-
Lewison, G.: ¬The work of the Bibliometrics Research Group (City University) and associates (2005)
0.08
0.08426458 = product of:
0.25279373 = sum of:
0.25279373 = sum of:
0.17880222 = weight(_text_:2005 in 4890) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.17880222 = score(doc=4890,freq=5.0), product of:
0.19702037 = queryWeight, product of:
4.329179 = idf(docFreq=1583, maxDocs=44218)
0.04550987 = queryNorm
0.9075317 = fieldWeight in 4890, product of:
2.236068 = tf(freq=5.0), with freq of:
5.0 = termFreq=5.0
4.329179 = idf(docFreq=1583, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4890)
0.07399151 = weight(_text_:22 in 4890) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07399151 = score(doc=4890,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15936781 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04550987 = queryNorm
0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 4890, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4890)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Date
- 20. 1.2007 17:02:22
- Source
- Aslib proceedings. 57(2005) no.3, S.200-
- Year
- 2005
-
Larivière, V.; Gingras, Y.; Archambault, E.: ¬The decline in the concentration of citations, 1900-2007 (2009)
0.04
0.03628738 = product of:
0.10886213 = sum of:
0.10886213 = sum of:
0.056542225 = weight(_text_:2005 in 2763) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.056542225 = score(doc=2763,freq=2.0), product of:
0.19702037 = queryWeight, product of:
4.329179 = idf(docFreq=1583, maxDocs=44218)
0.04550987 = queryNorm
0.2869867 = fieldWeight in 2763, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.329179 = idf(docFreq=1583, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2763)
0.052319903 = weight(_text_:22 in 2763) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.052319903 = score(doc=2763,freq=4.0), product of:
0.15936781 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04550987 = 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)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Abstract
- This article challenges recent research (Evans, 2008) reporting that the concentration of cited scientific literature increases with the online availability of articles and journals. Using Thomson Reuters' Web of Science, the present article analyses changes in the concentration of citations received (2- and 5-year citation windows) by papers published between 1900 and 2005. Three measures of concentration are used: the percentage of papers that received at least one citation (cited papers); the percentage of papers needed to account for 20%, 50%, and 80% of the citations; and the Herfindahl-Hirschman index (HHI). These measures are used for four broad disciplines: natural sciences and engineering, medical fields, social sciences, and the humanities. All these measures converge and show that, contrary to what was reported by Evans, the dispersion of citations is actually increasing.
- Date
- 22. 3.2009 19:22:35
-
Liu, Z.; Wang, C.: Mapping interdisciplinarity in demography : a journal network analysis (2005)
0.03
0.034767102 = product of:
0.1043013 = sum of:
0.1043013 = product of:
0.2086026 = sum of:
0.2086026 = weight(_text_:2005 in 4384) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.2086026 = score(doc=4384,freq=5.0), product of:
0.19702037 = queryWeight, product of:
4.329179 = idf(docFreq=1583, maxDocs=44218)
0.04550987 = queryNorm
1.058787 = fieldWeight in 4384, product of:
2.236068 = tf(freq=5.0), with freq of:
5.0 = termFreq=5.0
4.329179 = idf(docFreq=1583, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4384)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Source
- Journal of information science. 31(2005) no.4, S.308-316
- Year
- 2005
-
Norris, M.; Oppenheim, C.: ¬The h-index : a broad review of a new bibliometric indicator (2010)
0.03
0.032488484 = product of:
0.09746545 = sum of:
0.09746545 = sum of:
0.06663565 = weight(_text_:2005 in 4147) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06663565 = score(doc=4147,freq=4.0), product of:
0.19702037 = queryWeight, product of:
4.329179 = idf(docFreq=1583, maxDocs=44218)
0.04550987 = queryNorm
0.33821708 = fieldWeight in 4147, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
4.329179 = idf(docFreq=1583, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4147)
0.030829797 = weight(_text_:22 in 4147) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030829797 = score(doc=4147,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15936781 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04550987 = 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)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- 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
-
Frandsen, T.F.; Nicolaisen, J.: ¬The ripple effect : citation chain reactions of a nobel prize (2013)
0.03
0.031179328 = product of:
0.09353798 = sum of:
0.09353798 = sum of:
0.056542225 = weight(_text_:2005 in 654) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.056542225 = score(doc=654,freq=2.0), product of:
0.19702037 = queryWeight, product of:
4.329179 = idf(docFreq=1583, maxDocs=44218)
0.04550987 = queryNorm
0.2869867 = fieldWeight in 654, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.329179 = idf(docFreq=1583, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=654)
0.036995754 = weight(_text_:22 in 654) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.036995754 = score(doc=654,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15936781 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04550987 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 654, 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=654)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Abstract
- This paper explores the possible citation chain reactions of a Nobel Prize using the mathematician Robert J. Aumann as a case example. The results show that the award of the Nobel Prize in 2005 affected not only the citations to his work, but also affected the citations to the references in his scientific oeuvre. The results indicate that the spillover effect is almost as powerful as the effect itself. We are consequently able to document a ripple effect in which the awarding of the Nobel Prize ignites a citation chain reaction to Aumann's scientific oeuvre and to the references in its nearest citation network. The effect is discussed using innovation decision process theory as a point of departure to identify the factors that created a bandwagon effect leading to the reported observations.
