-
Cronin, B.: ¬The writing on the wall (2015)
0.02
0.022574812 = product of:
0.0601995 = sum of:
0.013388081 = weight(_text_:of in 7297) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.013388081 = score(doc=7297,freq=2.0), product of:
0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.20732689 = fieldWeight in 7297, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=7297)
0.013242318 = product of:
0.026484637 = sum of:
0.026484637 = weight(_text_:on in 7297) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.026484637 = score(doc=7297,freq=2.0), product of:
0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.29160398 = fieldWeight in 7297, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=7297)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.033569098 = product of:
0.067138195 = sum of:
0.067138195 = weight(_text_:22 in 7297) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.067138195 = score(doc=7297,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1446067 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 7297, 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=7297)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.375 = coord(3/8)
- Date
- 26. 4.2015 19:27:22
- Source
- Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 66(2015) no.5, S.873-875
-
Davenport, E.; Cronin, B.: Who dunnit? : Metatags and hyperauthorship (2001)
0.02
0.02130001 = product of:
0.056800026 = sum of:
0.029945528 = weight(_text_:use in 6031) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.029945528 = score(doc=6031,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.23682132 = fieldWeight in 6031, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6031)
0.019129815 = weight(_text_:of in 6031) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.019129815 = score(doc=6031,freq=12.0), product of:
0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.29624295 = fieldWeight in 6031, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6031)
0.007724685 = product of:
0.01544937 = sum of:
0.01544937 = weight(_text_:on in 6031) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.01544937 = score(doc=6031,freq=2.0), product of:
0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.17010231 = fieldWeight in 6031, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6031)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.375 = coord(3/8)
- Abstract
- Multiple authorship is a topic of growing concern in a number of scientific domains. When, as is increasingly common, scholarly articles and clinical reports have scores or even hundreds of authors-what Cronin (in press) has termed "hyperauthorship" -the precise nature of each individual's contribution is often masked. A notation that describes collaborators' contributions and allows those contributions to be tracked in, and across, texts (and over time) offers a solution. Such a notation should be useful, easy to use, and acceptable to communities of scientists. Drawing on earlier work, we present a proposal for an XML-like "contribution" mark-up, and discuss the potential benefits and possible drawbacks
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and technology. 52(2001) no.9, S.770-773
-
Cronin, B.: Library and information science in context (1998)
0.02
0.020251544 = product of:
0.08100618 = sum of:
0.023614356 = weight(_text_:of in 1416) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023614356 = score(doc=1416,freq=14.0), product of:
0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.36569026 = fieldWeight in 1416, product of:
3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
14.0 = termFreq=14.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1416)
0.05739182 = product of:
0.11478364 = sum of:
0.11478364 = weight(_text_:line in 1416) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.11478364 = score(doc=1416,freq=2.0), product of:
0.23157367 = queryWeight, product of:
5.6078424 = idf(docFreq=440, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.4956679 = fieldWeight in 1416, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.6078424 = idf(docFreq=440, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1416)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(2/8)
- Abstract
- State of the art review of the ways in which the library and information science (LIS) profession is adapting to the growing informatization of society, the emergence of an information society and how librarians and information scientists are positioning themselves as players in an information society, characterized by metaphors such as 'information superhighway' and 'Worldwide Library'. Identifies major change drivers and considers the kinds of strategic responses being made by, and required of, the LIS field in the face of pervasive technologization and shifting social practices
- Source
- Library and information work worldwide 1998. Ed.: M.B. Line et al
-
Larivière, V.; Sugimoto, C.R.; Cronin, B.: ¬A bibliometric chronicling of library and information science's first hundred years (2012)
0.02
0.019314842 = product of:
