Search (211 results, page 1 of 11)

  • × theme_ss:"Citation indexing"
  1. Huang, S.; Qian, J.; Huang, Y.; Lu, W.; Bu, Y.; Yang, J.; Cheng, Q.: Disclosing the relationship between citation structure and future impact of a publication (2022) 0.11 
    0.11397463 = product of:
  0.14246829 = sum of:
    0.10844573 = weight(_text_:section in 621) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10844573 = score(doc=621,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.26305357 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.276892 = idf(docFreq=613, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.4122572 = fieldWeight in 621, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.276892 = idf(docFreq=613, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=621)
    0.013321568 = weight(_text_:on in 621) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013321568 = score(doc=621,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.121501654 = fieldWeight in 621, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=621)
    0.0084865615 = weight(_text_:information in 621) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0084865615 = score(doc=621,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 621, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=621)
    0.012214432 = product of:
      0.024428863 = sum of:
        0.024428863 = weight(_text_:technology in 621) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.024428863 = score(doc=621,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049850095 = queryNorm
            0.16453418 = fieldWeight in 621, 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=621)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.8 = coord(4/5)
    Abstract
    Each section header of an article has its distinct communicative function. Citations from distinct sections may be different regarding citing motivation. In this paper, we grouped section headers with similar functions as a structural function and defined the distribution of citations from structural functions for a paper as its citation structure. We aim to explore the relationship between citation structure and the future impact of a publication and disclose the relative importance among citations from different structural functions. Specifically, we proposed two citation counting methods and a citation life cycle identification method, by which the regression data were built. Subsequently, we employed a ridge regression model to predict the future impact of the paper and analyzed the relative weights of regressors. Based on documents collected from the Association for Computational Linguistics Anthology website, our empirical experiments disclosed that functional structure features improve the prediction accuracy of citation count prediction and that there exist differences among citations from different structural functions. Specifically, at the early stage of citation lifetime, citations from Introduction and Method are particularly important for perceiving future impact of papers, and citations from Result and Conclusion are also vital. However, early accumulation of citations from the Background seems less important.
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 73(2022) no.7, S.1025-1042
  2. Nicolaisen, J.: Citation analysis (2007) 0.09 
    0.08535734 = product of:
  0.21339335 = sum of:
    0.027156997 = weight(_text_:information in 6091) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.027156997 = score(doc=6091,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.3103276 = fieldWeight in 6091, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=6091)
    0.18623635 = sum of:
      0.07817236 = weight(_text_:technology in 6091) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.07817236 = score(doc=6091,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
            0.049850095 = 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)
      0.108063996 = weight(_text_:22 in 6091) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.108063996 = score(doc=6091,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17456654 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.049850095 = 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)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Date
    13. 7.2008 19:53:22
    Source
    Annual review of information science and technology. 41(2007), S.xxx-xxx
  3. Chan, H.C.; Kim, H.-W.; Tan, W.C.: Information systems citation patterns from International Conference on Information Systems articles (2006) 0.07 
    0.0746826 = product of:
  0.124470994 = sum of:
    0.027688364 = weight(_text_:on in 201) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.027688364 = score(doc=201,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.25253648 = fieldWeight in 201, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=201)
    0.026943998 = weight(_text_:information in 201) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026943998 = score(doc=201,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.3078936 = fieldWeight in 201, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=201)
    0.06983863 = sum of:
      0.029314637 = weight(_text_:technology in 201) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.029314637 = score(doc=201,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
            0.049850095 = queryNorm
          0.19744103 = fieldWeight in 201, 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=201)
      0.040523995 = weight(_text_:22 in 201) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.040523995 = score(doc=201,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17456654 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.049850095 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 201, 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=201)
  0.6 = coord(3/5)
    Abstract
    Research patterns could enhance understanding of the Information Systems (IS) field. Citation analysis is the methodology commonly used to determine such research patterns. In this study, the citation methodology is applied to one of the top-ranked Information Systems conferences - International Conference on Information Systems (ICIS). Information is extracted from papers in the proceedings of ICIS 2000 to 2002. A total of 145 base articles and 4,226 citations are used. Research patterns are obtained using total citations, citations per journal or conference, and overlapping citations. We then provide the citation ranking of journals and conferences. We also examine the difference between the citation ranking in this study and the ranking of IS journals and IS conferences in other studies. Based on the comparison, we confirm that IS research is a multidisciplinary research area. We also identify the most cited papers and authors in the IS research area, and the organizations most active in producing papers in the top-rated IS conference. We discuss the findings and implications of the study.