- Date
- 22. 3.2013 16:21:09
-
Egghe, L.: Expansion of the field of informetrics : origins and consequences (2005)
0.03
0.02980037 = product of:
0.08940111 = sum of:
0.08940111 = product of:
0.17880222 = sum of:
0.17880222 = weight(_text_:2005 in 1910) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.17880222 = score(doc=1910,freq=5.0), product of:
0.19702037 = queryWeight, product of:
4.329179 = idf(docFreq=1583, maxDocs=44218)
0.04550987 = queryNorm
0.9075317 = fieldWeight in 1910, product of:
2.236068 = tf(freq=5.0), with freq of:
5.0 = termFreq=5.0
4.329179 = idf(docFreq=1583, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1910)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Source
- Information processing and management. 41(2005) no.6, S.1311-1316
- Year
- 2005
-
Harries, G.; Wilkinson, D.; Price, L.; Fairclough, R.; Thelwall, M.: Hyperlinks as a data source for science mapping : making sense of it all (2005)
0.03
0.02980037 = product of:
0.08940111 = sum of:
0.08940111 = product of:
0.17880222 = sum of:
0.17880222 = weight(_text_:2005 in 4654) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.17880222 = score(doc=4654,freq=5.0), product of:
0.19702037 = queryWeight, product of:
4.329179 = idf(docFreq=1583, maxDocs=44218)
0.04550987 = queryNorm
0.9075317 = fieldWeight in 4654, product of:
2.236068 = tf(freq=5.0), with freq of:
5.0 = termFreq=5.0
4.329179 = idf(docFreq=1583, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4654)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Source
- Journal of information science. 30(2005) no.5, S.436-
- Year
- 2005
-
Tonta, Y.; Ünal, Y.: Scatter of journals and literature obsolescence reflected in document delivery requests (2005)
0.03
0.028088193 = product of:
0.08426458 = sum of:
0.08426458 = sum of:
0.05960074 = weight(_text_:2005 in 3271) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05960074 = score(doc=3271,freq=5.0), product of:
0.19702037 = queryWeight, product of:
4.329179 = idf(docFreq=1583, maxDocs=44218)
0.04550987 = queryNorm
0.30251056 = fieldWeight in 3271, product of:
2.236068 = tf(freq=5.0), with freq of:
5.0 = termFreq=5.0
4.329179 = idf(docFreq=1583, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3271)
0.024663838 = weight(_text_:22 in 3271) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.024663838 = score(doc=3271,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15936781 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04550987 = queryNorm
0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 3271, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3271)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Date
- 20. 3.2005 10:54:22
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 56(2005) no.1, S.84-94
- Year
- 2005
-
Mukherjee, B.: Do open-access journals in library and information science have any scholarly impact? : a bibliometric study of selected open-access journals using Google Scholar (2009)
0.03
0.025982773 = product of:
0.07794832 = sum of:
0.07794832 = sum of:
0.047118522 = weight(_text_:2005 in 2745) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.047118522 = score(doc=2745,freq=2.0), product of:
0.19702037 = queryWeight, product of:
4.329179 = idf(docFreq=1583, maxDocs=44218)
0.04550987 = queryNorm
0.23915559 = fieldWeight in 2745, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.329179 = idf(docFreq=1583, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2745)
0.030829797 = weight(_text_:22 in 2745) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030829797 = score(doc=2745,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15936781 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04550987 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2745, 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=2745)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Abstract
- Using 17 fully open-access journals published uninterruptedly during 2000 to 2004 in the field of library and information science, the present study investigates the impact of these open-access journals in terms of quantity of articles published, subject distribution of the articles, synchronous and diachronous impact factor, immediacy index, and journals' and authors' self-citation. The results indicate that during this 5-year publication period, there are as many as 1,636 articles published by these journals. At the same time, the articles have received a total of 8,591 Web citations during a 7-year citation period. Eight of 17 journals have received more than 100 citations. First Monday received the highest number of citations; however, the average number of citations per article was the highest in D-Lib Magazine. The value of the synchronous impact factor varies from 0.6989 to 1.0014 during 2002 to 2005, and the diachronous impact factor varies from 1.472 to 2.487 during 2000 to 2004. The range of the immediacy index varies between 0.0714 and 1.395. D-Lib Magazine has an immediacy index value above 0.5 in all the years whereas the immediacy index value varies from year to year for the other journals. When the citations of sample articles were analyzed according to source, it was found that 40.32% of the citations came from full-text articles, followed by 33.35% from journal articles. The percentage of journals' self-citation was only 6.04%.
