-
Norris, M.; Oppenheim, C.: ¬The h-index : a broad review of a new bibliometric indicator (2010)
0.04
0.040272906 = product of:
0.08054581 = sum of:
0.08054581 = sum of:
0.05022497 = weight(_text_:1990 in 4147) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05022497 = score(doc=4147,freq=2.0), product of:
0.20172533 = queryWeight, product of:
4.506965 = idf(docFreq=1325, maxDocs=44218)
0.044758573 = queryNorm
0.248977 = fieldWeight in 4147, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.506965 = idf(docFreq=1325, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4147)
0.030320844 = weight(_text_:22 in 4147) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030320844 = score(doc=4147,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1567369 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.044758573 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4147, 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=4147)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Purpose - This review aims to show, broadly, how the h-index has become a subject of widespread debate, how it has spawned many variants and diverse applications since first introduced in 2005 and some of the issues in its use. Design/methodology/approach - The review drew on a range of material published in 1990 or so sources published since 2005. From these sources, a number of themes were identified and discussed ranging from the h-index's advantages to which citation database might be selected for its calculation. Findings - The analysis shows how the h-index has quickly established itself as a major subject of interest in the field of bibliometrics. Study of the index ranges from its mathematical underpinning to a range of variants perceived to address the indexes' shortcomings. The review illustrates how widely the index has been applied but also how care must be taken in its application. Originality/value - The use of bibliometric indicators to measure research performance continues, with the h-index as its latest addition. The use of the h-index, its variants and many applications to which it has been put are still at the exploratory stage. The review shows the breadth and diversity of this research and the need to verify the veracity of the h-index by more studies.
- Date
- 8. 1.2011 19:22:13
-
Levitt, J.M.; Thelwall, M.; Oppenheim, C.: Variations between subjects in the extent to which the social sciences have become more interdisciplinary (2011)
0.02
0.02174805 = product of:
0.0434961 = sum of:
0.0434961 = product of:
0.0869922 = sum of:
0.0869922 = weight(_text_:1990 in 4465) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0869922 = score(doc=4465,freq=6.0), product of:
0.20172533 = queryWeight, product of:
4.506965 = idf(docFreq=1325, maxDocs=44218)
0.044758573 = queryNorm
0.43124083 = fieldWeight in 4465, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
4.506965 = idf(docFreq=1325, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4465)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Increasing interdisciplinarity has been a policy objective since the 1990s, promoted by many governments and funding agencies, but the question is: How deeply has this affected the social sciences? Although numerous articles have suggested that research has become more interdisciplinary, yet no study has compared the extent to which the interdisciplinarity of different social science subjects has changed. To address this gap, changes in the level of interdisciplinarity since 1980 are investigated for subjects with many articles in the Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI), using the percentage of cross-disciplinary citing documents (PCDCD) to evaluate interdisciplinarity. For the 14 SSCI subjects investigated, the median level of interdisciplinarity, as measured using cross-disciplinary citations, declined from 1980 to 1990, but rose sharply between 1990 and 2000, confirming previous research. This increase was not fully matched by an increase in the percentage of articles that were assigned to more than one subject category. Nevertheless, although on average the social sciences have recently become more interdisciplinary, the extent of this change varies substantially from subject to subject. The SSCI subject with the largest increase in interdisciplinarity between 1990 and 2000 was Information Science & Library Science (IS&LS) but there is evidence that the level of interdisciplinarity of IS&LS increased less quickly during the first decade of this century.
-
Oppenheim, C.: ¬The implications of copyright legislation for electronic access to journal collections (1994)
0.01
0.012128337 = product of:
0.024256675 = sum of:
0.024256675 = product of:
0.04851335 = sum of:
0.04851335 = weight(_text_:22 in 7245) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04851335 = score(doc=7245,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1567369 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.044758573 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 7245, 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=7245)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Journal of document and text management. 2(1994) no.1, S.10-22
-
Oppenheim, C.: ¬An agenda for action to achieve the information society in the UK (1996)
0.01
0.012128337 = product of:
0.024256675 = sum of:
0.024256675 = product of:
0.04851335 = sum of:
0.04851335 = weight(_text_:22 in 7670) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04851335 = score(doc=7670,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1567369 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.044758573 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 7670, 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=7670)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Journal of information science. 22(1996) no.6, S.407-421
-
Oppenheim, C.: Intellectual property : legal and other issues (1997)
0.01
0.009096253 = product of:
0.018192505 = sum of:
0.018192505 = product of:
0.03638501 = sum of:
0.03638501 = weight(_text_:22 in 42) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03638501 = score(doc=42,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1567369 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.044758573 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 42, 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=42)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Information studies. 3(1997) no.1, S.5-22
-
Oppenheim, C.: Electronic scholarly publishing and open access (2009)
0.01
0.009096253 = product of:
0.018192505 = sum of:
0.018192505 = product of:
0.03638501 = sum of:
0.03638501 = weight(_text_:22 in 3662) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03638501 = score(doc=3662,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1567369 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.044758573 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3662, 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=3662)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 8. 7.2010 19:22:45