0.051506247 = sum of:
0.021389665 = weight(_text_:use in 244) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.021389665 = score(doc=244,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.1691581 = fieldWeight in 244, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=244)
0.02231347 = weight(_text_:of in 244) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02231347 = score(doc=244,freq=32.0), product of:
0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.34554482 = fieldWeight in 244, product of:
5.656854 = tf(freq=32.0), with freq of:
32.0 = termFreq=32.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=244)
0.007803111 = product of:
0.015606222 = sum of:
0.015606222 = weight(_text_:on in 244) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.015606222 = score(doc=244,freq=4.0), product of:
0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.1718293 = fieldWeight in 244, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=244)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.375 = coord(3/8)
- Abstract
- This paper presents a condensed history of Library and Information Science (LIS) over the course of more than a century using a variety of bibliometric measures. It examines in detail the variable rate of knowledge production in the field, shifts in subject coverage, the dominance of particular publication genres at different times, prevailing modes of production, interactions with other disciplines, and, more generally, observes how the field has evolved. It shows that, despite a striking growth in the number of journals, papers, and contributing authors, a decrease was observed in the field's market-share of all social science and humanities research. Collaborative authorship is now the norm, a pattern seen across the social sciences. The idea of boundary crossing was also examined: in 2010, nearly 60% of authors who published in LIS also published in another discipline. This high degree of permeability in LIS was also demonstrated through reference and citation practices: LIS scholars now cite and receive citations from other fields more than from LIS itself. Two major structural shifts are revealed in the data: in 1960, LIS changed from a professional field focused on librarianship to an academic field focused on information and use; and in 1990, LIS began to receive a growing number of citations from outside the field, notably from Computer Science and Management, and saw a dramatic increase in the number of authors contributing to the literature of the field.
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 63(2012) no.5, S.997-1016
-
Larivière, V.; Sugimoto, C.R.; Macaluso, B.; Milojevi´c, S.; Cronin, B.; Thelwall, M.: arXiv E-prints and the journal of record : an analysis of roles and relationships (2014)
0.02
0.019314842 = product of:
0.051506247 = sum of:
0.021389665 = weight(_text_:use in 1285) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.021389665 = score(doc=1285,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.1691581 = fieldWeight in 1285, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1285)
0.02231347 = weight(_text_:of in 1285) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02231347 = score(doc=1285,freq=32.0), product of:
0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.34554482 = fieldWeight in 1285, product of:
5.656854 = tf(freq=32.0), with freq of:
32.0 = termFreq=32.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1285)
0.007803111 = product of:
0.015606222 = sum of:
0.015606222 = weight(_text_:on in 1285) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.015606222 = score(doc=1285,freq=4.0), product of:
0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.1718293 = fieldWeight in 1285, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1285)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.375 = coord(3/8)
- Abstract
- Since its creation in 1991, arXiv has become central to the diffusion of research in a number of fields. Combining data from the entirety of arXiv and the Web of Science (WoS), this article investigates (a) the proportion of papers across all disciplines that are on arXiv and the proportion of arXiv papers that are in the WoS, (b) the elapsed time between arXiv submission and journal publication, and (c) the aging characteristics and scientific impact of arXiv e-prints and their published version. It shows that the proportion of WoS papers found on arXiv varies across the specialties of physics and mathematics, and that only a few specialties make extensive use of the repository. Elapsed time between arXiv submission and journal publication has shortened but remains longer in mathematics than in physics. In physics, mathematics, as well as in astronomy and astrophysics, arXiv versions are cited more promptly and decay faster than WoS papers. The arXiv versions of papers-both published and unpublished-have lower citation rates than published papers, although there is almost no difference in the impact of the arXiv versions of published and unpublished papers.