- Date
- 22. 3.2009 17:54:59
-
Stvilia, B.; Hinnant, C.C.; Schindler, K.; Worrall, A.; Burnett, G.; Burnett, K.; Kazmer, M.M.; Marty, P.F.: Composition of scientific teams and publication productivity at a national science lab (2011)
0.03
0.025982773 = product of:
0.07794832 = sum of:
0.07794832 = sum of:
0.047118522 = weight(_text_:2005 in 4191) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.047118522 = score(doc=4191,freq=2.0), product of:
0.19702037 = queryWeight, product of:
4.329179 = idf(docFreq=1583, maxDocs=44218)
0.04550987 = queryNorm
0.23915559 = fieldWeight in 4191, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.329179 = idf(docFreq=1583, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4191)
0.030829797 = weight(_text_:22 in 4191) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030829797 = score(doc=4191,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15936781 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04550987 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4191, 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=4191)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Abstract
- The production of scientific knowledge has evolved from a process of inquiry largely based on the activities of individual scientists to one grounded in the collaborative efforts of specialized research teams. This shift brings to light a new question: how the composition of scientific teams affects their production of knowledge. This study employs data from 1,415 experiments conducted at the National High Magnetic Field Laboratory (NHMFL) between 2005 and 2008 to identify and select a sample of 89 teams and examine whether team diversity and network characteristics affect productivity. The study examines how the diversity of science teams along several variables affects overall team productivity. Results indicate several diversity measures associated with network position and team productivity. Teams with mixed institutional associations were more central to the overall network compared with teams that primarily comprised NHMFL's own scientists. Team cohesion was positively related to productivity. The study indicates that high productivity in teams is associated with high disciplinary diversity and low seniority diversity of team membership. Finally, an increase in the share of senior members negatively affects productivity, and teams with members in central structural positions perform better than other teams.
- Date
- 22. 1.2011 13:19:42
-
Vakkari, P.; Järvelin, K.; Chang, Y.-W.: ¬The association of disciplinary background with the evolution of topics and methods in Library and Information Science research 1995-2015 (2023)
0.03
0.025982773 = product of:
0.07794832 = sum of:
0.07794832 = sum of:
0.047118522 = weight(_text_:2005 in 998) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.047118522 = score(doc=998,freq=2.0), product of:
0.19702037 = queryWeight, product of:
4.329179 = idf(docFreq=1583, maxDocs=44218)
0.04550987 = queryNorm
0.23915559 = fieldWeight in 998, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.329179 = idf(docFreq=1583, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=998)
0.030829797 = weight(_text_:22 in 998) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030829797 = score(doc=998,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15936781 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04550987 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 998, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=998)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Abstract
- The paper reports a longitudinal analysis of the topical and methodological development of Library and Information Science (LIS). Its focus is on the effects of researchers' disciplines on these developments. The study extends an earlier cross-sectional study (Vakkari et al., Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 2022a, 73, 1706-1722) by a coordinated dataset representing a content analysis of articles published in 31 scholarly LIS journals in 1995, 2005, and 2015. It is novel in its coverage of authors' disciplines, topical and methodological aspects in a coordinated dataset spanning two decades thus allowing trend analysis. The findings include a shrinking trend in the share of LIS from 67 to 36% while Computer Science, and Business and Economics increase their share from 9 and 6% to 21 and 16%, respectively. The earlier cross-sectional study (Vakkari et al., Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 2022a, 73, 1706-1722) for the year 2015 identified three topical clusters of LIS research, focusing on topical subfields, methodologies, and contributing disciplines. Correspondence analysis confirms their existence already in 1995 and traces their development through the decades. The contributing disciplines infuse their concepts, research questions, and approaches to LIS and may also subsume vital parts of LIS in their own structures of knowledge production.
