Search (23 results, page 1 of 2)

  • × theme_ss:"Elektronisches Publizieren"
  • × year_i:[2020 TO 2030}
  1. Walsh, J.A.; Cobb, P.J.; Fremery, W. de; Golub, K.; Keah, H.; Kim, J.; Kiplang'at, J.; Liu, Y.-H.; Mahony, S.; Oh, S.G.; Sula, C.A.; Underwood, T.; Wang, X.: Digital humanities in the iSchool (2022) 0.01 
    0.013142297 = product of:
  0.026284594 = sum of:
    0.008582841 = weight(_text_:information in 463) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008582841 = score(doc=463,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 463, 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=463)
    0.017701752 = product of:
      0.035403505 = sum of:
        0.035403505 = weight(_text_:organization in 463) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.035403505 = score(doc=463,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.19695997 = fieldWeight in 463, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=463)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    The interdisciplinary field known as digital humanities (DH) is represented in various forms in the teaching and research practiced in iSchools. Building on the work of an iSchools organization committee charged with exploring digital humanities curricula, we present findings from a series of related studies exploring aspects of DH teaching, education, and research in iSchools, often in collaboration with other units and disciplines. Through a survey of iSchool programs and an online DH course registry, we investigate the various education models for DH training found in iSchools, followed by a detailed look at DH courses and curricula, explored through analysis of course syllabi and course descriptions. We take a brief look at collaborative disciplines with which iSchools cooperate on DH research projects or in offering DH education. Next, we explore DH careers through an analysis of relevant job advertisements. Finally, we offer some observations about the management and administrative challenges and opportunities related to offering a new iSchool DH program. Our results provide a snapshot of the current state of digital humanities in iSchools which may usefully inform the design and evolution of new DH programs, degrees, and related initiatives.
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 73(2022) no.2, S.188-203
  2. Santos Green, L.; Johnston, M.P.: ¬A contextualization of editorial misconduct in the library and information science academic information ecosystem (2022) 0.01 
    0.0063070743 = product of:
  0.025228297 = sum of:
    0.025228297 = weight(_text_:information in 612) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.025228297 = score(doc=612,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.2850541 = fieldWeight in 612, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=612)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    In the last decade, one of the most effective tools applied in combating the erosion of public trust in academic research has been an increased level of transparency in the peer review and editorial process. Publicly available publication ethics guidelines and policies are vital in creating a transparent process that prevents unethical research, publication misconduct, manipulation of the communication of research to practitioners, and the erosion of public trust. This study investigated how these unethical practices, specifically those coded as editorial misconduct, bring the authenticity and integrity of the library and information science academic research digital record into question. Employing a multi-layered approach, including key informant interviews, researchers determined the frequency and the content of ethical publishing policies and procedures in library and information science journals; exploring the ways the lack of, or nonadherence to these policies and procedures impacted library and information science researchers in instances of editorial misconduct.
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 73(2022) no.7, S.913-928
  3. Krüger, N.; Pianos, T.: Lernmaterialien für junge Forschende in den Wirtschaftswissenschaften als Open Educational Resources (OER) (2021) 0.01 
    0.0059767957 = product of:
  0.023907183 = sum of:
    0.023907183 = product of:
      0.047814365 = sum of:
        0.047814365 = weight(_text_:22 in 252) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.047814365 = score(doc=252,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17654699 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 252, 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=252)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Date
    22. 5.2021 12:43:05
  4. Ortega, J.L.: Classification and analysis of PubPeer comments : how a web journal club is used (2022) 0.00 
    0.0036413912 = product of:
  0.014565565 = sum of:
    0.014565565 = weight(_text_:information in 544) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014565565 = score(doc=544,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.16457605 = fieldWeight in 544, 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=544)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    This study explores the use of PubPeer by the scholarly community, to understand the issues discussed in an online journal club, the disciplines most commented on, and the characteristics of the most prolific users. A sample of 39,985 posts about 24,779 publications were extracted from PubPeer in 2019 and 2020. These comments were divided into seven categories according to their degree of seriousness (Positive review, Critical review, Lack of information, Honest errors, Methodological flaws, Publishing fraud, and Manipulation). The results show that more than two-thirds of comments are posted to report some type of misconduct, mainly about image manipulation. These comments generate most discussion and take longer to be posted. By discipline, Health Sciences and Life Sciences are the most discussed research areas. The results also reveal "super commenters," users who access the platform to systematically review publications. The study ends by discussing how various disciplines use the site for different purposes.
