages and disadvantages of the h index and summarize the studies on the convergent validity of this index. We also introduce corrections and complements as well as single-number alternatives to the h index.
- Object
- H-Index
-
Meho, L.I.; Rogers, Y.: Citation counting, citation ranking, and h-index of human-computer interaction researchers : a comparison of Scopus and Web of Science (2008)
0.02
0.02301744 = product of:
0.04603488 = sum of:
0.04603488 = product of:
0.069052316 = sum of:
0.038128074 = weight(_text_:h in 2352) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.038128074 = score(doc=2352,freq=12.0), product of:
0.113413334 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.045649286 = queryNorm
0.3361869 = fieldWeight in 2352, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2352)
0.03092424 = weight(_text_:22 in 2352) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03092424 = score(doc=2352,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15985602 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045649286 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2352, 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=2352)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- This study examines the differences between Scopus and Web of Science in the citation counting, citation ranking, and h-index of 22 top human-computer interaction (HCI) researchers from EQUATOR - a large British Interdisciplinary Research Collaboration project. Results indicate that Scopus provides significantly more coverage of HCI literature than Web of Science, primarily due to coverage of relevant ACM and IEEE peer-reviewed conference proceedings. No significant differences exist between the two databases if citations in journals only are compared. Although broader coverage of the literature does not significantly alter the relative citation ranking of individual researchers, Scopus helps distinguish between the researchers in a more nuanced fashion than Web of Science in both citation counting and h-index. Scopus also generates significantly different maps of citation networks of individual scholars than those generated by Web of Science. The study also presents a comparison of h-index scores based on Google Scholar with those based on the union of Scopus and Web of Science. The study concludes that Scopus can be used as a sole data source for citation-based research and evaluation in HCI, especially when citations in conference proceedings are sought, and that researchers should manually calculate h scores instead of relying on system calculations.
- Object
- h-index
-
Wettlauf der Wissenschaft (2004)
0.02
0.022236958 = product of:
0.044473916 = sum of:
0.044473916 = sum of:
0.012452577 = weight(_text_:h in 2495) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.012452577 = score(doc=2495,freq=2.0), product of:
0.113413334 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.045649286 = queryNorm
0.10979818 = fieldWeight in 2495, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2495)
0.0072819493 = weight(_text_:d in 2495) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0072819493 = score(doc=2495,freq=2.0), product of:
0.0867278 = queryWeight, product of:
1.899872 = idf(docFreq=17979, maxDocs=44218)
0.045649286 = queryNorm
0.08396327 = fieldWeight in 2495, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.899872 = idf(docFreq=17979, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2495)
0.024739392 = weight(_text_:22 in 2495) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.024739392 = score(doc=2495,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15985602 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045649286 = queryNorm
0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 2495, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2495)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Language
- d
- Source
- Online Mitteilungen. 2004, Nr.79, S.22-23 [=Mitteilungen VÖB 57(2004) H.2]
-
Hauffe, H.: ¬The role of citation analysis in the history and evaluation of science : Bericht über einen Vortrag von Eugene Garfield (Wien, 26. Mai 2004) (2004)
0.02
0.020743795 = product of:
0.04148759 = sum of:
0.04148759 = product of:
0.062231384 = sum of:
0.04402651 = weight(_text_:h in 2492) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04402651 = score(doc=2492,freq=4.0), product of:
0.113413334 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.045649286 = queryNorm
0.3881952 = fieldWeight in 2492, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2492)
0.018204873 = weight(_text_:d in 2492) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.018204873 = score(doc=2492,freq=2.0), product of:
0.0867278 = queryWeight, product of:
1.899872 = idf(docFreq=17979, maxDocs=44218)
0.045649286 = queryNorm
0.20990817 = fieldWeight in 2492, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.899872 = idf(docFreq=17979, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2492)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Language
- d
- Source
- Online Mitteilungen. 2004, Nr.79, S.7-9 [=Mitteilungen VÖB 57(2004) H.2]
-
Stock, W.G.: Eugene Garfield und die Folgen : der Weg der Fußnote bis in die Wissenschaftspolitik (2002)
0.02
0.019734526 = product of:
0.039469052 = sum of:
0.039469052 = product of:
0.059203576 = sum of:
0.03735773 = weight(_text_:h in 472) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03735773 = score(doc=472,freq=2.0), product of:
0.113413334 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.045649286 = queryNorm
0.32939452 = fieldWeight in 472, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=472)
0.021845847 = weight(_text_:d in 472) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.021845847 = score(doc=472,freq=2.0), product of:
0.0867278 = queryWeight, product of:
1.899872 = idf(docFreq=17979, maxDocs=44218)
0.045649286 = queryNorm
0.2518898 = fieldWeight in 472, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.899872 = idf(docFreq=17979, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=472)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Language
- d
- Source
- Password. 2002, H.3, S.14-19
-
Egghe, L.; Ravichandra Rao, I.K.: ¬The influence of the broadness of a query of a topic on its h-index : models and examples of the h-index of n-grams (2008)
0.02
0.019441858 = product of:
0.038883716 = sum of:
0.038883716 = product of:
0.05832557 = sum of:
0.049223132 = weight(_text_:h in 2009) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.049223132 = score(doc=2009,freq=20.0), product of:
0.113413334 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.045649286 = queryNorm
0.4340154 = fieldWeight in 2009, product of:
4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
20.0 = termFreq=20.0
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2009)
0.009102437 = weight(_text_:d in 2009) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.009102437 = score(doc=2009,freq=2.0), product of:
0.0867278 = queryWeight, product of:
1.899872 = idf(docFreq=17979, maxDocs=44218)
0.045649286 = queryNorm
0.104954086 = fieldWeight in 2009, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.899872 = idf(docFreq=17979, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2009)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- The article studies the influence of the query formulation of a topic on its h-index. In order to generate pure random sets of documents, we used N-grams (N variable) to measure this influence: strings of zeros, truncated at the end. The used databases are WoS and Scopus. The formula h=T**1/alpha, proved in Egghe and Rousseau (2006) where T is the number of retrieved documents and is Lotka's exponent, is confirmed being a concavely increasing function of T. We also give a formula for the relation between h and N the length of the N-gram: h=D10**(-N/alpha) where D is a constant, a convexly decreasing function, which is found in our experiments. Nonlinear regression on h=T**1/alpha gives an estimation of , which can then be used to estimate the h-index of the entire database (Web of Science [WoS] and Scopus): h=S**1/alpha, , where S is the total number of documents in the database.
