Search (8 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Vaughan, L."
  1. Vaughan, L.; Chen, Y.: Data mining from web search queries : a comparison of Google trends and Baidu index (2015) 0.04
    0.03819228 = product of:
      0.07638456 = sum of:
        0.06049643 = weight(_text_:services in 1605) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06049643 = score(doc=1605,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.17221296 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.6713707 = idf(docFreq=3057, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046906993 = queryNorm
            0.3512885 = fieldWeight in 1605, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.6713707 = idf(docFreq=3057, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1605)
        0.015888125 = product of:
          0.03177625 = sum of:
            0.03177625 = weight(_text_:22 in 1605) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03177625 = score(doc=1605,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1642603 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046906993 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1605, 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=1605)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    Numerous studies have explored the possibility of uncovering information from web search queries but few have examined the factors that affect web query data sources. We conducted a study that investigated this issue by comparing Google Trends and Baidu Index. Data from these two services are based on queries entered by users into Google and Baidu, two of the largest search engines in the world. We first compared the features and functions of the two services based on documents and extensive testing. We then carried out an empirical study that collected query volume data from the two sources. We found that data from both sources could be used to predict the quality of Chinese universities and companies. Despite the differences between the two services in terms of technology, such as differing methods of language processing, the search volume data from the two were highly correlated and combining the two data sources did not improve the predictive power of the data. However, there was a major difference between the two in terms of data availability. Baidu Index was able to provide more search volume data than Google Trends did. Our analysis showed that the disadvantage of Google Trends in this regard was due to Google's smaller user base in China. The implication of this finding goes beyond China. Google's user bases in many countries are smaller than that in China, so the search volume data related to those countries could result in the same issue as that related to China.
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 66(2015) no.1, S.13-22
  2. Vaughan, L.; Hahn, T.B.: Profile, needs, and expectations of information professionals : what we learned from the 2003 ASIST membership survey (2005) 0.02
    0.015124108 = product of:
      0.06049643 = sum of:
        0.06049643 = weight(_text_:services in 3305) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06049643 = score(doc=3305,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.17221296 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.6713707 = idf(docFreq=3057, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046906993 = queryNorm
            0.3512885 = fieldWeight in 3305, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.6713707 = idf(docFreq=3057, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3305)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    A survey of American Society for Information Science and Technology (ASIST) members was administered via the Web in May 2003. The survey gathered demographic data about members and their preferences and expectations in regard to conferences and other ASIST products and services. With about a 32% return rate, findings were compared with an earlier survey conducted in 1979, which provides a glimpse of how the Society has changed and what needs to be done to ensure a healthy future development. The gender split has remained the same but members are about 5 years older an average than they were in 1979. A significant shift has occurred in members' institutional affiliations, from the largest group being in the industrial sector to the largest group being in educational institutions. Members an average reported slightly higher incomes (after adjusting for inflation) in 2003 than in 1979. Since 1979, a larger percentage of members have earned a doctoral degree. The most common field of study is library and information science. About half of the respondents reported that ASIST is their primary professional society. Their primary reason for maintaining ASIST membership is "learning about new developments/issues in the field." The most common responses to the question about what factors would make ASIST conferences more appealing related to lowering costs. Other responses related to attitudes about the ASIST Bulletin and the value of other proposed products and services are summarized and reported. Detailed analyses of relationships among different variables made possible a deeper understanding of members' needs and expectations, which provides directions for design of programs and services.
  3. Vaughan, L.; Shaw, D.: Web citation data for impact assessment : a comparison of four science disciplines (2005) 0.01
    0.008731907 = product of:
      0.03492763 = sum of:
        0.03492763 = weight(_text_:services in 3880) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03492763 = score(doc=3880,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17221296 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.6713707 = idf(docFreq=3057, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046906993 = queryNorm
            0.2028165 = fieldWeight in 3880, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.6713707 = idf(docFreq=3057, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3880)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    The number and type of Web citations to journal articles in four areas of science are examined: biology, genetics, medicine, and multidisciplinary sciences. For a sample of 5,972 articles published in 114 journals, the median Web citation counts per journal article range from 6.2 in medicine to 10.4 in genetics. About 30% of Web citations in each area indicate intellectual impact (citations from articles or class readings, in contrast to citations from bibliographic services or the author's or journal's home page). Journals receiving more Web citations also have higher percentages of citations indicating intellectual impact. There is significant correlation between the number of citations reported in the databases from the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI, now Thomson Scientific) and the number of citations retrieved using the Google search engine (Web citations). The correlation is much weaker for journals published outside the United Kingdom or United States and for multidisciplinary journals. Web citation numbers are higher than ISI citation counts, suggesting that Web searches might be conducted for an earlier or a more fine-grained assessment of an article's impact. The Web-evident impact of non-UK/USA publications might provide a balance to the geographic or cultural biases observed in ISI's data, although the stability of Web citation counts is debatable.
