Search (3 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × theme_ss:"Informetrie"
  • × author_ss:"Oppenheim, C."
  1. Oppenheim, C.: Using the h-Index to rank influential British researchers in information science and librarianship (2007) 0.00 
    0.0039907596 = product of:
  0.015963038 = sum of:
    0.015963038 = weight(_text_:information in 780) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015963038 = score(doc=780,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.2602176 = fieldWeight in 780, 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=780)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    The recently developed h-index has been applied to the literature produced by senior British-based academics in librarianship and information science. The majority of those evaluated currently hold senior positions in UK information science and librarianship departments; however, a small number of staff in other departments and retired "founding fathers" were analyzed as well. The analysis was carried out using the Web of Science (Thomson Scientific, Philadelphia, PA) for the years from 1992 to October 2005, and included both secondauthored papers and self-citations. The top-ranking British information scientist, Peter Willett, has an h-index of 31. However, it was found that Eugene Garfield, the founder of modern citation studies, has an even higher h-index of 36. These results support other studies suggesting that the h-index is a useful tool in the armory of bibliometrics.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 58(2007) no.2, S.297-301
  2. Johnson, B.; Oppenheim, C.: How socially connected are citers to those that they cite? (2007) 0.00 
    0.0021033147 = product of:
  0.008413259 = sum of:
    0.008413259 = weight(_text_:information in 839) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008413259 = score(doc=839,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 839, 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=839)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to report an investigation into the social and citation networks of three information scientists: David Nicholas, Peter Williams and Paul Huntington. Design/methodology/approach - Similarities between citation patterns and social closeness were identified and discussed. A total of 16 individuals in the citation network were identified and investigated using citation analysis, and a matrix formed of citations made between those in the network. Social connections between the 16 in the citation network were then investigated by means of a questionnaire, the results of which were merged into a separate matrix. These matrices were converted into visual social networks, using multidimensional scaling. A new deviance measure was devised for drawing comparisons between social and citation closeness in individual cases. Findings - Nicholas, Williams and Huntington were found to have cited 527 authors in the period 2000-2003, the 16 most cited becoming the subjects of further citation and social investigation. This comparison, along with the examination of visual representations indicates a positive correlation between social closeness and citation counts. Possible explanations for this correlation are discussed, and implications considered. Despite this correlation, the information scientists were found to cite widely outside their immediate social connections. Originality/value - Social network analysis has not been often used in combination with citation analysis to explore inter-relationships in research teams.
  3. Norris, M.; Oppenheim, C.; Rowland, F.: ¬The citation advantage of open-access articles (2008) 0.00 
    0.0014872681 = product of:
  0.0059490725 = sum of:
    0.0059490725 = weight(_text_:information in 2374) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0059490725 = score(doc=2374,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 2374, 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=2374)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 59(2008) no.12, S.1963-1972

Authors