Search (888 results, page 1 of 45)

  • × theme_ss:"Informetrie"
  1. Nicolaisen, J.: Citation analysis (2007) 0.10
    0.09755418 = product of:
      0.19510835 = sum of:
        0.19510835 = sum of:
          0.081896365 = weight(_text_:technology in 6091) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.081896365 = score(doc=6091,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.15554588 = queryWeight, product of:
                2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052224867 = queryNorm
              0.5265094 = fieldWeight in 6091, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
                0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=6091)
          0.11321198 = weight(_text_:22 in 6091) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.11321198 = score(doc=6091,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.18288259 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052224867 = queryNorm
              0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 6091, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=6091)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    13. 7.2008 19:53:22
    Source
    Annual review of information science and technology. 41(2007), S.xxx-xxx
  2. Marx, W.; Bornmann, L.: On the problems of dealing with bibliometric data (2014) 0.07
    0.073165625 = product of:
      0.14633125 = sum of:
        0.14633125 = sum of:
          0.061422274 = weight(_text_:technology in 1239) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.061422274 = score(doc=1239,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.15554588 = queryWeight, product of:
                2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052224867 = queryNorm
              0.39488205 = fieldWeight in 1239, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
                0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1239)
          0.084908985 = weight(_text_:22 in 1239) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.084908985 = score(doc=1239,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.18288259 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052224867 = queryNorm
              0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 1239, 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=1239)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    18. 3.2014 19:13:22
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 65(2014) no.4, S.866-867
  3. Manley, S.: Letters to the editor and the race for publication metrics (2022) 0.05
    0.050100517 = product of:
      0.10020103 = sum of:
        0.10020103 = sum of:
          0.05067079 = weight(_text_:technology in 547) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.05067079 = score(doc=547,freq=4.0), product of:
              0.15554588 = queryWeight, product of:
                2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052224867 = queryNorm
              0.32576108 = fieldWeight in 547, product of:
                2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                  4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=547)
          0.04953024 = weight(_text_:22 in 547) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.04953024 = score(doc=547,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.18288259 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052224867 = queryNorm
              0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 547, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=547)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    This article discusses how letters to the editor boost publishing metrics for journals and authors, and then examines letters published since 2015 in six elite journals, including the Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. The initial findings identify some potentially anomalous use of letters and unusual self-citation patterns. The article proposes that Clarivate Analytics consider slightly reconfiguring the Journal Impact Factor to more fairly account for letters and that journals transparently explain their letter submission policies.
    Date
    6. 4.2022 19:22:26
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 73(2022) no.5, S.702-707
  4. Bornmann, L.; Mutz, R.: From P100 to P100' : a new citation-rank approach (2014) 0.05
    0.04877709 = product of:
      0.09755418 = sum of:
        0.09755418 = sum of:
          0.040948182 = weight(_text_:technology in 1431) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.040948182 = score(doc=1431,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.15554588 = queryWeight, product of:
                2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052224867 = queryNorm
              0.2632547 = fieldWeight in 1431, 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=1431)
          0.05660599 = weight(_text_:22 in 1431) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.05660599 = score(doc=1431,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.18288259 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052224867 = queryNorm
              0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 1431, 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=1431)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    22. 8.2014 17:05:18
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 65(2014) no.9, S.1939-1943
  5. Raan, A.F.J. van: Statistical properties of bibliometric indicators : research group indicator distributions and correlations (2006) 0.05
    0.04537543 = product of:
      0.09075086 = sum of:
        0.09075086 = sum of:
          0.030711137 = weight(_text_:technology in 5275) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.030711137 = score(doc=5275,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.15554588 = queryWeight, product of:
                2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052224867 = queryNorm
              0.19744103 = fieldWeight in 5275, 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=5275)
          0.06003972 = weight(_text_:22 in 5275) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.06003972 = score(doc=5275,freq=4.0), product of:
              0.18288259 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052224867 = queryNorm
              0.32829654 = fieldWeight in 5275, product of:
                2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                  4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5275)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    22. 7.2006 16:20:22
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 57(2006) no.3, S.408-430
  6. Larivière, V.; Gingras, Y.; Archambault, E.: ¬The decline in the concentration of citations, 1900-2007 (2009) 0.05
    0.04537543 = product of:
      0.09075086 = sum of:
        0.09075086 = sum of:
          0.030711137 = weight(_text_:technology in 2763) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.030711137 = score(doc=2763,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.15554588 = queryWeight, product of:
                2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052224867 = queryNorm
              0.19744103 = fieldWeight in 2763, 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=2763)
          0.06003972 = weight(_text_:22 in 2763) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.06003972 = score(doc=2763,freq=4.0), product of:
              0.18288259 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052224867 = queryNorm
              0.32829654 = fieldWeight in 2763, product of:
                2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                  4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2763)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    22. 3.2009 19:22:35
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 60(2009) no.4, S.858-862
  7. Raan, A.F.J. van: Scaling rules in the science system : influence of field-specific citation characteristics on the impact of research groups (2008) 0.04
    0.0429433 = product of:
      0.0858866 = sum of:
        0.0858866 = sum of:
          0.04343211 = weight(_text_:technology in 2758) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.04343211 = score(doc=2758,freq=4.0), product of:
              0.15554588 = queryWeight, product of:
                2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052224867 = queryNorm
              0.2792238 = fieldWeight in 2758, 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=2758)
          0.042454492 = weight(_text_:22 in 2758) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.042454492 = score(doc=2758,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.18288259 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052224867 = queryNorm
              0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2758, 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=2758)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    22. 3.2009 19:03:12
    Footnote
    Vgl. auch: Costas, R., M. Bordons u. T.N. van Leeuwen u.a.: Scaling rules in the science system: Influence of field-specific citation characteristics on the impact of individual researchers. In: Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 60(2009) no.4, S.740-753.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 59(2008) no.4, S.565-576
  8. Ntuli, H.; Inglesi-Lotz, R.; Chang, T.; Pouris, A.: Does research output cause economic growth or vice versa? : evidence from 34 OECD countries (2015) 0.04
    0.0429433 = product of:
      0.0858866 = sum of:
        0.0858866 = sum of:
          0.04343211 = weight(_text_:technology in 2132) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.04343211 = score(doc=2132,freq=4.0), product of:
              0.15554588 = queryWeight, product of:
                2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052224867 = queryNorm
              0.2792238 = fieldWeight in 2132, 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=2132)
          0.042454492 = weight(_text_:22 in 2132) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.042454492 = score(doc=2132,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.18288259 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052224867 = queryNorm
              0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2132, 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=2132)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    The causal relation between research and economic growth is of particular importance for political support of science and technology as well as for academic purposes. This article revisits the causal relationship between research articles published and economic growth in Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries for the period 1981-2011, using bootstrap panel causality analysis, which accounts for cross-section dependency and heterogeneity across countries. The article, by the use of the specific method and the choice of the country group, makes a contribution to the existing literature. Our empirical results support unidirectional causality running from research output (in terms of total number of articles published) to economic growth for the US, Finland, Hungary, and Mexico; the opposite causality from economic growth to research articles published for Canada, France, Italy, New Zealand, the UK, Austria, Israel, and Poland; and no causality for the rest of the countries. Our findings provide important policy implications for research policies and strategies for OECD countries.