  4. Vaughan, L.; Shaw , D.: Bibliographic and Web citations : what Is the difference? (2003) 0.01
    0.008731907 = product of:
      0.03492763 = sum of:
        0.03492763 = weight(_text_:services in 5176) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03492763 = score(doc=5176,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17221296 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.6713707 = idf(docFreq=3057, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046906993 = queryNorm
            0.2028165 = fieldWeight in 5176, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.6713707 = idf(docFreq=3057, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5176)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    Vaughn, and Shaw look at the relationship between traditional citation and Web citation (not hyperlinks but rather textual mentions of published papers). Using English language research journals in ISI's 2000 Journal Citation Report - Information and Library Science category - 1209 full length papers published in 1997 in 46 journals were identified. Each was searched in Social Science Citation Index and on the Web using Google phrase search by entering the title in quotation marks, and followed for distinction where necessary with sub-titles, author's names, and journal title words. After removing obvious false drops, the number of web sites was recorded for comparison with the SSCI counts. A second sample from 1992 was also collected for examination. There were a total of 16,371 web citations to the selected papers. The top and bottom ranked four journals were then examined and every third citation to every third paper was selected and classified as to source type, domain, and country of origin. Web counts are much higher than ISI citation counts. Of the 46 journals from 1997, 26 demonstrated a significant correlation between Web and traditional citation counts, and 11 of the 15 in the 1992 sample also showed significant correlation. Journal impact factor in 1998 and 1999 correlated significantly with average Web citations per journal in the 1997 data, but at a low level. Thirty percent of web citations come from other papers posted on the web, and 30percent from listings of web based bibliographic services, while twelve percent come from class reading lists. High web citation journals often have web accessible tables of content.
  5. Vaughan, L.; Ninkov, A.: ¬A new approach to web co-link analysis (2018) 0.01
    0.008731907 = product of:
      0.03492763 = sum of:
        0.03492763 = weight(_text_:services in 4256) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03492763 = score(doc=4256,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17221296 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.6713707 = idf(docFreq=3057, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046906993 = queryNorm
            0.2028165 = fieldWeight in 4256, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.6713707 = idf(docFreq=3057, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4256)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    Numerous web co-link studies have analyzed a wide variety of websites ranging from those in the academic and business arena to those dealing with politics and governments. Such studies uncover rich information about these organizations. In recent years, however, there has been a dearth of co-link analysis, mainly due to the lack of sources from which co-link data can be collected directly. Although several commercial services such as Alexa provide inlink data, none provide co-link data. We propose a new approach to web co-link analysis that can alleviate this problem so that researchers can continue to mine the valuable information contained in co-link data. The proposed approach has two components: (a) generating co-link data from inlink data using a computer program; (b) analyzing co-link data at the site level in addition to the page level that previous co-link analyses have used. The site-level analysis has the potential of expanding co-link data sources. We tested this proposed approach by analyzing a group of websites focused on vaccination using Moz inlink data. We found that the approach is feasible, as we were able to generate co-link data from inlink data and analyze the co-link data with multidimensional scaling.
  6. Vaughan, L.: New measurements for search engine evaluation proposed and tested (2004) 0.01
    0.00515191 = product of:
      0.02060764 = sum of:
        0.02060764 = product of:
          0.04121528 = sum of:
            0.04121528 = weight(_text_:management in 2535) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.04121528 = score(doc=2535,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15810528 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046906993 = queryNorm
                0.2606825 = fieldWeight in 2535, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2535)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Source
    Information processing and management. 40(2004) no.4, S.677-691
  7. Vaughan, L.; Thelwall, M.: ¬A modelling approach to uncover hyperlink patterns : the case of Canadian universities (2005) 0.01
    0.00515191 = product of:
      0.02060764 = sum of:
        0.02060764 = product of:
          0.04121528 = sum of:
            0.04121528 = weight(_text_:management in 1014) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.04121528 = score(doc=1014,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15810528 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046906993 = queryNorm
                0.2606825 = fieldWeight in 1014, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1014)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Source
    Information processing and management. 41(2005) no.2, S.347-360
  8. Vaughan, L.; Thelwall, M.: Search engine coverage bias : evidence and possible causes (2004) 0.00
    0.004415923 = product of:
      0.017663691 = sum of:
        0.017663691 = product of:
          0.035327382 = sum of:
            0.035327382 = weight(_text_:management in 2536) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.035327382 = score(doc=2536,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15810528 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046906993 = queryNorm
                0.22344214 = fieldWeight in 2536, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2536)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Source
    Information processing and management. 40(2004) no.4, S.693-708