-
Levitt, J.M.; Thelwall, M.: Citation levels and collaboration within library and information science (2009)
0.04
0.03781286 = product of:
0.07562572 = sum of:
0.07562572 = sum of:
0.025592614 = weight(_text_:technology in 2734) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.025592614 = score(doc=2734,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15554588 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.052224867 = queryNorm
0.16453418 = fieldWeight in 2734, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2734)
0.0500331 = weight(_text_:22 in 2734) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0500331 = score(doc=2734,freq=4.0), product of:
0.18288259 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052224867 = queryNorm
0.27358043 = fieldWeight in 2734, 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=2734)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Collaboration is a major research policy objective, but does it deliver higher quality research? This study uses citation analysis to examine the Web of Science (WoS) Information Science & Library Science subject category (IS&LS) to ascertain whether, in general, more highly cited articles are more highly collaborative than other articles. It consists of two investigations. The first investigation is a longitudinal comparison of the degree and proportion of collaboration in five strata of citation; it found that collaboration in the highest four citation strata (all in the most highly cited 22%) increased in unison over time, whereas collaboration in the lowest citation strata (un-cited articles) remained low and stable. Given that over 40% of the articles were un-cited, it seems important to take into account the differences found between un-cited articles and relatively highly cited articles when investigating collaboration in IS&LS. The second investigation compares collaboration for 35 influential information scientists; it found that their more highly cited articles on average were not more highly collaborative than their less highly cited articles. In summary, although collaborative research is conducive to high citation in general, collaboration has apparently not tended to be essential to the success of current and former elite information scientists.
- Date
- 22. 3.2009 12:43:51
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 60(2009) no.3, S.434-442
-
Thelwall, M.; Buckley, K.; Paltoglou, G.: Sentiment in Twitter events (2011)
0.04
0.036582813 = product of:
0.073165625 = sum of:
0.073165625 = sum of:
0.030711137 = weight(_text_:technology in 4345) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030711137 = score(doc=4345,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15554588 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.052224867 = queryNorm
0.19744103 = fieldWeight in 4345, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4345)
0.042454492 = weight(_text_:22 in 4345) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.042454492 = score(doc=4345,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18288259 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052224867 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4345, 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=4345)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 1.2011 14:27:06
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 62(2011) no.2, S.406-418
-
Thelwall, M.; Maflahi, N.: Guideline references and academic citations as evidence of the clinical value of health research (2016)
0.04
0.036582813 = product of:
0.073165625 = sum of:
0.073165625 = sum of:
0.030711137 = weight(_text_:technology in 2856) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030711137 = score(doc=2856,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15554588 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.052224867 = queryNorm
0.19744103 = fieldWeight in 2856, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2856)
0.042454492 = weight(_text_:22 in 2856) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.042454492 = score(doc=2856,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18288259 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052224867 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2856, 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=2856)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 19. 3.2016 12:22:00
- Source
- Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 67(2016) no.4, S.960-966
-
Thelwall, M.; Sud, P.: Mendeley readership counts : an investigation of temporal and disciplinary differences (2016)
0.04
0.036582813 = product of:
0.073165625 = sum of:
0.073165625 = sum of:
0.030711137 = weight(_text_:technology in 3211) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030711137 = score(doc=3211,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15554588 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.052224867 = queryNorm
0.19744103 = fieldWeight in 3211, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3211)
0.042454492 = weight(_text_:22 in 3211) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.042454492 = score(doc=3211,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18288259 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052224867 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3211, 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=3211)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 16.11.2016 11:07:22
- Source
- Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 67(2016) no.12, S.3036-3050
-
Didegah, F.; Thelwall, M.: Co-saved, co-tweeted, and co-cited networks (2018)
0.04
0.036582813 = product of:
0.073165625 = sum of:
0.073165625 = sum of:
0.030711137 = weight(_text_:technology in 4291) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030711137 = score(doc=4291,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15554588 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.052224867 = queryNorm
0.19744103 = fieldWeight in 4291, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4291)
0.042454492 = weight(_text_:22 in 4291) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.042454492 = score(doc=4291,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18288259 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052224867 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4291, 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=4291)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 28. 7.2018 10:00:22
- Source
- Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 69(2018) no.8, S.959-973
-
Thelwall, M.; Buckley, K.; Paltoglou, G.; Cai, D.; Kappas, A.: Sentiment strength detection in short informal text (2010)
0.04
0.035786085 = product of:
0.07157217 = sum of:
0.07157217 = sum of:
0.036193423 = weight(_text_:technology in 4200) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.036193423 = score(doc=4200,freq=4.0), product of:
0.15554588 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.052224867 = queryNorm
0.23268649 = fieldWeight in 4200, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4200)
0.035378743 = weight(_text_:22 in 4200) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.035378743 = score(doc=4200,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18288259 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052224867 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4200, 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=4200)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 1.2011 14:29:23