    Date
    3. 1.2007 17:22:03
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 57(2006) no.9, S.1263-1274
  4. Van der Veer Martens, B.; Goodrum, G.: ¬The diffusion of theories : a functional approach (2006) 0.07 
    0.067205876 = product of:
  0.11200979 = sum of:
    0.018650195 = weight(_text_:on in 5269) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.018650195 = score(doc=5269,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.17010231 = fieldWeight in 5269, 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=5269)
    0.011881187 = weight(_text_:information in 5269) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011881187 = score(doc=5269,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 5269, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5269)
    0.08147841 = sum of:
      0.03420041 = weight(_text_:technology in 5269) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03420041 = score(doc=5269,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
            0.049850095 = queryNorm
          0.23034787 = fieldWeight in 5269, 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=5269)
      0.047278 = weight(_text_:22 in 5269) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.047278 = score(doc=5269,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17456654 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.049850095 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 5269, 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=5269)
  0.6 = coord(3/5)
    Abstract
    This comparative case study of the diffusion and nondiffusion over time of eight theories in the social sciences uses citation analysis, citation context analysis, content analysis, surveys of editorial review boards, and personal interviews with theorists to develop a model of the theory functions that facilitate theory diffusion throughout specific intellectual communities. Unlike previous work on the diffusion of theories as innovations, this theory functions model differs in several important respects from the findings of previous studies that employed Everett Rogers's classic typology of innovation characteristics that promote diffusion. The model is also presented as a contribution to a more integrated theory of citation.
    Date
    22. 7.2006 15:20:01
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 57(2006) no.3, S.330-341
  5. Ding, Y.; Zhang, G.; Chambers, T.; Song, M.; Wang, X.; Zhai, C.: Content-based citation analysis : the next generation of citation analysis (2014) 0.06 
    0.057605032 = product of:
  0.09600838 = sum of:
    0.015985882 = weight(_text_:on in 1521) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015985882 = score(doc=1521,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.14580199 = fieldWeight in 1521, 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=1521)
    0.0101838745 = weight(_text_:information in 1521) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0101838745 = score(doc=1521,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 1521, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1521)
    0.06983863 = sum of:
      0.029314637 = weight(_text_:technology in 1521) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.029314637 = score(doc=1521,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
            0.049850095 = queryNorm
          0.19744103 = fieldWeight in 1521, 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=1521)
      0.040523995 = weight(_text_:22 in 1521) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.040523995 = score(doc=1521,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17456654 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.049850095 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1521, 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=1521)
  0.6 = coord(3/5)
    Abstract
    Traditional citation analysis has been widely applied to detect patterns of scientific collaboration, map the landscapes of scholarly disciplines, assess the impact of research outputs, and observe knowledge transfer across domains. It is, however, limited, as it assumes all citations are of similar value and weights each equally. Content-based citation analysis (CCA) addresses a citation's value by interpreting each one based on its context at both the syntactic and semantic levels. This paper provides a comprehensive overview of CAA research in terms of its theoretical foundations, methodical approaches, and example applications. In addition, we highlight how increased computational capabilities and publicly available full-text resources have opened this area of research to vast possibilities, which enable deeper citation analysis, more accurate citation prediction, and increased knowledge discovery.
    Date
    22. 8.2014 16:52:04
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 65(2014) no.9, S.1820-1833
  6. Xie, J.; Lu, H.; Kang, L.; Cheng, Y.: Citing criteria and its effects on researcher's intention to cite : a mixed-method study (2022) 0.04 
    0.041640554 = product of:
  0.06940092 = sum of:
    0.031971764 = weight(_text_:on in 634) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.031971764 = score(doc=634,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.29160398 = fieldWeight in 634, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=634)
    0.022771835 = weight(_text_:information in 634) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022771835 = score(doc=634,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.2602176 = fieldWeight in 634, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=634)
    0.014657319 = product of:
      0.029314637 = sum of:
        0.029314637 = weight(_text_:technology in 634) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029314637 = score(doc=634,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049850095 = queryNorm
            0.19744103 = fieldWeight in 634, 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=634)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6 = coord(3/5)
    Abstract
    This study explored users' criteria for citation decisions and investigated the effects on users' intention to cite using a mixed-method approach. A qualitative study was conducted first, where 16 citing criteria were identified based on interviews and inductive analysis. The findings were then used to develop hypotheses and extend the information adoption model. A questionnaire was designed to collect data from users in Chinese universities to test the research model. The findings indicated that pleasure, topicality, and functionality significantly increased users' perceived information usefulness, while familiarity and accessibility significantly enhanced users' perceived ease of use. Information usefulness and information ease of use further contributed to users' intention to cite with adjusted R2 equaling 44.6%. It is also found that perceived academic quality based on 5 antecedents (i.e., reliability, comprehensiveness, novelty, author credibility, and source reputation) significantly increased users' pleasure. Implications and limitations were provided.
