Search (8 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Zhang, Y."
  1. 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) 0.05 
    0.0502218 = sum of:
  0.025577148 = product of:
    0.10230859 = sum of:
      0.10230859 = weight(_text_:authors in 2808) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.10230859 = score(doc=2808,freq=6.0), product of:
          0.23454411 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051448494 = queryNorm
          0.43620193 = fieldWeight in 2808, product of:
            2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
              6.0 = termFreq=6.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2808)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.024644654 = product of:
    0.04928931 = sum of:
      0.04928931 = weight(_text_:22 in 2808) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04928931 = score(doc=2808,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.18016386 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051448494 = 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)
    Abstract
    Internet based electronic resources are growing dramatically but there have been no empirical studies evaluating the impact of e-sources, as a whole, on formal scholarly communication. reports results of an investigation into how much e-sources have been used in formal scholarly communication, using a case study in the area of Library and Information Science (LIS) during the period 1994 to 1996. 4 citation based indicators were used in the study of the impact measurement. Concludes that, compared with the impact of print sources, the impact of e-sources on formal scholarly communication in LIS is small, as measured by e-sources cited, and does not increase significantly by year even though there is observable growth of these impact across the years. It is found that periodical format is related to the rate of citing e-sources, articles are more likely to cite e-sources than are print priodical articles. However, once authors cite electronic resource, there is no significant difference in the number of references per article by periodical format or by year. Suggests that, at this stage, citing e-sources may depend on authors rather than the periodical format in which authors choose to publish
    Date
    30. 1.1999 17:22:22
  2. Zhang, Y.: Scholarly use of Internet-based electronic resources (2001) 0.01 
    0.012530192 = product of:
  0.025060384 = sum of:
    0.025060384 = product of:
      0.100241534 = sum of:
        0.100241534 = weight(_text_:authors in 5212) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.100241534 = score(doc=5212,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.23454411 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051448494 = queryNorm
            0.42738882 = fieldWeight in 5212, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5212)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    By Internet resources Zhang means any electronic file accessible by any Internet protocol. Their usage is determined by an examination of the citations to such sources in a nine-year sample of four print and four electronic LIS journals, by a survey of editors of these journals, and by a survey of scholars with "in press" papers in these journals. Citations were gathered from Social Science Citation Index and manually classed as e-sources by the format used. All authors with "in press" papers were asked about their use and opinion of Internet sources and for any suggestions for improvement. Use of electronic sources is heavy and access is very high. Access and ability explain most usage while satisfaction was not significant. Citation of e-journals increases over the eight years. Authors report under citation of e-journals in favor of print equivalents. Traditional reasons are given for citing and not citing, but additional reasons are also present for e-journals.
  3. Zhang, Y.: Developing a holistic model for digital library evaluation (2010) 0.01 
    0.01045584 = product of:
  0.02091168 = sum of:
    0.02091168 = product of:
      0.04182336 = sum of:
        0.04182336 = weight(_text_:22 in 2360) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04182336 = score(doc=2360,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18016386 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051448494 = 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)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    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.
  4. Zhang, Y.; Jansen, B.J.; Spink, A.: Identification of factors predicting clickthrough in Web searching using neural network analysis (2009) 0.01 
    0.01045584 = product of:
  0.02091168 = sum of:
    0.02091168 = product of:
      0.04182336 = sum of:
        0.04182336 = weight(_text_:22 in 2742) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04182336 = score(doc=2742,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18016386 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051448494 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2742, 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=2742)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    22. 3.2009 17:49:11
  5. Zhang, Y.; Liu, J.; Song, S.: ¬The design and evaluation of a nudge-based interface to facilitate consumers' evaluation of online health information credibility (2023) 0.01 
    0.008713201 = product of:
  0.017426401 = sum of:
    0.017426401 = product of:
      0.034852803 = sum of:
        0.034852803 = weight(_text_:22 in 993) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.034852803 = score(doc=993,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18016386 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051448494 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 993, 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=993)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    22. 6.2023 18:18:34
  6. Zhang, Y.; Wu, M.; Zhang, G.; Lu, J.: Stepping beyond your comfort zone : diffusion-based network analytics for knowledge trajectory recommendation (2023) 0.01 
    0.008713201 = product of:
  0.017426401 = sum of:
    0.017426401 = product of:
      0.034852803 = sum of:
        0.034852803 = weight(_text_:22 in 994) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.034852803 = score(doc=994,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18016386 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051448494 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 994, 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=994)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    22. 6.2023 18:07:12
  7. Zhang, Y.; Li, Y.: ¬A user-centered functional metadata evaluation of moving image collections (2008) 0.01 
    0.0073834863 = product of:
  0.0147669725 = sum of:
    0.0147669725 = product of:
      0.05906789 = sum of:
        0.05906789 = weight(_text_:authors in 1884) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05906789 = score(doc=1884,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.23454411 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051448494 = queryNorm
            0.25184128 = fieldWeight in 1884, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1884)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    In this article, the authors report a series of evaluations of two metadata schemes developed for Moving Image Collections (MIC), an integrated online catalog of moving images. Through two online surveys and one experiment spanning various stages of metadata implementation, the MIC evaluation team explored a user-centered approach in which the four generic user tasks suggested by IFLA FRBR (International Association of Library Associations Functional Requirement for Bibliographic Records) were embedded in data collection and analyses. Diverse groups of users rated usefulness of individual metadata fields for finding, identifying, selecting, and obtaining moving images. The results demonstrate a consistency across these evaluations with respect to (a) identification of a set of useful metadata fields highly rated by target users for each of the FRBR generic tasks, and (b) indication of a significant interaction between MIC metadata fields and the FRBR generic tasks. The findings provide timely feedback for the MIC implementation specifically, and valuable suggestions to other similar metadata application settings in general. They also suggest the feasibility of using the four IFLA FRBR generic tasks as a framework for user-centered functional metadata evaluations.
  8. Lu, C.; Zhang, Y.; Ahn, Y.-Y.; Ding, Y.; Zhang, C.; Ma, D.: Co-contributorship network and division of labor in individual scientific collaborations (2020) 0.01 
    0.0073834863 = product of:
  0.0147669725 = sum of:
    0.0147669725 = product of:
      0.05906789 = sum of:
        0.05906789 = weight(_text_:authors in 5963) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05906789 = score(doc=5963,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.23454411 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051448494 = queryNorm
            0.25184128 = fieldWeight in 5963, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5963)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Collaborations are pervasive in current science. Collaborations have been studied and encouraged in many disciplines. However, little is known about how a team really functions from the detailed division of labor within. In this research, we investigate the patterns of scientific collaboration and division of labor within individual scholarly articles by analyzing their co-contributorship networks. Co-contributorship networks are constructed by performing the one-mode projection of the author-task bipartite networks obtained from 138,787 articles published in PLoS journals. Given an article, we define 3 types of contributors: Specialists, Team-players, and Versatiles. Specialists are those who contribute to all their tasks alone; team-players are those who contribute to every task with other collaborators; and versatiles are those who do both. We find that team-players are the majority and they tend to contribute to the 5 most common tasks as expected, such as "data analysis" and "performing experiments." The specialists and versatiles are more prevalent than expected by our designed 2 null models. Versatiles tend to be senior authors associated with funding and supervision. Specialists are associated with 2 contrasting roles: the supervising role as team leaders or marginal and specialized contributors.

Authors

Years

Themes