Search (39 results, page 1 of 2)

  • × theme_ss:"Citation indexing"
  1. Garfield, E.; Stock, W.G.: Citation Consciousness : Interview with Eugene Garfiels, chairman emeritus of ISI; Philadelphia (2002) 0.04
    0.04242566 = product of:
      0.12727697 = sum of:
        0.099177554 = weight(_text_:history in 613) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.099177554 = score(doc=613,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19296135 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.6519823 = idf(docFreq=1146, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041479383 = queryNorm
            0.5139763 = fieldWeight in 613, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.6519823 = idf(docFreq=1146, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=613)
        0.02809942 = product of:
          0.05619884 = sum of:
            0.05619884 = weight(_text_:22 in 613) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.05619884 = score(doc=613,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.14525373 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041479383 = queryNorm
                0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 613, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=613)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    
    Content
    Abschnitte zu: The origins of citation indexing in science - Citation analysis in sociology, history and philosophy of science - From ASIS to ASIST
    Source
    Password. 2002, H.6, S.22-25
  2. Weinberg, B.H.: ¬The earliest Hebrew citation indexes (1997) 0.03
    0.031331822 = product of:
      0.09399546 = sum of:
        0.05950654 = weight(_text_:history in 86) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05950654 = score(doc=86,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19296135 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.6519823 = idf(docFreq=1146, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041479383 = queryNorm
            0.3083858 = fieldWeight in 86, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.6519823 = idf(docFreq=1146, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=86)
        0.03448892 = product of:
          0.06897784 = sum of:
            0.06897784 = weight(_text_:century in 86) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.06897784 = score(doc=86,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.20775084 = queryWeight, product of:
                  5.0085325 = idf(docFreq=802, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041479383 = queryNorm
                0.33202195 = fieldWeight in 86, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  5.0085325 = idf(docFreq=802, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=86)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    
    Abstract
    The invention of the citation index was credited to Shepard (1873) and Shapiro described a legal citation index published in 1743. A similar index was embedded in the Talmud 2 centuries earlier (1546). The 1st Hebrew citation index to a printed book is dated 1511. The earliest Hebrew manuscript citation index, ascribed to Maimonides, dates from the 12th century. Considerable knowledge was assumed for users of these tools. The substantial knowledge of their compilers contrats with the semi-automatic production of modern citation indexes. The terms citation, quotation, reference, cross-reference, locator, and concordance are employed inconsistently in publications about Hebrew indexes. There is a lack of citation links between the secondary literature on Hebrew indexes and that of citation analysis
    Footnote
    Contribution to part 1 of a 2 part series on the history of documentation and information science
  3. De Bellis, N.: Bibliometrics and citation analysis : from the Science citation index to cybermetrics (2008) 0.02
    0.02088788 = product of:
      0.06266364 = sum of:
        0.039671022 = weight(_text_:history in 3585) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.039671022 = score(doc=3585,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19296135 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.6519823 = idf(docFreq=1146, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041479383 = queryNorm
            0.20559052 = fieldWeight in 3585, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.6519823 = idf(docFreq=1146, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3585)
        0.022992613 = product of:
          0.045985226 = sum of:
            0.045985226 = weight(_text_:century in 3585) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.045985226 = score(doc=3585,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.20775084 = queryWeight, product of:
                  5.0085325 = idf(docFreq=802, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041479383 = queryNorm
                0.22134796 = fieldWeight in 3585, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  5.0085325 = idf(docFreq=802, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3585)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    
    Content
    Inhalt: Biblio/sciento/infor-metrics : terminological issues and early historical developments -- The empirical foundations of bibliometrics : the Science citation index -- The philosophical foundations of bibliometrics : Bernal, Merton, Price, Garfield, and Small -- The mathematical foundations of bibliometrics -- Maps and paradigms : bibliographic citations at the service of the history and sociology of science -- Impact factor and the evaluation of scientists : bibliographic citations at the service of science policy and management -- On the shoulders of dwarfs : citation as rhetorical device and the criticisms to the normative model -- Measuring scientific communication in the twentieth century : from bibliometrics to cybermetrics.