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 73(2022) no.8, S.1079-1091
  7. Száva-Kováts, E.: Indirect-collective referencing (ICR) : life course, nature, and importance of a special kind of science referencing (1999) 0.04 
    0.040881246 = product of:
  0.102203116 = sum of:
    0.092019245 = weight(_text_:section in 4298) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.092019245 = score(doc=4298,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.26305357 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.276892 = idf(docFreq=613, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.34981182 = fieldWeight in 4298, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.276892 = idf(docFreq=613, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4298)
    0.0101838745 = weight(_text_:information in 4298) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0101838745 = score(doc=4298,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 4298, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4298)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    Indirect collective referencing (ICR) is a special kind of indirect referencing, in an act making reference to all references cited in a directly cited paper. In this research the literature phenomenon of ICR is defined in the narrowest sense, taking into account only its indisputable minimum. To reveal the life course of this phenomenon, a longitudinal section was taken in the representative elite general physics journal, The Physical Review, processing more than 4.200 journal papers from 1897 to 1997 and their close to 84.00 formal references. This investigation showed that the ICR phenomenon has existed in the journal for a century now; that the frequency and intensity of the phenomenon have been constantly increasing in both absolute and relative terms since the last, mature period of the Little Science age; and that this growth has accelerated in the publication explosion of the Big Science age. It was shown that the Citation Indexes show only a fraction of the really cited references in the journal
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 50(1999) no.14, S.1284-1294
  8. Rosenberg, V.: ¬An assessment of ISI's new Web of Science : ISI's services brings citiation indexing to new and advanced researchers (1998) 0.04 
    0.040827077 = product of:
  0.068045124 = sum of:
    0.026643137 = weight(_text_:on in 1885) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026643137 = score(doc=1885,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.24300331 = fieldWeight in 1885, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1885)
    0.016973123 = weight(_text_:information in 1885) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016973123 = score(doc=1885,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.19395474 = fieldWeight in 1885, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1885)
    0.024428863 = product of:
      0.048857726 = sum of:
        0.048857726 = weight(_text_:technology in 1885) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.048857726 = score(doc=1885,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049850095 = queryNorm
            0.32906836 = fieldWeight in 1885, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1885)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6 = coord(3/5)
    Abstract
    Comments on the affinity of Web technology and citation indexes and reviews the ISI service, Web of Science. Although still requiring refinement, it multiplies the effectiveness of an already effective search tool
    Source
    Information today. 15(1998) no.3, S.21,61
  9. Garfield, E.: Recollections of Irving H. Sher 1924-1996 : Polymath/information scientist extraordinaire (2001) 0.04 
    0.039312378 = product of:
  0.098280944 = sum of:
    0.016802534 = weight(_text_:information in 6920) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016802534 = score(doc=6920,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.1920054 = fieldWeight in 6920, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6920)
    0.08147841 = sum of:
      0.03420041 = weight(_text_:technology in 6920) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03420041 = score(doc=6920,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
            0.049850095 = queryNorm
          0.23034787 = fieldWeight in 6920, 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=6920)
      0.047278 = weight(_text_:22 in 6920) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.047278 = score(doc=6920,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17456654 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.049850095 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 6920, 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=6920)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Date
    16.12.2001 14:01:22
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and technology. 52(2001) no.14, S.1197-1202
  10. Larivière, V.; Gingras, Y.; Archambault, E.: ¬The decline in the concentration of citations, 1900-2007 (2009) 0.04 
    0.03872324 = product of:
  0.096808106 = sum of:
    0.0101838745 = weight(_text_:information in 2763) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0101838745 = score(doc=2763,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 2763, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2763)
    0.08662423 = sum of:
      0.029314637 = weight(_text_:technology in 2763) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.029314637 = score(doc=2763,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
            0.049850095 = 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)
      0.05730959 = weight(_text_:22 in 2763) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.05730959 = score(doc=2763,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.17456654 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.049850095 = 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)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    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
  11. Døsen, K.: One more reference on self-reference (1992) 0.04 
    0.038664408 = product of:
  0.09666102 = sum of:
    0.04262902 = weight(_text_:on in 4604) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04262902 = score(doc=4604,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.3888053 = fieldWeight in 4604, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=4604)
    0.054031998 = product of:
      0.108063996 = sum of:
        0.108063996 = weight(_text_:22 in 4604) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.108063996 = score(doc=4604,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17456654 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049850095 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 4604, 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=4604)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Date
    7. 2.2005 14:10:22
  12. Boyack, K.W.; Small, H.; Klavans, R.: Improving the accuracy of co-citation clustering using full text (2013) 0.04 
    0.03762806 = product of:
  0.06271343 = sum of:
    0.027688364 = weight(_text_:on in 1036) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.027688364 = score(doc=1036,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.25253648 = fieldWeight in 1036, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1036)
    0.020367749 = weight(_text_:information in 1036) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020367749 = score(doc=1036,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.23274569 = fieldWeight in 1036, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1036)
    0.014657319 = product of:
      0.029314637 = sum of:
        0.029314637 = weight(_text_:technology in 1036) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029314637 = score(doc=1036,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049850095 = queryNorm
            0.19744103 = fieldWeight in 1036, 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=1036)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6 = coord(3/5)
    Abstract
    Historically, co-citation models have been based only on bibliographic information. Full-text analysis offers the opportunity to significantly improve the quality of the signals upon which these co-citation models are based. In this work we study the effect of reference proximity on the accuracy of co-citation clusters. Using a corpus of 270,521 full text documents from 2007, we compare the results of traditional co-citation clustering using only the bibliographic information to results from co-citation clustering where proximity between reference pairs is factored into the pairwise relationships. We find that accounting for reference proximity from full text can increase the textual coherence (a measure of accuracy) of a co-citation cluster solution by up to 30% over the traditional approach based on bibliographic information.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 64(2013) no.9, S.1759-17676
  13. Pair, C.I.: Formal evaluation methods : their utility and limitations (1995) 0.04 
    0.03677069 = product of:
  0.061284482 = sum of:
    0.03230309 = weight(_text_:on in 4259) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03230309 = score(doc=4259,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.29462588 = fieldWeight in 4259, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4259)
    0.011881187 = weight(_text_:information in 4259) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011881187 = score(doc=4259,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 4259, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4259)
    0.017100206 = product of:
      0.03420041 = sum of:
        0.03420041 = weight(_text_:technology in 4259) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03420041 = score(doc=4259,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049850095 = queryNorm
            0.23034787 = fieldWeight in 4259, 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=4259)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6 = coord(3/5)
    Abstract
    Discusses evaluation techniques as an integral part of science with the emphasis on evalution for policy purposes. Outlines early attempts to validate the use of biliometric indicators. Concludes that: best results are obtained by applying a variety of methods simultaneously; reliable results can be obtained from citation analysis for purely scientific subfields such as physics; and citation analysis tends to give unreliable results for technological subjects. Concludes that bibliometrics as a technique for determining policy should never be used on its own. Describes an evaluation method used for selecting research projects for financial support, as applied by STW, the technology branch of the Netherlands' research council, NWO
    Source
    International forum on information and documentation. 20(1995) no.4, S.16-24
  14. Sidiropoulos, A.; Manolopoulos, Y.: ¬A new perspective to automatically rank scientific conferences using digital libraries (2005) 0.04 
    0.036618754 = product of:
  0.061031256 = sum of:
    0.031971764 = weight(_text_:on in 1011) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.031971764 = score(doc=1011,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.29160398 = fieldWeight in 1011, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1011)
    0.0144021725 = weight(_text_:information in 1011) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0144021725 = score(doc=1011,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.16457605 = fieldWeight in 1011, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1011)
    0.014657319 = product of:
      0.029314637 = sum of:
        0.029314637 = weight(_text_:technology in 1011) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029314637 = score(doc=1011,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049850095 = queryNorm
            0.19744103 = fieldWeight in 1011, 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=1011)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6 = coord(3/5)
    Abstract
    Citation analysis is performed in order to evaluate authors and scientific collections, such as journals and conference proceedings. Currently, two major systems exist that perform citation analysis: Science Citation Index (SCI) by the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI) and CiteSeer by the NEC Research Institute. The SCI, mostly a manual system up until recently, is based on the notion of the ISI Impact Factor, which has been used extensively for citation analysis purposes. On the other hand the CiteSeer system is an automatically built digital library using agents technology, also based on the notion of ISI Impact Factor. In this paper, we investigate new alternative notions besides the ISI impact factor, in order to provide a novel approach aiming at ranking scientific collections. Furthermore, we present a web-based system that has been built by extracting data from the Databases and Logic Programming (DBLP) website of the University of Trier. Our system, by using the new citation metrics, emerges as a useful tool for ranking scientific collections. In this respect, some first remarks are presented, e.g. on ranking conferences related to databases.