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 73(2022) no.5, S.655-670
  5. Cabanac, G.; Labbé, C.: Prevalence of nonsensical algorithmically generated papers in the scientific literature (2021) 0.00 
    0.0030344925 = product of:
  0.01213797 = sum of:
    0.01213797 = weight(_text_:information in 410) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01213797 = score(doc=410,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 410, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=410)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    In 2014 leading publishers withdrew more than 120 nonsensical publications automatically generated with the SCIgen program. Casual observations suggested that similar problematic papers are still published and sold, without follow-up retractions. No systematic screening has been performed and the prevalence of such nonsensical publications in the scientific literature is unknown. Our contribution is 2-fold. First, we designed a detector that combs the scientific literature for grammar-based computer-generated papers. Applied to SCIgen, it has a 83.6% precision. Second, we performed a scientometric study of the 243 detected SCIgen-papers from 19 publishers. We estimate the prevalence of SCIgen-papers to be 75 per million papers in Information and Computing Sciences. Only 19% of the 243 problematic papers were dealt with: formal retraction (12) or silent removal (34). Publishers still serve and sometimes sell the remaining 197 papers without any caveat. We found evidence of citation manipulation via edited SCIgen bibliographies. This work reveals metric gaming up to the point of absurdity: fraudsters publish nonsensical algorithmically generated papers featuring genuine references. It stresses the need to screen papers for nonsense before peer-review and chase citation manipulation in published papers. Overall, this is yet another illustration of the harmful effects of the pressure to publish or perish.
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 72(2021) no.12, S.1461-1476
  6. Luhmann, J.; Burghardt, M.: Digital humanities - A discipline in its own right? : an analysis of the role and position of digital humanities in the academic landscape (2022) 0.00 
    0.0030344925 = product of:
  0.01213797 = sum of:
    0.01213797 = weight(_text_:information in 460) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01213797 = score(doc=460,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 460, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=460)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    Although digital humanities (DH) has received a lot of attention in recent years, its status as "a discipline in its own right" (Schreibman et al., A companion to digital humanities (pp. xxiii-xxvii). Blackwell; 2004) and its position in the overall academic landscape are still being negotiated. While there are countless essays and opinion pieces that debate the status of DH, little research has been dedicated to exploring the field in a systematic and empirical way (Poole, Journal of Documentation; 2017:73). This study aims to contribute to the existing research gap by comparing articles published over the past three decades in three established English-language DH journals (Computers and the Humanities, Literary and Linguistic Computing, Digital Humanities Quarterly) with research articles from journals in 15 other academic disciplines (corpus size: 34,041 articles; 299 million tokens). As a method of analysis, we use latent Dirichlet allocation topic modeling, combined with recent approaches that aggregate topic models by means of hierarchical agglomerative clustering. Our findings indicate that DH is simultaneously a discipline in its own right and a highly interdisciplinary field, with many connecting factors to neighboring disciplines-first and foremost, computational linguistics, and information science. Detailed descriptive analyses shed some light on the diachronic development of DH and also highlight topics that are characteristic for DH.