  4. Hauffe, H.: ¬The role of citation analysis in the history and evaluation of science : Bericht über einen Vortrag von Eugene Garfield (Wien, 26. Mai 2004) (2004) 0.02
    0.016529594 = product of:
      0.099177554 = sum of:
        0.099177554 = weight(_text_:history in 2492) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.099177554 = score(doc=2492,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19296135 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.6519823 = idf(docFreq=1146, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041479383 = queryNorm
            0.5139763 = fieldWeight in 2492, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.6519823 = idf(docFreq=1146, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2492)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
  5. Garfield, E.: From citation indexes to informetrics : is the tail now wagging the dog? (1998) 0.02
    0.016363464 = product of:
      0.09818078 = sum of:
        0.09818078 = weight(_text_:history in 2809) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09818078 = score(doc=2809,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.19296135 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.6519823 = idf(docFreq=1146, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041479383 = queryNorm
            0.5088106 = fieldWeight in 2809, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.6519823 = idf(docFreq=1146, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2809)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Abstract
    Provides a synoptic review and history of citation indexes and their evolution into research evaluation tools including a discussion of the use of bibliometric data for evaluating US institutions (academic departments) by the National Research Council (NRC). Covers the origin and uses of periodical impact factors, validation studies of citation analysis, information retrieval and dissemination (current awareness), citation consciousness, historiography and science mapping, Citation Classics, and the history of contemporary science. Illustrates the retrieval of information by cited reference searching, especially as it applies to avoiding duplicated research. Discusses the 15 year cumulative impacts of periodicals and the percentage of uncitedness, the emergence of scientometrics, old boy networks, and citation frequency distributions. Concludes with observations about the future of citation indexing
  6. Osareh, F.: Bibliometrics, citation analysis and co-citation analysis : a review of literature I (1996) 0.01
    0.013223674 = product of:
      0.079342045 = sum of:
        0.079342045 = weight(_text_:history in 7170) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.079342045 = score(doc=7170,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19296135 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.6519823 = idf(docFreq=1146, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041479383 = queryNorm
            0.41118103 = fieldWeight in 7170, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.6519823 = idf(docFreq=1146, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=7170)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Abstract
    Part 1 of a 2 part article reviewing the technique of bibliometrics and one of its most widely used methods, citation analysis. Traces the history and development of bibliometrics, including its definition, scope, role in scholarly communication and applications. Treats citation analysis similarly with particular reference to bibliographic coupling and cocitation coupling
  7. Szava-Kovats, E.: Non-indexed indirect-collective citedness (NIICC) (1998) 0.01
    0.013223674 = product of:
      0.079342045 = sum of:
        0.079342045 = weight(_text_:history in 175) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.079342045 = score(doc=175,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19296135 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.6519823 = idf(docFreq=1146, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041479383 = queryNorm
            0.41118103 = fieldWeight in 175, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.6519823 = idf(docFreq=1146, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=175)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Abstract
    Examines non-indexed indirect collective citedness (NIICC), through a study of 621 articles from 1969 volumes of 2 physics journals, in order to establish the frequency of the phenomenon in the research material. Findings refute the representativity ofd the citation indexes in the field of citedness in the scientific journal literature during the science history period of early Big Science as NIICC was found to be widespread
  8. Kostoff, R.N.: ¬The use and misuse of citation analysis in research evaluation (1998) 0.01
    0.013223674 = product of:
      0.079342045 = sum of:
        0.079342045 = weight(_text_:history in 4129) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.079342045 = score(doc=4129,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19296135 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.6519823 = idf(docFreq=1146, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041479383 = queryNorm
            0.41118103 = fieldWeight in 4129, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.6519823 = idf(docFreq=1146, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4129)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Abstract
    Leydesdorff, in his 1998 paper 'Theories of citation?', addresses the history of citations and citation analysis, and the transformation of a reference mechanism into a purportedly quantitative measure of research impact/quality. Examines different facets of citations and citation analysis, and discusses the validity of citation analysis as a useful measure of research impact/quality
  9. Hellqvist, B.: Referencing in the humanities and its implications for citation analysis (2010) 0.01
    0.011570716 = product of:
      0.069424294 = sum of:
        0.069424294 = weight(_text_:history in 3329) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.069424294 = score(doc=3329,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19296135 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.6519823 = idf(docFreq=1146, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041479383 = queryNorm
            0.3597834 = fieldWeight in 3329, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.6519823 = idf(docFreq=1146, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3329)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Abstract
    This article studies citation practices in the arts and humanities from a theoretical and conceptual viewpoint, drawing on studies from fields like linguistics, history, library & information science, and the sociology of science. The use of references in the humanities is discussed in connection with the growing interest in the possibilities of applying citation analysis to humanistic disciplines. The study shows how the use of references within the humanities is connected to concepts of originality, to intellectual organization, and to searching and writing. Finally, it is acknowledged that the use of references is connected to stylistic, epistemological, and organizational differences, and these differences must be taken into account when applying citation analysis to humanistic disciplines.