    Source
    Information processing and management. 41(2005) no.2, S.289-312
  15. Cronin, B.; Shaw, D.: Banking (on) different forms of symbolic capital (2002) 0.04 
    0.036036298 = product of:
  0.060060494 = sum of:
    0.02131451 = weight(_text_:on in 1263) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02131451 = score(doc=1263,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.19440265 = fieldWeight in 1263, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1263)
    0.019202897 = weight(_text_:information in 1263) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019202897 = score(doc=1263,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.21943474 = fieldWeight in 1263, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1263)
    0.01954309 = product of:
      0.03908618 = sum of:
        0.03908618 = weight(_text_:technology in 1263) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03908618 = score(doc=1263,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049850095 = queryNorm
            0.2632547 = fieldWeight in 1263, 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=1263)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6 = coord(3/5)
    Abstract
    The accrual of symbolic capital is an important aspect of academic life. Successful capital formation is commonly signified by the trappings of scholarly distinction or acknowledged status as a public intellectual. We consider and compare three potential indices of symbolic capital: citation counts, Web hits, and media mentions. Our Eindings, which are domain specific, suggest that public intellectuals are notable by their absence within the information studies community.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and technology. 53(2002) no.14, S.1267-1270
  16. Ardanuy, J.: Sixty years of citation analysis studies in the humanities (1951-2010) (2013) 0.04 
    0.035990804 = product of:
  0.05998467 = sum of:
    0.027688364 = weight(_text_:on in 1015) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.027688364 = score(doc=1015,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.25253648 = fieldWeight in 1015, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1015)
    0.017638987 = weight(_text_:information in 1015) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017638987 = score(doc=1015,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.20156369 = fieldWeight in 1015, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1015)
    0.014657319 = product of:
      0.029314637 = sum of:
        0.029314637 = weight(_text_:technology in 1015) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029314637 = score(doc=1015,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049850095 = queryNorm
            0.19744103 = fieldWeight in 1015, 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=1015)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6 = coord(3/5)
    Abstract
    This article provides an overview of studies that have used citation analysis in the field of humanities in the period 1951 to 2010. The work is based on an exhaustive search in databases-particularly those in library and information science-and on citation chaining from papers on citation analysis. The results confirm that use of this technique in the humanities is limited, and although there was some growth in the 1970s and 1980s, it has stagnated in the past 2 decades. Most of the work has been done by research staff, but almost one third involves library staff, and 15% has been done by students. The study also showed that less than one fourth of the works used a citation database such as the Arts & Humanities Citation Index and that 21% of the works were in publications other than library and information science journals. The United States has the greatest output, and English is by far the most frequently used language, and 13.9% of the studies are in other languages.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 64(2013) no.8, S.1751-1755
  17. Mendez, A.: Some considerations on the retrieval of literature based on citations (1978) 0.03 
    0.034977417 = product of:
  0.08744354 = sum of:
    0.06028654 = weight(_text_:on in 778) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06028654 = score(doc=778,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.54985374 = fieldWeight in 778, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=778)
    0.027156997 = weight(_text_:information in 778) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.027156997 = score(doc=778,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.3103276 = fieldWeight in 778, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=778)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Source
    Information scientist. 12(1978), S.67-71
  18. Hu, X.; Rousseau, R.: Do citation chimeras exist? : The case of under-cited influential articles suffering delayed recognition (2019) 0.03 
    0.034087777 = product of:
  0.056812957 = sum of:
    0.031971764 = weight(_text_:on in 5217) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.031971764 = score(doc=5217,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.29160398 = fieldWeight in 5217, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5217)
    0.0101838745 = weight(_text_:information in 5217) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0101838745 = score(doc=5217,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 5217, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5217)
    0.014657319 = product of:
      0.029314637 = sum of:
        0.029314637 = weight(_text_:technology in 5217) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029314637 = score(doc=5217,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049850095 = queryNorm
            0.19744103 = fieldWeight in 5217, 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=5217)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6 = coord(3/5)
    Abstract
    In this study we investigate if articles suffering delayed recognition can at the same time be under-cited influential articles. Theoretically these two types of articles are independent, in the sense that suffering delayed recognition depends on the number and time distribution of received citations, while being an under-cited influential article depends only partially on the number of received (first generation) citations, and much more on second and third citation generations. Among 49 articles suffering delayed recognition we found 13 that are also under-cited influential. Based on a thorough investigation of these special cases we found that so-called authoritative citers play an important role in uniting the two different document types into a special citation chimera. Our investigation contributes to the classification of publications.