    Date
    8. 7.2015 22:00:42
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 66(2015) no.8, S.1709-1716
  9. Neth, M.: Citation analysis and the Web (1998) 0.04
    0.04267995 = product of:
      0.0853599 = sum of:
        0.0853599 = sum of:
          0.03582966 = weight(_text_:technology in 108) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.03582966 = score(doc=108,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.15554588 = queryWeight, product of:
                2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052224867 = queryNorm
              0.23034787 = fieldWeight in 108, 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=108)
          0.04953024 = weight(_text_:22 in 108) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.04953024 = score(doc=108,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.18288259 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052224867 = queryNorm
              0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 108, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=108)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Citation analysis has long been used by librarians as an important tool of collection development and the advent of Internet technology and especially the WWW adds a new facet to the role played by citation analysis. One of the reasons why librarians create WWW homepages is to provide users with further sources of interest or reference and to do this libraries include links from their own homepages to other information sources. Reports current research on the analysis of WWW pages as an introduction to an examination of the homepages of 25 art libraries to determine what sites are most often included. The types of linked sites are analyzed based on 3 criteria: location, focus and evidence that the link was evaluated before the connection was establisheds
    Date
    10. 1.1999 16:22:37
  10. Burrell, Q.L.: Predicting future citation behavior (2003) 0.04
    0.04267995 = product of:
      0.0853599 = sum of:
        0.0853599 = sum of:
          0.03582966 = weight(_text_:technology in 3837) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.03582966 = score(doc=3837,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.15554588 = queryWeight, product of:
                2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052224867 = queryNorm
              0.23034787 = fieldWeight in 3837, 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=3837)
          0.04953024 = weight(_text_:22 in 3837) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.04953024 = score(doc=3837,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.18288259 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052224867 = queryNorm
              0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 3837, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3837)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    29. 3.2003 19:22:48
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and technology. 54(2003) no.5, S.372-378
  11. Campanario, J.M.: Large increases and decreases in journal impact factors in only one year : the effect of journal self-citations (2011) 0.04
    0.04267995 = product of:
      0.0853599 = sum of:
        0.0853599 = sum of:
          0.03582966 = weight(_text_:technology in 4187) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.03582966 = score(doc=4187,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.15554588 = queryWeight, product of:
                2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052224867 = queryNorm
              0.23034787 = fieldWeight in 4187, 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=4187)
          0.04953024 = weight(_text_:22 in 4187) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.04953024 = score(doc=4187,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.18288259 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052224867 = queryNorm
              0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 4187, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4187)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    22. 1.2011 12:53:00
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 62(2011) no.2, S.230-235
  12. Ding, Y.: Applying weighted PageRank to author citation networks (2011) 0.04
    0.04267995 = product of:
      0.0853599 = sum of:
        0.0853599 = sum of:
          0.03582966 = weight(_text_:technology in 4188) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.03582966 = score(doc=4188,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.15554588 = queryWeight, product of:
                2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052224867 = queryNorm
              0.23034787 = fieldWeight in 4188, 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=4188)
          0.04953024 = weight(_text_:22 in 4188) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.04953024 = score(doc=4188,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.18288259 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052224867 = queryNorm
              0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 4188, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4188)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    22. 1.2011 13:02:21
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 62(2011) no.2, S.236-245
  13. Vieira, E.S.; Cabral, J.A.S.; Gomes, J.A.N.F.: Definition of a model based on bibliometric indicators for assessing applicants to academic positions (2014) 0.04
    0.04267995 = product of:
      0.0853599 = sum of:
        0.0853599 = sum of:
          0.03582966 = weight(_text_:technology in 1221) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.03582966 = score(doc=1221,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.15554588 = queryWeight, product of:
                2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052224867 = queryNorm
              0.23034787 = fieldWeight in 1221, 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=1221)
          0.04953024 = weight(_text_:22 in 1221) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.04953024 = score(doc=1221,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.18288259 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052224867 = queryNorm
              0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 1221, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1221)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    18. 3.2014 18:22:21
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 65(2014) no.3, S.560-577
  14. Vakkari, P.; Järvelin, K.; Chang, Y.-W.: ¬The association of disciplinary background with the evolution of topics and methods in Library and Information Science research 1995-2015 (2023) 0.04
    0.03985323 = product of:
      0.07970646 = sum of:
        0.07970646 = sum of:
          0.044327714 = weight(_text_:technology in 998) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.044327714 = score(doc=998,freq=6.0), product of:
              0.15554588 = queryWeight, product of:
                2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052224867 = queryNorm
              0.2849816 = fieldWeight in 998, product of:
                2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                  6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=998)
          0.035378743 = weight(_text_:22 in 998) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.035378743 = score(doc=998,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.18288259 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052224867 = queryNorm
              0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 998, 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=998)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    The paper reports a longitudinal analysis of the topical and methodological development of Library and Information Science (LIS). Its focus is on the effects of researchers' disciplines on these developments. The study extends an earlier cross-sectional study (Vakkari et al., Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 2022a, 73, 1706-1722) by a coordinated dataset representing a content analysis of articles published in 31 scholarly LIS journals in 1995, 2005, and 2015. It is novel in its coverage of authors' disciplines, topical and methodological aspects in a coordinated dataset spanning two decades thus allowing trend analysis. The findings include a shrinking trend in the share of LIS from 67 to 36% while Computer Science, and Business and Economics increase their share from 9 and 6% to 21 and 16%, respectively. The earlier cross-sectional study (Vakkari et al., Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 2022a, 73, 1706-1722) for the year 2015 identified three topical clusters of LIS research, focusing on topical subfields, methodologies, and contributing disciplines. Correspondence analysis confirms their existence already in 1995 and traces their development through the decades. The contributing disciplines infuse their concepts, research questions, and approaches to LIS and may also subsume vital parts of LIS in their own structures of knowledge production.