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 73(2022) no.2, S.148-171
  7. James, J.E.: Pirate open access as electronic civil disobedience : is it ethical to breach the paywalls of monetized academic publishing? (2020) 0.00 
    0.0025748524 = product of:
  0.01029941 = sum of:
    0.01029941 = weight(_text_:information in 37) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01029941 = score(doc=37,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 37, 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=37)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 71(2020) no.12, S.1500-1504
  8. Pampel, H.: Empfehlungen für transformative Zeitschriftenverträge mit Publikationsdienstleistern veröffentlicht (2022) 0.00 
    0.0025748524 = product of:
  0.01029941 = sum of:
    0.01029941 = weight(_text_:information in 805) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01029941 = score(doc=805,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 805, 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=805)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    Mailtext: "Im Rahmen der Schwerpunktinitiative "Digitale Information" der Allianz der Wissenschaftsorganisationen wurden jetzt "Empfehlungen für transformative Zeitschriftenverträge mit Publikationsdienstleistern" veröffentlicht. Die formulierten Kriterien dienen als gemeinsamer und handlungsleitender Rahmen der Akteur:innen aus allen Wissenschaftsorganisationen, d.h. Hochschulen ebenso wie außeruniversitäre Forschungseinrichtungen, für Verhandlungen mit Publikationsdienstleistern. Dabei bildet die Forderung nach größtmöglicher Kostentransparenz und Kosteneffizienz im Gesamtsystem den Kern des Handelns der Wissenschaftsorganisationen im Kontext ihrer Open-Access-Strategie für die Jahre 2021-2025. Diese Kriterien gliedern sich in die Aspekte Transformation von Zeitschriften, Preisgestaltung, Transparenz, Workflow, Preprints, Qualitätssicherung, Metadaten und Schnittstellen, Statistiken, Tracking und Waiver. Deutsche Version: https://doi.org/10.48440/allianzoa.045 Englische Version: https://doi.org/10.48440/allianzoa.046 Siehe auch: Empfehlungen für transformative Zeitschriftenverträge mit Publikationsdienstleistern veröffentlicht https://www.allianzinitiative.de/2022/11/24/empfehlungen-fuer-transformative-zeitschriftenvertraege-mit-publikationsdienstleistern-veroeffentlicht/ Recommendations for Transformative Journal Agreements with Providers of Publishing Services published https://www.allianzinitiative.de/2022/11/24/recommendations-for-transformative-journal-agreements-with-providers-of-publishing-services-published/?lang=en"
  9. Zeng, M.L.; Sula, C.A.; Gracy, K.F.; Hyvönen, E.; Alves Lima, V.M.: JASIST special issue on digital humanities (DH) : guest editorial (2022) 0.00 
    0.002427594 = product of:
  0.009710376 = sum of:
    0.009710376 = weight(_text_:information in 462) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009710376 = score(doc=462,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.10971737 = fieldWeight in 462, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=462)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    More than 15 years ago, A Companion to Digital Humanities marked out the area of digital humanities (DH) "as a discipline in its own right" (Schreibman et al., 2004, p. xxiii). In the years that followed, there is ample evidence that the DH domain, formed by the intersection of humanities disciplines and digital information technology, has undergone remarkable expansion. This growth is reflected in A New Companion to Digital Humanities (Schreibman et al., 2016). The extensively revised contents of the second edition were contributed by a global team of authors who are pioneers of innovative research in the field. Over this formative period, DH has become a widely recognized, impactful mode of scholarship and an institutional unit for collaborative, transdisciplinary, and computationally engaged research, teaching, and publication (Burdick et al., 2012; Svensson, 2010; Van Ruyskensvelde, 2014). The field of DH has advanced tremendously over the last decade and continues to expand. Meanwhile, competing definitions and approaches of DH scholars continue to spark debate. "Complexity" was a theme of the DH2019 international conference, as it demonstrates the multifaceted connections within DH scholarship today (Alliance of Digital Humanities Organizations, 2019). Yet, while it is often assumed that the DH is in flux and not particularly fixed as an institutional or intellectual construct, there are also obviously touchstones within the DH field, most visibly in the relationship between traditional humanities disciplines and technological infrastructures. Thus, it is still meaningful to "bring together the humanistic and the digital through embracing a non-territorial and liminal zone" (Svensson, 2016, p. 477). This is the focus of this JASIST special issue, which mirrors the increasing attention on DH worldwide.