- Object
- h-index
-
Chan, H.C.; Kim, H.-W.; Tan, W.C.: Information systems citation patterns from International Conference on Information Systems articles (2006)
0.02
0.018595984 = product of:
0.03719197 = sum of:
0.03719197 = product of:
0.05578795 = sum of:
0.018678864 = weight(_text_:h in 201) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.018678864 = score(doc=201,freq=2.0), product of:
0.113413334 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.045649286 = queryNorm
0.16469726 = fieldWeight in 201, 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=201)
0.03710909 = weight(_text_:22 in 201) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03710909 = score(doc=201,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15985602 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045649286 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 201, 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=201)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 3. 1.2007 17:22:03
-
Nicolaisen, J.: Citation analysis (2007)
0.02
0.01649293 = product of:
0.03298586 = sum of:
0.03298586 = product of:
0.09895757 = sum of:
0.09895757 = weight(_text_:22 in 6091) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09895757 = score(doc=6091,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15985602 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045649286 = queryNorm
0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 6091, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=6091)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 13. 7.2008 19:53:22
-
Bornmann, L.; Mutz, R.; Daniel, H.D.: Do we need the h index and its variants in addition to standard bibliometric measures? (2009)
0.01
0.014636151 = product of:
0.029272301 = sum of:
0.029272301 = product of:
0.04390845 = sum of:
0.034806013 = weight(_text_:h in 2861) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.034806013 = score(doc=2861,freq=10.0), product of:
0.113413334 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.045649286 = queryNorm
0.30689526 = fieldWeight in 2861, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2861)
0.009102437 = weight(_text_:d in 2861) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.009102437 = score(doc=2861,freq=2.0), product of:
0.0867278 = queryWeight, product of:
1.899872 = idf(docFreq=17979, maxDocs=44218)
0.045649286 = queryNorm
0.104954086 = fieldWeight in 2861, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.899872 = idf(docFreq=17979, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2861)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- In this study, we investigate whether there is a need for the h index and its variants in addition to standard bibliometric measures (SBMs). Results from our recent study (L. Bornmann, R. Mutz, & H.-D. Daniel, 2008) have indicated that there are two types of indices: One type of indices (e.g., h index) describes the most productive core of a scientist's output and informs about the number of papers in the core. The other type of indices (e.g., a index) depicts the impact of the papers in the core. In evaluative bibliometric studies, the two dimensions quantity and quality of output are usually assessed using the SBMs number of publications (for the quantity dimension) and total citation counts (for the impact dimension). We additionally included the SBMs into the factor analysis. The results of the newly calculated analysis indicate that there is a high intercorrelation between number of publications and the indices that load substantially on the factor Quantity of the Productive Core as well as between total citation counts and the indices that load substantially on the factor Impact of the Productive Core. The high-loading indices and SBMs within one performance dimension could be called redundant in empirical application, as high intercorrelations between different indicators are a sign for measuring something similar (or the same). Based on our findings, we propose the use of any pair of indicators (one relating to the number of papers in a researcher's productive core and one relating to the impact of these core papers) as a meaningful approach for comparing scientists.