- Source
- Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 65(2014) no.6, S.1157-1169
-
Cronin, B.; Overfeldt, K.; Fouchereaux, K.; Manzvanzvike, T.; Cha, M.; Sona, E.: Internet-sourced competitive intelligence (1994)
0.02
0.017128814 = product of:
0.04567684 = sum of:
0.025667597 = weight(_text_:use in 539) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.025667597 = score(doc=539,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.20298971 = fieldWeight in 539, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=539)
0.013388081 = weight(_text_:of in 539) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.013388081 = score(doc=539,freq=8.0), product of:
0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.20732689 = fieldWeight in 539, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=539)
0.006621159 = product of:
0.013242318 = sum of:
0.013242318 = weight(_text_:on in 539) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.013242318 = score(doc=539,freq=2.0), product of:
0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.14580199 = fieldWeight in 539, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=539)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.375 = coord(3/8)
- Abstract
- Little research has been reported on how the Internet is being used to source corporate competitive intelligence. An exploratory study was conducted to explore current practice and future potential. A request for participants was posted to business-oriented listservs and Usenet newsgroups. Respondents were sent an open-ended survey which addressed three topics: a) the Internet as a source of competitive edge; b) ways in which the Internet could make their firm mor competitive, and c) security and other usage-related issues from the corporate perspective. Findings suggest that the Internet is being used as a tool for monitoring the external environment, locating distributed experts, engaging in informal know-how trading, and conducting market research. Respondents foresee greater use of the Internet in the context of the competitive intelligence function, and generally have few reservations about using the Internet
- Source
- Proceedings of the 15th National Online Meeting 1994, New York, 10-12 May 1994. Ed. by M.E. Williams
-
Cronin, B.; Overfeldt, K.; Fouchereaux, K.; Manzvanzvike, T.; Cha, M.; Sona, E.: ¬The Internet and competitive intelligence : a survey of current practice (1994)
0.01
0.014021526 = product of:
0.056086104 = sum of:
0.03422346 = weight(_text_:use in 529) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03422346 = score(doc=529,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.27065295 = fieldWeight in 529, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=529)
0.021862645 = weight(_text_:of in 529) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.021862645 = score(doc=529,freq=12.0), product of:
0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.33856338 = fieldWeight in 529, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=529)
0.25 = coord(2/8)
- Abstract
- The Internet has the potential to become a major strategic information tool for commercial enterprises. many companies, large and small, are already using the Internet to gain an edge in an increasingly competitive business environment, both domestically and internationally. It may well be that the Internet is the next major phase in the evolution of the competitive intelligence function in advanced organizations, especially as commercialization of the network intensifies. Describes an exploratory study of business use of the Internet for competitive intelligence purposes
- Source
- International journal of information management. 14(1994) no.3, S.204-222
-
Cronin, B.; Shaw, D.; LaBarre, K.: Visible, Less Visible, and Invisible Work : Patterns of Collaboration in 20th Century Chemistry (2004)
0.01
0.013961855 = product of:
0.05584742 = sum of:
0.029945528 = weight(_text_:use in 2094) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.029945528 = score(doc=2094,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.23682132 = fieldWeight in 2094, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2094)
0.025901893 = weight(_text_:of in 2094) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.025901893 = score(doc=2094,freq=22.0), product of:
0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.40111488 = fieldWeight in 2094, product of:
4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
22.0 = termFreq=22.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2094)
0.25 = coord(2/8)
- Abstract
- We chronicle the use of acknowledgments in 20th century chemistry by analyzing and classifying over 2,000 specimens covering a 100-year period. Our results show that acknowledgment has gradually established itself as a constitutive element of academic writing- one that provides a revealing insight into the structural nature of subauthorship collaboration in science. Complementary data an rates of coauthorship are also presented to highlight the growing importance of teamwork and the increasing division of labor in contemporary chemistry. The results of this study are compared with the findings of a parallel study of collaboration in both the social sciences and the humanities.