- Footnote
- Vgl. auch das Erratum in: Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 62(2011) no.2, S.419
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 61(2010) no.12, S.2544-2558
-
Kousha, K.; Thelwall, M.: How is science cited on the Web? : a classification of google unique Web citations (2007)
0.03
0.030485678 = product of:
0.060971357 = sum of:
0.060971357 = sum of:
0.025592614 = weight(_text_:technology in 586) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.025592614 = score(doc=586,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15554588 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.052224867 = queryNorm
0.16453418 = fieldWeight in 586, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=586)
0.035378743 = weight(_text_:22 in 586) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.035378743 = score(doc=586,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18288259 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052224867 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 586, 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=586)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Although the analysis of citations in the scholarly literature is now an established and relatively well understood part of information science, not enough is known about citations that can be found on the Web. In particular, are there new Web types, and if so, are these trivial or potentially useful for studying or evaluating research communication? We sought evidence based upon a sample of 1,577 Web citations of the URLs or titles of research articles in 64 open-access journals from biology, physics, chemistry, and computing. Only 25% represented intellectual impact, from references of Web documents (23%) and other informal scholarly sources (2%). Many of the Web/URL citations were created for general or subject-specific navigation (45%) or for self-publicity (22%). Additional analyses revealed significant disciplinary differences in the types of Google unique Web/URL citations as well as some characteristics of scientific open-access publishing on the Web. We conclude that the Web provides access to a new and different type of citation information, one that may therefore enable us to measure different aspects of research, and the research process in particular; but to obtain good information, the different types should be separated.
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 58(2007) no.11, S.1631-1644
-
Thelwall, M.; Sud, P.; Wilkinson, D.: Link and co-inlink network diagrams with URL citations or title mentions (2012)
0.03
0.030485678 = product of:
0.060971357 = sum of:
0.060971357 = sum of:
0.025592614 = weight(_text_:technology in 57) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.025592614 = score(doc=57,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15554588 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.052224867 = queryNorm
0.16453418 = fieldWeight in 57, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=57)
0.035378743 = weight(_text_:22 in 57) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.035378743 = score(doc=57,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18288259 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052224867 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 57, 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=57)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 6. 4.2012 18:16:22
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 63(2012) no.4, S.805-816
-
Thelwall, M.; Kousha, K.; Abdoli, M.; Stuart, E.; Makita, M.; Wilson, P.; Levitt, J.: Why are coauthored academic articles more cited : higher quality or larger audience? (2023)
0.03
0.030485678 = product of:
0.060971357 = sum of:
0.060971357 = sum of:
0.025592614 = weight(_text_:technology in 995) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.025592614 = score(doc=995,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15554588 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.052224867 = queryNorm
0.16453418 = fieldWeight in 995, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=995)
0.035378743 = weight(_text_:22 in 995) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.035378743 = score(doc=995,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18288259 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052224867 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 995, 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=995)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 6.2023 18:11:50
- Source
- Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 74(2023) no.7, S.791-810
-
Thelwall, M.; Ruschenburg, T.: Grundlagen und Forschungsfelder der Webometrie (2006)
0.01
0.014151498 = product of:
0.028302995 = sum of:
0.028302995 = product of:
0.05660599 = sum of:
0.05660599 = weight(_text_:22 in 77) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05660599 = score(doc=77,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18288259 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052224867 = 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)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 4.12.2006 12:12:22
-
Sugimoto, C.R.; Thelwall, M.: Scholars on soap boxes : science communication and dissemination in TED videos (2013)
0.01
0.012796307 = product of:
0.025592614 = sum of:
0.025592614 = product of:
0.051185228 = sum of:
0.051185228 = weight(_text_:technology in 678) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.051185228 = score(doc=678,freq=8.0), product of:
0.15554588 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.052224867 = queryNorm
0.32906836 = fieldWeight in 678, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=678)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Online videos provide a novel, and often interactive, platform for the popularization of science. One successful collection is hosted on the TED (Technology, Entertainment, Design) website. This study uses a range of bibliometric (citation) and webometric (usage and bookmarking) indicators to examine TED videos in order to provide insights into the type and scope of their impact. The results suggest that TED Talks impact primarily the public sphere, with about three-quarters of a billion total views, rather than the academic realm. Differences were found among broad disciplinary areas, with art and design videos having generally lower levels of impact but science and technology videos generating otherwise average impact for TED. Many of the metrics were only loosely related, but there was a general consensus about the most popular videos as measured through views or comments on YouTube and the TED site. Moreover, most videos were found in at least one online syllabus and videos in online syllabi tended to be more viewed, discussed, and blogged. Less-liked videos generated more discussion, although this may be because they are more controversial. Science and technology videos presented by academics were more liked than those by nonacademics, showing that academics are not disadvantaged in this new media environment.