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 73(2022) no.2, S.143-147
  10. Moksness, L.; Olsen, S.O.: Perceived quality and self-identity in scholarly publishing (2020) 0.00 
    0.0021457102 = product of:
  0.008582841 = sum of:
    0.008582841 = weight(_text_:information in 5677) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008582841 = score(doc=5677,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 5677, 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=5677)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 71(2020) no.3, S.338-348
  11. Moore, S.A.: Revisiting "the 1990s debutante" : scholar-led publishing and the prehistory of the open access movement (2020) 0.00 
    0.0021457102 = product of:
  0.008582841 = sum of:
    0.008582841 = weight(_text_:information in 5920) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008582841 = score(doc=5920,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 5920, 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=5920)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 71(2020) no.7, S.856-866
  12. Kim, L.; Portenoy, J.H.; West, J.D.; Stovel, K.W.: Scientific journals still matter in the era of academic search engines and preprint archives (2020) 0.00 
    0.0021457102 = product of:
  0.008582841 = sum of:
    0.008582841 = weight(_text_:information in 5961) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008582841 = score(doc=5961,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 5961, 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=5961)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 71(2020) no.10, S.1218-1226
  13. Siler, K.: Demarcating spectrums of predatory publishing : economic and institutional sources of academic legitimacy (2020) 0.00 
    0.0021457102 = product of:
  0.008582841 = sum of:
    0.008582841 = weight(_text_:information in 9) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008582841 = score(doc=9,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 9, 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=9)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 71(2020) no.11, S.1386-1401
  14. Kulczycki, E.; Guns, R.; Pölönen, J.; Engels, T.C.E.; Rozkosz, E.A.; Zuccala, A.A.; Bruun, K.; Eskola, O.; Starcic, A.I.; Petr, M.; Sivertsen, G.: Multilingual publishing in the social sciences and humanities : a seven-country European study (2020) 0.00 
    0.0021457102 = product of:
  0.008582841 = sum of:
    0.008582841 = weight(_text_:information in 11) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008582841 = score(doc=11,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 11, 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=11)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 71(2020) no.11, S.1371-1385
  15. Fang, Z.; Dudek, J.; Costas, R.: ¬The stability of Twitter metrics : a study on unavailable Twitter mentions of scientific publications (2020) 0.00 
    0.0021457102 = product of:
  0.008582841 = sum of:
    0.008582841 = weight(_text_:information in 35) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008582841 = score(doc=35,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 35, 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=35)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 71(2020) no.12, S.1455-1469
  16. Jahn, N.; Matthias, L.; Laakso, M.: Toward transparency of hybrid open access through publisher-provided metadata : an article-level study of Elsevier (2022) 0.00 
    0.0021457102 = product of:
  0.008582841 = sum of:
    0.008582841 = weight(_text_:information in 448) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008582841 = score(doc=448,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 448, 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=448)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 73(2022) no.1, S.104-118
  17. Ma, R.; Li, K.: Digital humanities as a cross-disciplinary battleground : an examination of inscriptions in journal publications (2022) 0.00 
    0.0021457102 = product of:
  0.008582841 = sum of:
    0.008582841 = weight(_text_:information in 461) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008582841 = score(doc=461,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 461, 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=461)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 73(2022) no.2, S.172-187
  18. Buehling, K.; Geissler, M.; Strecker, D.: Free access to scientific literature and its influence on the publishing activity in developing countries : the effect of Sci-Hub in the field of mathematics (2022) 0.00 
    0.0021457102 = product of:
  0.008582841 = sum of:
    0.008582841 = weight(_text_:information in 647) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008582841 = score(doc=647,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 647, 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=647)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 73(2022) no.9, S.1336-1355
  19. Morrison, H.; Borges, L.; Zhao, X.; Kakou, T.L.; Shanbhoug, A.N.: Change and growth in open access journal publishing and charging trends 2011-2021 (2022) 0.00 
    0.0021457102 = product of:
  0.008582841 = sum of:
    0.008582841 = weight(_text_:information in 741) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008582841 = score(doc=741,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 741, 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=741)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 73(2022) no.12, S.1793-1805
  20. Ming, W.; Zhao, Z.: Rethinking the open access citation advantage : evidence from the "reverse-flipping" journals (2022) 0.00 
    0.0021457102 = product of:
  0.008582841 = sum of:
    0.008582841 = weight(_text_:information in 750) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008582841 = score(doc=750,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 750, 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=750)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 73(2022) no.11, S.1608-1620

Authors

Languages

  • e 21
  • d 2

Types

Themes