- Date
- 22. 6.2023 18:15:06
-
Haustein, S.; Sugimoto, C.; Larivière, V.: Social media in scholarly communication : Guest editorial (2015)
0.02
0.022488296 = product of:
0.06746489 = sum of:
0.06746489 = sum of:
0.04896701 = weight(_text_:2005 in 3809) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04896701 = score(doc=3809,freq=6.0), product of:
0.19702037 = queryWeight, product of:
4.329179 = idf(docFreq=1583, maxDocs=44218)
0.04550987 = queryNorm
0.24853781 = fieldWeight in 3809, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
4.329179 = idf(docFreq=1583, maxDocs=44218)
0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=3809)
0.018497877 = weight(_text_:22 in 3809) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.018497877 = score(doc=3809,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15936781 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04550987 = queryNorm
0.116070345 = fieldWeight in 3809, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=3809)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Abstract
- One of the solutions to help scientists filter the most relevant publications and, thus, to stay current on developments in their fields during the transition from "little science" to "big science", was the introduction of citation indexing as a Wellsian "World Brain" (Garfield, 1964) of scientific information: It is too much to expect a research worker to spend an inordinate amount of time searching for the bibliographic descendants of antecedent papers. It would not be excessive to demand that the thorough scholar check all papers that have cited or criticized such papers, if they could be located quickly. The citation index makes this check practicable (Garfield, 1955, p. 108). In retrospective, citation indexing can be perceived as a pre-social web version of crowdsourcing, as it is based on the concept that the community of citing authors outperforms indexers in highlighting cognitive links between papers, particularly on the level of specific ideas and concepts (Garfield, 1983). Over the last 50 years, citation analysis and more generally, bibliometric methods, have developed from information retrieval tools to research evaluation metrics, where they are presumed to make scientific funding more efficient and effective (Moed, 2006). However, the dominance of bibliometric indicators in research evaluation has also led to significant goal displacement (Merton, 1957) and the oversimplification of notions of "research productivity" and "scientific quality", creating adverse effects such as salami publishing, honorary authorships, citation cartels, and misuse of indicators (Binswanger, 2015; Cronin and Sugimoto, 2014; Frey and Osterloh, 2006; Haustein and Larivière, 2015; Weingart, 2005).
Furthermore, the rise of the web, and subsequently, the social web, has challenged the quasi-monopolistic status of the journal as the main form of scholarly communication and citation indices as the primary assessment mechanisms. Scientific communication is becoming more open, transparent, and diverse: publications are increasingly open access; manuscripts, presentations, code, and data are shared online; research ideas and results are discussed and criticized openly on blogs; and new peer review experiments, with open post publication assessment by anonymous or non-anonymous referees, are underway. The diversification of scholarly production and assessment, paired with the increasing speed of the communication process, leads to an increased information overload (Bawden and Robinson, 2008), demanding new filters. The concept of altmetrics, short for alternative (to citation) metrics, was created out of an attempt to provide a filter (Priem et al., 2010) and to steer against the oversimplification of the measurement of scientific success solely on the basis of number of journal articles published and citations received, by considering a wider range of research outputs and metrics (Piwowar, 2013). Although the term altmetrics was introduced in a tweet in 2010 (Priem, 2010), the idea of capturing traces - "polymorphous mentioning" (Cronin et al., 1998, p. 1320) - of scholars and their documents on the web to measure "impact" of science in a broader manner than citations was introduced years before, largely in the context of webometrics (Almind and Ingwersen, 1997; Thelwall et al., 2005):
There will soon be a critical mass of web-based digital objects and usage statistics on which to model scholars' communication behaviors - publishing, posting, blogging, scanning, reading, downloading, glossing, linking, citing, recommending, acknowledging - and with which to track their scholarly influence and impact, broadly conceived and broadly felt (Cronin, 2005, p. 196). A decade after Cronin's prediction and five years after the coining of altmetrics, the time seems ripe to reflect upon the role of social media in scholarly communication. This Special Issue does so by providing an overview of current research on the indicators and metrics grouped under the umbrella term of altmetrics, on their relationships with traditional indicators of scientific activity, and on the uses that are made of the various social media platforms - on which these indicators are based - by scientists of various disciplines.