  10. Baird, L.M.; Oppenheim, C.: Do citations matter? (1994) 0.01
    0.009917757 = product of:
      0.05950654 = sum of:
        0.05950654 = weight(_text_:history in 6896) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05950654 = score(doc=6896,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19296135 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.6519823 = idf(docFreq=1146, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041479383 = queryNorm
            0.3083858 = fieldWeight in 6896, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.6519823 = idf(docFreq=1146, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=6896)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Abstract
    Citation indexes are based on the principle of authors citing previous articles of relevance. The paper demonstrates the long history of citing for precedent and notes how ISI's citation indexes differ from 'Shephards Citations'. The paper analyses some of the criticisms of citations counting, and some of the uses for which citation analysis has been employed. The paper also examines the idea of the development of an Acknowledgement Index, and concludes such an index is unlikely to be commercially viable. The paper describes a citation study of Eugene Garfield, and concludes that he may be the most heavily cited information scientist, that he is a heavy self-citer, and that the reasons why other authors cite Garfield are different from the reasons why he cites himself. The paper concludes that citation studies remain a valid methgod of analysis of individuals', institutions', or journals' impact, but need to be used with caution and in conjunction with other measures
  11. Aksnes, D.W.: Citation rates and perceptions of scientific contribution (2006) 0.01
    0.009917757 = product of:
      0.05950654 = sum of:
        0.05950654 = weight(_text_:history in 4925) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05950654 = score(doc=4925,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19296135 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.6519823 = idf(docFreq=1146, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041479383 = queryNorm
            0.3083858 = fieldWeight in 4925, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.6519823 = idf(docFreq=1146, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4925)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Abstract
    In this study scientists were asked about their own publication history and their citation counts. The study shows that the citation counts of the publications correspond reasonably well with the authors' own assessments of scientific contribution. Generally, citations proved to have the highest accuracy in identifying either major or minor contributions. Nevertheless, according to these judgments, citations are not a reliable indicator of scientific contribution at the level of the individual article. In the construction of relative citation indicators, the average citation rate of the subfield appears to be slightly more appropriate as a reference standard than the journal citation rate. The study confirms that review articles are cited more frequently than other publication types. Compared to the significance authors attach to these articles they appear to be considerably "overcited." However, there were only marginal differences in the citation rates between empirical, methods, and theoretical contributions.
  12. McVeigh, M.E.: Citation indexes and the Web of Science (2009) 0.01
    0.009917757 = product of:
      0.05950654 = sum of:
        0.05950654 = weight(_text_:history in 3848) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05950654 = score(doc=3848,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19296135 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.6519823 = idf(docFreq=1146, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041479383 = queryNorm
            0.3083858 = fieldWeight in 3848, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.6519823 = idf(docFreq=1146, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3848)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Abstract
    The Web of Science, an online database of bibliographic information produced by Thomson Reuters- draws its real value from the scholarly citation index at its core. By indexing the cited references from each paper as a separate part of the bibliographic data, a citation index creates a pathway by which a paper can be linked backward in time to the body of work that preceded it, as well as linked forward in time to its scholarly descendants. This entry provides a brief history of the development of the citation index, its core functionalities, and the way these unique data are provided to users through the Web of Science.
  13. Zhang, G.; Ding, Y.; Milojevic, S.: Citation content analysis (CCA) : a framework for syntactic and semantic analysis of citation content (2013) 0.01
    0.009917757 = product of:
      0.05950654 = sum of:
        0.05950654 = weight(_text_:history in 975) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05950654 = score(doc=975,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19296135 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.6519823 = idf(docFreq=1146, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041479383 = queryNorm
            0.3083858 = fieldWeight in 975, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.6519823 = idf(docFreq=1146, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=975)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Abstract
    This study proposes a new framework for citation content analysis (CCA), for syntactic and semantic analysis of citation content that can be used to better analyze the rich sociocultural context of research behavior. This framework could be considered the next generation of citation analysis. The authors briefly review the history and features of content analysis in traditional social sciences and its previous application in library and information science (LIS). Based on critical discussion of the theoretical necessity of a new method as well as the limits of citation analysis, the nature and purposes of CCA are discussed, and potential procedures to conduct CCA, including principles to identify the reference scope, a two-dimensional (citing and cited) and two-module (syntactic and semantic) codebook, are provided and described. Future work and implications are also suggested.