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 64(2013) no.4, S.663-674
-
Orduna-Malea, E.; Thelwall, M.; Kousha, K.: Web citations in patents : evidence of technological impact? (2017)
0.01
0.010858027 = product of:
0.021716055 = sum of:
0.021716055 = product of:
0.04343211 = sum of:
0.04343211 = weight(_text_:technology in 3764) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04343211 = score(doc=3764,freq=4.0), product of:
0.15554588 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.052224867 = queryNorm
0.2792238 = fieldWeight in 3764, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3764)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Patents sometimes cite webpages either as general background to the problem being addressed or to identify prior publications that limit the scope of the patent granted. Counts of the number of patents citing an organization's website may therefore provide an indicator of its technological capacity or relevance. This article introduces methods to extract URL citations from patents and evaluates the usefulness of counts of patent web citations as a technology indicator. An analysis of patents citing 200 US universities or 177 UK universities found computer science and engineering departments to be frequently cited, as well as research-related webpages, such as Wikipedia, YouTube, or the Internet Archive. Overall, however, patent URL citations seem to be frequent enough to be useful for ranking major US and the top few UK universities if popular hosted subdomains are filtered out, but the hit count estimates on the first search engine results page should not be relied upon for accuracy.
- Source
- Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 68(2017) no.8, S.1967-1974
-
Thelwall, M.; Vaughan, L.: Webometrics : an introduction to the special issue (2004)
0.01
0.010237046 = product of:
0.020474091 = sum of:
0.020474091 = product of:
0.040948182 = sum of:
0.040948182 = weight(_text_:technology in 2908) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.040948182 = score(doc=2908,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15554588 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.052224867 = queryNorm
0.2632547 = fieldWeight in 2908, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2908)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 55(2004) no.14, S.1213-1215
-
Barjak, F.; Thelwall, M.: ¬A statistical analysis of the web presences of European life sciences research teams (2008)
0.01
0.009048356 = product of:
0.018096711 = sum of:
0.018096711 = product of:
0.036193423 = sum of:
0.036193423 = weight(_text_:technology in 1383) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.036193423 = score(doc=1383,freq=4.0), product of:
0.15554588 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.052224867 = queryNorm
0.23268649 = fieldWeight in 1383, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1383)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Web links have been used for around ten years to explore the online impact of academic information and information producers. Nevertheless, few studies have attempted to relate link counts to relevant offline attributes of the owners of the targeted Web sites, with the exception of research productivity. This article reports the results of a study to relate site inlink counts to relevant owner characteristics for over 400 European life-science research group Web sites. The analysis confirmed that research-group size and Web-presence size were important for attracting Web links, although research productivity was not. Little evidence was found for significant influence of any of an array of factors, including research-group leader gender and industry connections. In addition, the choice of search engine for link data created a surprising international difference in the results, with Google perhaps giving unreliable results. Overall, the data collection, statistical analysis and results interpretation were all complex and it seems that we still need to know more about search engines, hyperlinks, and their function in science before we can draw conclusions on their usefulness and role in the canon of science and technology indicators.