- Date
- 20. 1.2015 18:30:22
-
Kurtz, M.J.; Eichhorn, G.; Accomazzi, A.; Grant, C.; Demleitner, M.; Henneken, E.; Murray, S.S.: ¬The effect of use and access on citations (2005)
0.02
0.019866914 = product of:
0.05960074 = sum of:
0.05960074 = product of:
0.11920148 = sum of:
0.11920148 = weight(_text_:2005 in 1064) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.11920148 = score(doc=1064,freq=5.0), product of:
0.19702037 = queryWeight, product of:
4.329179 = idf(docFreq=1583, maxDocs=44218)
0.04550987 = queryNorm
0.6050211 = fieldWeight in 1064, product of:
2.236068 = tf(freq=5.0), with freq of:
5.0 = termFreq=5.0
4.329179 = idf(docFreq=1583, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1064)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Source
- Information processing and management. 41(2005) no.6, S.1395-1402
- Year
- 2005
-
Hirsch, J.E.: ¬An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output (2005)
0.02
0.019866914 = product of:
0.05960074 = sum of:
0.05960074 = product of:
0.11920148 = sum of:
0.11920148 = weight(_text_:2005 in 785) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.11920148 = score(doc=785,freq=5.0), product of:
0.19702037 = queryWeight, product of:
4.329179 = idf(docFreq=1583, maxDocs=44218)
0.04550987 = queryNorm
0.6050211 = fieldWeight in 785, product of:
2.236068 = tf(freq=5.0), with freq of:
5.0 = termFreq=5.0
4.329179 = idf(docFreq=1583, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=785)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Source
- Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 102(2005), no.46, S.16569-16572
- Year
- 2005
-
Tuomaala, O.; Järvelin, K.; Vakkari, P.: Evolution of library and information science, 1965-2005 : content analysis of journal articles (2014)
0.02
0.019236058 = product of:
0.05770817 = sum of:
0.05770817 = product of:
0.11541634 = sum of:
0.11541634 = weight(_text_:2005 in 1309) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.11541634 = score(doc=1309,freq=12.0), product of:
0.19702037 = queryWeight, product of:
4.329179 = idf(docFreq=1583, maxDocs=44218)
0.04550987 = queryNorm
0.5858092 = fieldWeight in 1309, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
4.329179 = idf(docFreq=1583, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1309)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Abstract
- This article first analyzes library and information science (LIS) research articles published in core LIS journals in 2005. It also examines the development of LIS from 1965 to 2005 in light of comparable data sets for 1965, 1985, and 2005. In both cases, the authors report (a) how the research articles are distributed by topic and (b) what approaches, research strategies, and methods were applied in the articles. In 2005, the largest research areas in LIS by this measure were information storage and retrieval, scientific communication, library and information-service activities, and information seeking. The same research areas constituted the quantitative core of LIS in the previous years since 1965. Information retrieval has been the most popular area of research over the years. The proportion of research on library and information-service activities decreased after 1985, but the popularity of information seeking and of scientific communication grew during the period studied. The viewpoint of research has shifted from library and information organizations to end users and development of systems for the latter. The proportion of empirical research strategies was high and rose over time, with the survey method being the single most important method. However, attention to evaluation and experiments increased considerably after 1985. Conceptual research strategies and system analysis, description, and design were quite popular, but declining. The most significant changes from 1965 to 2005 are the decreasing interest in library and information-service activities and the growth of research into information seeking and scientific communication.