    Date
    22. 6.2023 18:15:06
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 74(2023) no.7, S.811-827
  15. 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
  16. Crespo, J.A.; Herranz, N.; Li, Y.; Ruiz-Castillo, J.: ¬The effect on citation inequality of differences in citation practices at the web of science subject category level (2014) 0.04
    0.03781286 = product of:
      0.07562572 = sum of:
        0.07562572 = sum of:
          0.025592614 = weight(_text_:technology in 1291) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.025592614 = score(doc=1291,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.15554588 = queryWeight, product of:
                2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052224867 = queryNorm
              0.16453418 = fieldWeight in 1291, 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=1291)
          0.0500331 = weight(_text_:22 in 1291) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.0500331 = score(doc=1291,freq=4.0), product of:
              0.18288259 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052224867 = queryNorm
              0.27358043 = fieldWeight in 1291, 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=1291)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    This article studies the impact of differences in citation practices at the subfield, or Web of Science subject category level, using the model introduced in Crespo, Li, and Ruiz-Castillo (2013a), according to which the number of citations received by an article depends on its underlying scientific influence and the field to which it belongs. We use the same Thomson Reuters data set of about 4.4 million articles used in Crespo et al. (2013a) to analyze 22 broad fields. The main results are the following: First, when the classification system goes from 22 fields to 219 subfields the effect on citation inequality of differences in citation practices increases from ?14% at the field level to 18% at the subfield level. Second, we estimate a set of exchange rates (ERs) over a wide [660, 978] citation quantile interval to express the citation counts of articles into the equivalent counts in the all-sciences case. In the fractional case, for example, we find that in 187 of 219 subfields the ERs are reliable in the sense that the coefficient of variation is smaller than or equal to 0.10. Third, in the fractional case the normalization of the raw data using the ERs (or subfield mean citations) as normalization factors reduces the importance of the differences in citation practices from 18% to 3.8% (3.4%) of overall citation inequality. Fourth, the results in the fractional case are essentially replicated when we adopt a multiplicative approach.