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and technology. 55(2004) no.2, S.160-168
-
Cronin, B.: Vernacular and vehicular language (2009)
0.01
0.0136958435 = product of:
0.054783374 = sum of:
0.015619429 = weight(_text_:of in 7192) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.015619429 = score(doc=7192,freq=2.0), product of:
0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.24188137 = fieldWeight in 7192, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=7192)
0.039163947 = product of:
0.078327894 = sum of:
0.078327894 = weight(_text_:22 in 7192) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.078327894 = score(doc=7192,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1446067 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 7192, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=7192)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(2/8)
- Date
- 22. 3.2009 11:44:11
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 60(2009) no.3, S.433
-
Cronin, B.: Thinking about data (2013)
0.01
0.0136958435 = product of:
0.054783374 = sum of:
0.015619429 = weight(_text_:of in 4347) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.015619429 = score(doc=4347,freq=2.0), product of:
0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.24188137 = fieldWeight in 4347, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4347)
0.039163947 = product of:
0.078327894 = sum of:
0.078327894 = weight(_text_:22 in 4347) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.078327894 = score(doc=4347,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1446067 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 4347, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4347)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(2/8)
- Date
- 22. 3.2013 16:18:36
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 64(2013) no.3, S.435-436
-
Cronin, B.; Shaw, D.; LaBarre, K.: ¬A cast of thousands : Coauthorship and subauthorship collaboration in the 20th century as manifested in the scholarly journal literature of psychology and philosophy (2003)
0.01
0.013660504 = product of:
0.054642014 = sum of:
0.029945528 = weight(_text_:use in 1731) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.029945528 = score(doc=1731,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.23682132 = fieldWeight in 1731, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1731)
0.024696484 = weight(_text_:of in 1731) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.024696484 = score(doc=1731,freq=20.0), product of:
0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.38244802 = fieldWeight in 1731, product of:
4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
20.0 = termFreq=20.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1731)
0.25 = coord(2/8)
- Abstract
- We chronicle the use of acknowledgments in 20th-century scholarship by analyzing and classifying more than 4,500 specimens covering a 100-year period. Our results show that the intensity of acknowledgment varies by discipline, reflecting differences in prevailing sociocognitive structures and work practices. We demonstrate that the acknowledgment has gradually established itself as a constitutive element of academic writing, one that provides a revealing insight into the nature and extent of subauthorship collaboration. Complementary data an rates of coauthorship are also presented to highlight the growing importance of collaboration and the increasing division of labor in contemporary research and scholarship.
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and technology. 54(2003) no.9, S.855-871
-
Snyder, H.; Cronin, B.; Davenport, E.: What's the use of citation? : Citation analysis as a literature topic in selected disciplines of the social sciences (1995)
0.01
0.012898376 = product of:
0.051593505 = sum of:
0.025667597 = weight(_text_:use in 1825) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.025667597 = score(doc=1825,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.20298971 = fieldWeight in 1825, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1825)
0.02592591 = weight(_text_:of in 1825) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02592591 = score(doc=1825,freq=30.0), product of:
0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.4014868 = fieldWeight in 1825, product of:
5.477226 = tf(freq=30.0), with freq of:
30.0 = termFreq=30.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1825)
0.25 = coord(2/8)
- Abstract
- Reports results of a study to investigate the place and role of citation analysis in selected disciplines in the social sciences, including library and information science. 5 core library and information science periodicals: Journal of documentation; Library quarterly; Journal of the American Society for Information Science; College and research libraries; and the Journal of information science, were studed to determine the percentage of articles devoted to citation analysis and develop an indictive typology to categorize the major foci of research being conducted under the rubric of citation analysis. Similar analysis was conducted for periodicals in other social sciences disciplines. Demonstrates how the rubric can be used to dertermine how citatiion analysis is applied within library and information science and other disciplines. By isolating citation from bibliometrics in general, this work is differentiated from other, previous studies. Analysis of data from a 10 year sample of transdisciplinary social sciences literature suggests that 2 application areas predominate: the validity of citation as an evaluation tool; and impact or performance studies of authors, periodicals, and institutions
- Source
- Journal of information science. 21(1995) no.2, S.75-85
-
Cronin, B.; Meho, L.I.: Applying the author affiliation index to library and information science journals (2008)
0.01
0.011711466 = product of:
0.046845865 = sum of:
0.03422346 = weight(_text_:use in 2361) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03422346 = score(doc=2361,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.27065295 = fieldWeight in 2361, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2361)
0.012622404 = weight(_text_:of in 2361) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.012622404 = score(doc=2361,freq=4.0), product of:
0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.19546966 = fieldWeight in 2361, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2361)
0.25 = coord(2/8)
- Abstract
- The authors use a novel method - the Author Affiliation Index (AAI) - to determine whether faculty at the top-10 North American library and information science (LIS) programs have a disproportionate presence in the premier journals of the field. The study finds that LIS may be both too small and too interdisciplinary a domain for the AAI to provide reliable results.