-
Fairthorne, R.A.: Empirical hyperbolic distributions (Bradford-Zipf-Mandelbrot) for bibliometric description and prediction (1969)
0.02
0.01884741 = product of:
0.056542225 = sum of:
0.056542225 = product of:
0.11308445 = sum of:
0.11308445 = weight(_text_:2005 in 4329) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.11308445 = score(doc=4329,freq=2.0), product of:
0.19702037 = queryWeight, product of:
4.329179 = idf(docFreq=1583, maxDocs=44218)
0.04550987 = queryNorm
0.5739734 = fieldWeight in 4329, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.329179 = idf(docFreq=1583, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4329)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Footnote
- Wiederabdruck in: Journal of documentation. 61(2005) no.2, S.171-193.
-
Burrell, Q.L.: On Egghe's version of continuous concentration theory (2006)
0.02
0.017769508 = product of:
0.053308524 = sum of:
0.053308524 = product of:
0.10661705 = sum of:
0.10661705 = weight(_text_:2005 in 4903) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.10661705 = score(doc=4903,freq=4.0), product of:
0.19702037 = queryWeight, product of:
4.329179 = idf(docFreq=1583, maxDocs=44218)
0.04550987 = queryNorm
0.54114735 = fieldWeight in 4903, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
4.329179 = idf(docFreq=1583, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4903)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Abstract
- In a recent article, Egghe (2005) discussed what he terms Lorenz concentration theory, covering the Lorenz curve and concentration measures such as the coefficient of variation and the Theil and Gini coefficients. In this note, we point out that neither the curve construction nor the concentration measures conform to the standard statistical/econometric definitions. We here give the standard formulations and apply them to the (truncated) Pareto distributions that are the subject of Egghe's (2005) article. We also interpret Egghe's usage.
-
Mayr, P.; Tosques, F.: Webometrische Analysen mit Hilfe der Google Web APIs (2005)
0.02
0.017383551 = product of:
0.05215065 = sum of:
0.05215065 = product of:
0.1043013 = sum of:
0.1043013 = weight(_text_:2005 in 3189) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.1043013 = score(doc=3189,freq=5.0), product of:
0.19702037 = queryWeight, product of:
4.329179 = idf(docFreq=1583, maxDocs=44218)
0.04550987 = queryNorm
0.5293935 = fieldWeight in 3189, product of:
2.236068 = tf(freq=5.0), with freq of:
5.0 = termFreq=5.0
4.329179 = idf(docFreq=1583, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3189)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Source
- Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 56(2005) H.1, S.41-48
- Year
- 2005
-
Coleman, A.: Instruments of cognition : use of citations and Web links in online teaching materials (2005)
0.02
0.017383551 = product of:
0.05215065 = sum of:
0.05215065 = product of:
0.1043013 = sum of:
0.1043013 = weight(_text_:2005 in 3329) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.1043013 = score(doc=3329,freq=5.0), product of:
0.19702037 = queryWeight, product of:
4.329179 = idf(docFreq=1583, maxDocs=44218)
0.04550987 = queryNorm
0.5293935 = fieldWeight in 3329, product of:
2.236068 = tf(freq=5.0), with freq of:
5.0 = termFreq=5.0
4.329179 = idf(docFreq=1583, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3329)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 56(2005) no.4, S.382-392
- Year
- 2005
-
Leydesdorff, L.: Similarity measures, author cocitation Analysis, and information theory (2005)
0.02
0.017383551 = product of:
0.05215065 = sum of:
0.05215065 = product of:
0.1043013 = sum of:
0.1043013 = weight(_text_:2005 in 3471) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.1043013 = score(doc=3471,freq=5.0), product of:
0.19702037 = queryWeight, product of:
4.329179 = idf(docFreq=1583, maxDocs=44218)
0.04550987 = queryNorm
0.5293935 = fieldWeight in 3471, product of:
2.236068 = tf(freq=5.0), with freq of:
5.0 = termFreq=5.0
4.329179 = idf(docFreq=1583, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3471)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 56(2005) no.7, S.769-772
- Year
- 2005