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 70(2019) no.5, S.499-508
  19. Barnett, G.A.; Fink, E.L.: Impact of the internet and scholar age distribution on academic citation age (2008) 0.03 
    0.034048714 = product of:
  0.056747854 = sum of:
    0.027688364 = weight(_text_:on in 1376) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.027688364 = score(doc=1376,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.25253648 = fieldWeight in 1376, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1376)
    0.0144021725 = weight(_text_:information in 1376) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0144021725 = score(doc=1376,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.16457605 = fieldWeight in 1376, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1376)
    0.014657319 = product of:
      0.029314637 = sum of:
        0.029314637 = weight(_text_:technology in 1376) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029314637 = score(doc=1376,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049850095 = queryNorm
            0.19744103 = fieldWeight in 1376, 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=1376)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6 = coord(3/5)
    Abstract
    This article examines the impact of the Internet and the age distribution of research scholars on academic citation age with a mathematical model proposed by Barnett, Fink, and Debus (1989) and a revised model that incorporates information about the online environment and scholar age distribution. The modified model fits the data well, accounting for 99.6% of the variance for science citations and 99.8% for social science citations. The Internet's impact on the aging process of academic citations has been very small, accounting for only 0.1% for the social sciences and 0.8% for the sciences. Rather than resulting in the use of more recent citations, the Internet appears to have lengthened the average life of academic citations by 6 to 8 months. The aging of scholars seems to have a greater impact, accounting for 2.8% of the variance for the sciences and 0.9% for the social sciences. However, because the diffusion of the Internet and the aging of the professoriate are correlated over this time period, differentiating their effects is somewhat problematic.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 59(2008) no.4, S.526-534
  20. Aström, F.: Changes in the LIS research front : time-sliced cocitation analyses of LIS journal articles, 1990-2004 (2007) 0.03 
    0.03302796 = product of:
  0.055046603 = sum of:
    0.023073634 = weight(_text_:on in 329) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023073634 = score(doc=329,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.21044704 = fieldWeight in 329, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=329)
    0.014699157 = weight(_text_:information in 329) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014699157 = score(doc=329,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.16796975 = fieldWeight in 329, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=329)
    0.017273815 = product of:
      0.03454763 = sum of:
        0.03454763 = weight(_text_:technology in 329) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03454763 = score(doc=329,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049850095 = queryNorm
            0.23268649 = fieldWeight in 329, 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=329)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6 = coord(3/5)
    Abstract
    Based on articles published in 1990-2004 in 21 library and information science (LIS) journals, a set of cocitation analyses was performed to study changes in research fronts over the last 15 years, where LIS is at now, and to discuss where it is heading. To study research fronts, here defined as current and influential cocited articles, a citations among documents methodology was applied; and to study changes, the analyses were time-sliced into three 5-year periods. The results show a stable structure of two distinct research fields: informetrics and information seeking and retrieval (ISR). However, experimental retrieval research and user oriented research have merged into one ISR field; and IR and informetrics also show signs of coming closer together, sharing research interests and methodologies, making informetrics research more visible in mainstream LIS research. Furthermore, the focus on the Internet, both in ISR research and in informetrics-where webometrics quickly has become a dominating research area-is an important change. The future is discussed in terms of LIS dependency on technology, how integration of research areas as well as technical systems can be expected to continue to characterize LIS research, and how webometrics will continue to develop and find applications.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 58(2007) no.7, S.947-957

Authors

Years

Languages

  • e 199
  • d 10
  • chi 2
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 204
  • el 5
  • m 5
  • s 2
  • r 1
  • More… Less…

Themes

Subjects

Classifications