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 59(2008) no.11, S.1861-1865
-
Davenport, E.; Cronin, B.: Knowledge management : Semantic drift or conceptual shift? (2000)
0.01
0.010938063 = product of:
0.043752253 = sum of:
0.015778005 = weight(_text_:of in 2277) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.015778005 = score(doc=2277,freq=4.0), product of:
0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.24433708 = fieldWeight in 2277, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2277)
0.02797425 = product of:
0.0559485 = sum of:
0.0559485 = weight(_text_:22 in 2277) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0559485 = score(doc=2277,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1446067 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 2277, 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=2277)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(2/8)
- Date
- 31. 7.2001 20:22:57
- Footnote
- Thematisierung der Verschiebung des Verständnisses von Wissensmanagement; vgl. auch: Day, R.E.: Totality and representation: a history of knowledge management ... in: JASIS 52(2001) no.9, S.725-735
- Source
- Journal of education for library and information science. 41(2000) no.?, S.294-306
-
Cronin, B.: On the epistemic significance of place (2008)
0.01
0.01013836 = product of:
0.04055344 = sum of:
0.024947217 = weight(_text_:of in 4853) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.024947217 = score(doc=4853,freq=10.0), product of:
0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.38633084 = fieldWeight in 4853, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4853)
0.015606222 = product of:
0.031212443 = sum of:
0.031212443 = weight(_text_:on in 4853) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.031212443 = score(doc=4853,freq=4.0), product of:
0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.3436586 = fieldWeight in 4853, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4853)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(2/8)
- Abstract
- The author describes an exploratory analysis of the influence of place and proximity on collaboration. Bibliometric data and biographical information are combined to reveal the extent to which co-authorship relationships are a function of physical collocation.
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 59(2008) no.6, S.1002-1006
-
Lee, C.J.; Sugimoto, C.R.; Zhang, G.; Cronin, B.: Bias in peer review (2013)
0.01
0.009735268 = product of:
0.03894107 = sum of:
0.024135707 = weight(_text_:of in 525) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.024135707 = score(doc=525,freq=26.0), product of:
0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.37376386 = fieldWeight in 525, product of:
5.0990195 = tf(freq=26.0), with freq of:
26.0 = termFreq=26.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=525)
0.014805362 = product of:
0.029610723 = sum of:
0.029610723 = weight(_text_:on in 525) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.029610723 = score(doc=525,freq=10.0), product of:
0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.32602316 = fieldWeight in 525, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=525)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(2/8)
- Abstract
- Research on bias in peer review examines scholarly communication and funding processes to assess the epistemic and social legitimacy of the mechanisms by which knowledge communities vet and self-regulate their work. Despite vocal concerns, a closer look at the empirical and methodological limitations of research on bias raises questions about the existence and extent of many hypothesized forms of bias. In addition, the notion of bias is predicated on an implicit ideal that, once articulated, raises questions about the normative implications of research on bias in peer review. This review provides a brief description of the function, history, and scope of peer review; articulates and critiques the conception of bias unifying research on bias in peer review; characterizes and examines the empirical, methodological, and normative claims of bias in peer review research; and assesses possible alternatives to the status quo. We close by identifying ways to expand conceptions and studies of bias to contend with the complexity of social interactions among actors involved directly and indirectly in peer review.