- Object
- h-Index
-
Mukherjee, B.: Do open-access journals in library and information science have any scholarly impact? : a bibliometric study of selected open-access journals using Google Scholar (2009)
0.01
0.01459901 = product of:
0.02919802 = sum of:
0.02919802 = product of:
0.04379703 = sum of:
0.01287279 = weight(_text_:d in 2745) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.01287279 = score(doc=2745,freq=4.0), product of:
0.0867278 = queryWeight, product of:
1.899872 = idf(docFreq=17979, maxDocs=44218)
0.045649286 = queryNorm
0.1484275 = fieldWeight in 2745, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.899872 = idf(docFreq=17979, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2745)
0.03092424 = weight(_text_:22 in 2745) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03092424 = score(doc=2745,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15985602 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045649286 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2745, 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=2745)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Using 17 fully open-access journals published uninterruptedly during 2000 to 2004 in the field of library and information science, the present study investigates the impact of these open-access journals in terms of quantity of articles published, subject distribution of the articles, synchronous and diachronous impact factor, immediacy index, and journals' and authors' self-citation. The results indicate that during this 5-year publication period, there are as many as 1,636 articles published by these journals. At the same time, the articles have received a total of 8,591 Web citations during a 7-year citation period. Eight of 17 journals have received more than 100 citations. First Monday received the highest number of citations; however, the average number of citations per article was the highest in D-Lib Magazine. The value of the synchronous impact factor varies from 0.6989 to 1.0014 during 2002 to 2005, and the diachronous impact factor varies from 1.472 to 2.487 during 2000 to 2004. The range of the immediacy index varies between 0.0714 and 1.395. D-Lib Magazine has an immediacy index value above 0.5 in all the years whereas the immediacy index value varies from year to year for the other journals. When the citations of sample articles were analyzed according to source, it was found that 40.32% of the citations came from full-text articles, followed by 33.35% from journal articles. The percentage of journals' self-citation was only 6.04%.
- Date
- 22. 3.2009 17:54:59
-
Van der Veer Martens, B.: Do citation systems represent theories of truth? (2001)
0.01
0.0145778265 = product of:
0.029155653 = sum of:
0.029155653 = product of:
0.087466955 = sum of:
0.087466955 = weight(_text_:22 in 3925) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.087466955 = score(doc=3925,freq=4.0), product of:
0.15985602 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045649286 = queryNorm
0.54716086 = fieldWeight in 3925, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3925)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 7.2006 15:22:28
-
Tunger, D.: Bibliometrie als Teil eines Trenderkennugns-Systems in der Naturwissenschaft (2009)
0.01
0.013271305 = product of:
0.02654261 = sum of:
0.02654261 = product of:
0.039813913 = sum of:
0.02179201 = weight(_text_:h in 2770) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02179201 = score(doc=2770,freq=2.0), product of:
0.113413334 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.045649286 = queryNorm
0.19214681 = fieldWeight in 2770, 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=2770)
0.018021906 = weight(_text_:d in 2770) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.018021906 = score(doc=2770,freq=4.0), product of:
0.0867278 = queryWeight, product of:
1.899872 = idf(docFreq=17979, maxDocs=44218)
0.045649286 = queryNorm
0.2077985 = fieldWeight in 2770, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.899872 = idf(docFreq=17979, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2770)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Language
- d
- Source
- Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 60(2009) H.2, S.93-96
-
Nah, I.W.; Kang, D.-S.; Lee, D.-H.; Chung, Y.-C.: ¬A bibliometric evaluation of research performance in different subject categories (2009)
0.01
0.013271305 = product of:
0.02654261 = sum of:
0.02654261 = product of:
0.039813913 = sum of:
0.02179201 = weight(_text_:h in 2772) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02179201 = score(doc=2772,freq=2.0), product of:
0.113413334 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.045649286 = queryNorm
0.19214681 = fieldWeight in 2772, 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=2772)
0.018021906 = weight(_text_:d in 2772) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.018021906 = score(doc=2772,freq=4.0), product of:
0.0867278 = queryWeight, product of:
1.899872 = idf(docFreq=17979, maxDocs=44218)
0.045649286 = queryNorm
0.2077985 = fieldWeight in 2772, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.899872 = idf(docFreq=17979, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2772)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
-
Pernik, V.; Schlögl, C.: Möglichkeiten und Grenzen von Web Structure Mining am Beispiel von informationswissenschaftlichen Hochschulinstituten im deutschsprachigen Raum (2006)
0.01
0.013156351 = product of:
0.026312701 = sum of:
0.026312701 = product of:
0.039469052 = sum of:
0.024905154 = weight(_text_:h in 78) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.024905154 = score(doc=78,freq=2.0), product of:
0.113413334 = queryWeight, product of:
2.4844491 = idf(docFreq=10020, maxDocs=44218)
0.045649286 = queryNorm
0.21959636 = fieldWeight in 78, 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=78)
0.014563899 = weight(_text_:d in 78) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014563899 = score(doc=78,freq=2.0), product of:
0.0867278 = queryWeight, product of:
1.899872 = idf(docFreq=17979, maxDocs=44218)
0.045649286 = queryNorm
0.16792654 = fieldWeight in 78, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.899872 = idf(docFreq=17979, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=78)
0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Language
- d
- Source
- Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 57(2006) H.8, S.407-414
-
Lewison, G.: ¬The work of the Bibliometrics Research Group (City University) and associates (2005)
0.01
0.012369696 = product of:
0.024739392 = sum of:
0.024739392 = product of:
0.07421818 = sum of:
0.07421818 = weight(_text_:22 in 4890) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07421818 = score(doc=4890,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15985602 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.045649286 = queryNorm
0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 4890, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4890)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 20. 1.2007 17:02:22