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 59(2008) no.4, S.628-643
-
Kousha, K.; Thelwall, M.; Rezaie, S.: Can the impact of scholarly images be assessed online? : an exploratory study using image identification technology (2010)
0.01
0.009048356 = product of:
0.018096711 = sum of:
0.018096711 = product of:
0.036193423 = sum of:
0.036193423 = weight(_text_:technology in 3966) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.036193423 = score(doc=3966,freq=4.0), product of:
0.15554588 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.052224867 = queryNorm
0.23268649 = fieldWeight in 3966, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3966)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 61(2010) no.9, S.1734-1744
-
Mohammadi, E.; Thelwall, M.; Haustein, S.; Larivière, V.: Who reads research articles? : an altmetrics analysis of Mendeley user categories (2015)
0.01
0.009048356 = product of:
0.018096711 = sum of:
0.018096711 = product of:
0.036193423 = sum of:
0.036193423 = weight(_text_:technology in 2162) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.036193423 = score(doc=2162,freq=4.0), product of:
0.15554588 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.052224867 = queryNorm
0.23268649 = fieldWeight in 2162, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2162)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Little detailed information is known about who reads research articles and the contexts in which research articles are read. Using data about people who register in Mendeley as readers of articles, this article explores different types of users of Clinical Medicine, Engineering and Technology, Social Science, Physics, and Chemistry articles inside and outside academia. The majority of readers for all disciplines were PhD students, postgraduates, and postdocs but other types of academics were also represented. In addition, many Clinical Medicine articles were read by medical professionals. The highest correlations between citations and Mendeley readership counts were found for types of users who often authored academic articles, except for associate professors in some sub-disciplines. This suggests that Mendeley readership can reflect usage similar to traditional citation impact if the data are restricted to readers who are also authors without the delay of impact measured by citation counts. At the same time, Mendeley statistics can also reveal the hidden impact of some research articles, such as educational value for nonauthor users inside academia or the impact of research articles on practice for readers outside academia.
- Source
- Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 66(2015) no.9, S.1832-1846
-
Kousha, K.; Thelwall, M.: News stories as evidence for research? : BBC citations from articles, Books, and Wikipedia (2017)
0.01
0.009048356 = product of:
0.018096711 = sum of:
0.018096711 = product of:
0.036193423 = sum of:
0.036193423 = weight(_text_:technology in 3760) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.036193423 = score(doc=3760,freq=4.0), product of:
0.15554588 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.052224867 = queryNorm
0.23268649 = fieldWeight in 3760, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3760)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Although news stories target the general public and are sometimes inaccurate, they can serve as sources of real-world information for researchers. This article investigates the extent to which academics exploit journalism using content and citation analyses of online BBC News stories cited by Scopus articles. A total of 27,234 Scopus-indexed publications have cited at least one BBC News story, with a steady annual increase. Citations from the arts and humanities (2.8% of publications in 2015) and social sciences (1.5%) were more likely than citations from medicine (0.1%) and science (<0.1%). Surprisingly, half of the sampled Scopus-cited science and technology (53%) and medicine and health (47%) stories were based on academic research, rather than otherwise unpublished information, suggesting that researchers have chosen a lower-quality secondary source for their citations. Nevertheless, the BBC News stories that were most frequently cited by Scopus, Google Books, and Wikipedia introduced new information from many different topics, including politics, business, economics, statistics, and reports about events. Thus, news stories are mediating real-world knowledge into the academic domain, a potential cause for concern.
- Source
- Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 68(2017) no.8, S.2017-2028
-
Thelwall, M.; Harries, G.: ¬The connection between the research of a university and counts of links to its Web pages : an investigation based upon a classification of the relationships of pages to the research of the host university (2003)
0.01
0.008957415 = product of:
0.01791483 = sum of:
0.01791483 = product of:
0.03582966 = sum of:
0.03582966 = weight(_text_:technology in 1676) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03582966 = score(doc=1676,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15554588 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.052224867 = queryNorm
0.23034787 = fieldWeight in 1676, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1676)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and technology. 54(2003) no.7, S.594-602
-
Price, L.; Thelwall, M.: ¬The clustering power of low frequency words in academic webs (2005)
0.01
0.008957415 = product of:
0.01791483 = sum of:
0.01791483 = product of:
0.03582966 = sum of:
0.03582966 = weight(_text_:technology in 3561) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03582966 = score(doc=3561,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15554588 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.052224867 = queryNorm
0.23034787 = fieldWeight in 3561, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3561)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 56(2005) no.8, S.883-888
-
Thelwall, M.; Stuart, D.: Web crawling ethics revisited : cost, privacy, and denial of service (2006)
0.01
0.008957415 = product of:
0.01791483 = sum of:
0.01791483 = product of:
0.03582966 = sum of:
0.03582966 = weight(_text_:technology in 6098) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03582966 = score(doc=6098,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15554588 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.052224867 = queryNorm
0.23034787 = fieldWeight in 6098, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6098)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 57(2006) no.13, S.1771-1779