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 64(2013) no.1, S.2-17
-
Cronin, B.; Meho, L.I.: ¬The shifting balance of intellectual trade in information studies (2008)
0.01
0.009027983 = product of:
0.036111932 = sum of:
0.020662563 = weight(_text_:of in 1377) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.020662563 = score(doc=1377,freq=14.0), product of:
0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.31997898 = fieldWeight in 1377, product of:
3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
14.0 = termFreq=14.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1377)
0.01544937 = product of:
0.03089874 = sum of:
0.03089874 = weight(_text_:on in 1377) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03089874 = score(doc=1377,freq=8.0), product of:
0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.34020463 = fieldWeight in 1377, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1377)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(2/8)
- Abstract
- The authors describe a large-scale, longitudinal citation analysis of intellectual trading between information studies and cognate disciplines. The results of their investigation reveal the extent to which information studies draws on and, in turn, contributes to the ideational substrates of other academic domains. Their data show that the field has become a more successful exporter of ideas as well as less introverted than was previously the case. In the last decade, information studies has begun to contribute significantly to the literatures of such disciplines as computer science and engineering on the one hand and business and management on the other, while also drawing more heavily on those same literatures.
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 59(2008) no.4, S.551-564
-
Cronin, B.; Snyder, H.; Atkins, H.: Comparative citation rankings of authors in mongraphic and journal literature : a study of sociology (1997)
0.01
0.00890521 = product of:
0.03562084 = sum of:
0.024696484 = weight(_text_:of in 4709) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.024696484 = score(doc=4709,freq=20.0), product of:
0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.38244802 = fieldWeight in 4709, product of:
4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
20.0 = termFreq=20.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4709)
0.010924355 = product of:
0.02184871 = sum of:
0.02184871 = weight(_text_:on in 4709) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02184871 = score(doc=4709,freq=4.0), product of:
0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.24056101 = fieldWeight in 4709, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4709)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(2/8)
- Abstract
- Describes a study which examined the scholarly literature of sociology. Tens of thousands of references from monographs and leading academic journals were analyzed. The relative rankings of authors who were highly cited in the monographic literature did not change in the journal literature of the same period. However, there was only a small overlap between the most highly cited authors based on the journal sample and those based on the monograph sample. The lack of correlation suggests that there may be 2 distinct populations of highly cited authors
- Source
- Journal of documentation. 53(1997) no.3, S.263-273
-
Cronin, B.; Snyder, H.W.; Rosembaum, H.; Martinson, A.; Callahan, E.: Invoked on the Web (1998)
0.01
0.008586906 = product of:
0.034347624 = sum of:
0.021862645 = weight(_text_:of in 2327) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.021862645 = score(doc=2327,freq=12.0), product of:
0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.33856338 = fieldWeight in 2327, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2327)
0.012484977 = product of:
0.024969954 = sum of:
0.024969954 = weight(_text_:on in 2327) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.024969954 = score(doc=2327,freq=4.0), product of:
0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.27492687 = fieldWeight in 2327, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2327)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(2/8)
- Abstract
- Where, how, and why are scholars invoked on the WWW? An inductively derived typology was used to captue genres of invocation. Comparative data were gathered using five commercial search engines. It is argued that the Web fosters mow modalities of scholarly communication. Different categories of invocation are identified and analyzed in terms of their potential to inform sociometric and bibliometric analyses of academic interaction
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 49(1998) no.14, S.1319-1328
-
Cronin, B.: Standing on ceremony (2013)
0.01
0.0077671995 = product of:
0.031068798 = sum of:
0.015619429 = weight(_text_:of in 1106) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.015619429 = score(doc=1106,freq=2.0), product of:
0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.24188137 = fieldWeight in 1106, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=1106)
0.01544937 = product of:
0.03089874 = sum of:
0.03089874 = weight(_text_:on in 1106) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03089874 = score(doc=1106,freq=2.0), product of:
0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.34020463 = fieldWeight in 1106, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=1106)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.25 = coord(2/8)
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 64(2013) no.7, S.1309-1310