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 65(2014) no.6, S.1244-1256
  17. Yan, E.: Finding knowledge paths among scientific disciplines (2014) 0.04
    0.03781286 = product of:
      0.07562572 = sum of:
        0.07562572 = sum of:
          0.025592614 = weight(_text_:technology in 1534) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.025592614 = score(doc=1534,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.15554588 = queryWeight, product of:
                2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052224867 = queryNorm
              0.16453418 = fieldWeight in 1534, 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=1534)
          0.0500331 = weight(_text_:22 in 1534) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.0500331 = score(doc=1534,freq=4.0), product of:
              0.18288259 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052224867 = queryNorm
              0.27358043 = fieldWeight in 1534, 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=1534)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    26.10.2014 20:22:22
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 65(2014) no.11, S.2331-2347
  18. Zhu, Q.; Kong, X.; Hong, S.; Li, J.; He, Z.: Global ontology research progress : a bibliometric analysis (2015) 0.04
    0.03781286 = product of:
      0.07562572 = sum of:
        0.07562572 = sum of:
          0.025592614 = weight(_text_:technology in 2590) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.025592614 = score(doc=2590,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.15554588 = queryWeight, product of:
                2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052224867 = queryNorm
              0.16453418 = fieldWeight in 2590, 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=2590)
          0.0500331 = weight(_text_:22 in 2590) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.0500331 = score(doc=2590,freq=4.0), product of:
              0.18288259 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052224867 = queryNorm
              0.27358043 = fieldWeight in 2590, 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=2590)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to analyse the global scientific outputs of ontology research, an important emerging discipline that has huge potential to improve information understanding, organization, and management. Design/methodology/approach - This study collected literature published during 1900-2012 from the Web of Science database. The bibliometric analysis was performed from authorial, institutional, national, spatiotemporal, and topical aspects. Basic statistical analysis, visualization of geographic distribution, co-word analysis, and a new index were applied to the selected data. Findings - Characteristics of publication outputs suggested that ontology research has entered into the soaring stage, along with increased participation and collaboration. The authors identified the leading authors, institutions, nations, and articles in ontology research. Authors were more from North America, Europe, and East Asia. The USA took the lead, while China grew fastest. Four major categories of frequently used keywords were identified: applications in Semantic Web, applications in bioinformatics, philosophy theories, and common supporting technology. Semantic Web research played a core role, and gene ontology study was well-developed. The study focus of ontology has shifted from philosophy to information science. Originality/value - This is the first study to quantify global research patterns and trends in ontology, which might provide a potential guide for the future research. The new index provides an alternative way to evaluate the multidisciplinary influence of researchers.
    Date
    20. 1.2015 18:30:22
    17. 9.2018 18:22:23
  19. Siddiqui, M.A.: ¬A bibliometric study of authorship characteristics in four international information science journals (1997) 0.04
    0.036582813 = product of:
      0.073165625 = sum of:
        0.073165625 = sum of:
          0.030711137 = weight(_text_:technology in 853) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.030711137 = score(doc=853,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.15554588 = queryWeight, product of:
                2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052224867 = queryNorm
              0.19744103 = fieldWeight in 853, 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=853)
          0.042454492 = weight(_text_:22 in 853) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.042454492 = score(doc=853,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.18288259 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052224867 = queryNorm
              0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 853, 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=853)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Reports results of a bibliometric study of the authorship characteristics of articles published in 4 major information science periodicals: JASIS, Information technology and libraries, Journal of information science, and Program. The aim was to determine the details of their authors, such as: sex, occupation, affiliation, geographic distribution, and institutional affiliation. A total of 163 articles published in 1993 and written by 294 authors were analyzed. Results indicate that: men (206 or 70%) publish 3.0 times more articles than women (69 or 23,5%). Schools of library and information science contributed the most authors. The majority of authors came from the USA (148 or 50,3%), with the Midwest region claiming the largest share (110 or 25,0%). Academic libraries (110 or 37,4%) account for the major share of library publication. 12 schools of library and information science, in the USA, contributed 32 authors (50,0%) and assistant professors (25 or 39,1%) publish the most in these library schools. Male school of library and information science authors publish 1,6 times more than their female counterparts
    Source
    International forum on information and documentation. 22(1997) no.3, S.3-23
  20. Asonuma, A.; Fang, Y.; Rousseau, R.: Reflections on the age distribution of Japanese scientists (2006) 0.04
    0.036582813 = product of:
      0.073165625 = sum of:
        0.073165625 = sum of:
          0.030711137 = weight(_text_:technology in 5270) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.030711137 = score(doc=5270,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.15554588 = queryWeight, product of:
                2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052224867 = queryNorm
              0.19744103 = fieldWeight in 5270, 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=5270)
          0.042454492 = weight(_text_:22 in 5270) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.042454492 = score(doc=5270,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.18288259 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052224867 = queryNorm
              0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 5270, 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=5270)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    22. 7.2006 15:26:24
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 57(2006) no.3, S.342-346

Years

Languages

  • e 878
  • d 8
  • ro 1
  • sp 1
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 881
  • s 4
  • m 3
  • el 1
  • r 1
  • More… Less…