  14. White, H.D.: Citation analysis : history (2009) 0.01
    0.008264797 = product of:
      0.049588777 = sum of:
        0.049588777 = weight(_text_:history in 3763) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.049588777 = score(doc=3763,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19296135 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.6519823 = idf(docFreq=1146, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041479383 = queryNorm
            0.25698814 = fieldWeight in 3763, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.6519823 = idf(docFreq=1146, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3763)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
  15. Min, C.; Chen, Q.; Yan, E.; Bu, Y.; Sun, J.: Citation cascade and the evolution of topic relevance (2021) 0.01
    0.008264797 = product of:
      0.049588777 = sum of:
        0.049588777 = weight(_text_:history in 62) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.049588777 = score(doc=62,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19296135 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.6519823 = idf(docFreq=1146, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041479383 = queryNorm
            0.25698814 = fieldWeight in 62, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.6519823 = idf(docFreq=1146, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=62)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Abstract
    Citation analysis, as a tool for quantitative studies of science, has long emphasized direct citation relations, leaving indirect or high-order citations overlooked. However, a series of early and recent studies demonstrate the existence of indirect and continuous citation impact across generations. Adding to the literature on high-order citations, we introduce the concept of a citation cascade: the constitution of a series of subsequent citing events initiated by a certain publication. We investigate this citation structure by analyzing more than 450,000 articles and over 6 million citation relations. We show that citation impact exists not only within the three generations documented in prior research but also in much further generations. Still, our experimental results indicate that two to four generations are generally adequate to trace a work's scientific impact. We also explore specific structural properties-such as depth, width, structural virality, and size-which account for differences among individual citation cascades. Finally, we find evidence that it is more important for a scientific work to inspire trans-domain (or indirectly related domain) works than to receive only intradomain recognition in order to achieve high impact. Our methods and findings can serve as a new tool for scientific evaluation and the modeling of scientific history.
  16. Castro, R. de; Grossmann, J.W.: Famous trails to Paul Erdös (1999) 0.01
    0.0076642046 = product of:
      0.045985226 = sum of:
        0.045985226 = product of:
          0.09197045 = sum of:
            0.09197045 = weight(_text_:century in 3991) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.09197045 = score(doc=3991,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.20775084 = queryWeight, product of:
                  5.0085325 = idf(docFreq=802, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041479383 = queryNorm
                0.44269592 = fieldWeight in 3991, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  5.0085325 = idf(docFreq=802, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3991)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Abstract
    The notion of Erdös number has floated around the mathematical research community for more than 40 years, as a way to quantify the common knowledge that mathematical and scientific research has become a very collaborative process in the 20th century, not an activity engaged in solely by isolated individualists. In this paper we explore some (fairly short) collaboration paths that one can follow from Paul Erdös to researchers inside and outside of mathematics
  17. Nicolaisen, J.: Citation analysis (2007) 0.01
    0.007493179 = product of:
      0.044959072 = sum of:
        0.044959072 = product of:
          0.089918144 = sum of:
            0.089918144 = weight(_text_:22 in 6091) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.089918144 = score(doc=6091,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.14525373 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041479383 = 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)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Date
    13. 7.2008 19:53:22
  18. Døsen, K.: One more reference on self-reference (1992) 0.01
    0.007493179 = product of:
      0.044959072 = sum of:
        0.044959072 = product of:
          0.089918144 = sum of:
            0.089918144 = weight(_text_:22 in 4604) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.089918144 = score(doc=4604,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.14525373 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041479383 = 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)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Date
    7. 2.2005 14:10:22
  19. Van der Veer Martens, B.: Do citation systems represent theories of truth? (2001) 0.01
    0.0066230968 = product of:
      0.03973858 = sum of:
        0.03973858 = product of:
          0.07947716 = sum of:
            0.07947716 = weight(_text_:22 in 3925) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.07947716 = score(doc=3925,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.14525373 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041479383 = queryNorm
                0.54716086 = fieldWeight in 3925, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3925)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Date
    22. 7.2006 15:22:28
  20. Garfield, E.: Citation indexes for science (1985) 0.01
    0.006611837 = product of:
      0.039671022 = sum of:
        0.039671022 = weight(_text_:history in 3632) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.039671022 = score(doc=3632,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19296135 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.6519823 = idf(docFreq=1146, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041479383 = queryNorm
            0.20559052 = fieldWeight in 3632, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.6519823 = idf(docFreq=1146, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3632)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Abstract
    Indexes in general seek to provide a "key" to a body of literature intending to help the user in identifying, verifying, and/or locating individual or related items. The most common devices for collocation in indexes are authors' names and subjects. A different approach to collocating related items in an index is provided by a method called "citation indexing." Citation indexes attempt to link items through citations or references, in other works, by bringing together items cited in a particular work and the works citing a particular item. Citation indexing is based an the concept that there is a significant intellectual link between a document and each bibliographic item cited in it and that this link is useful to the scholar because an author's references to earlier writings identify relevant information to the subject of his current work. One of the major differences between the citation index and the traditional subject index is that the former, while listing current literature, also provides a retrospec tive view of past literature. While each issue of a traditional index is normally concerned only with the current literature, the citation index brings back retrospective literature in the form of cited references, thereby linking current scholarly works with earlier works. The advantages of the citation index have been considered to be its value as a tool for tracing the history of ideas or discoveries, for associating ideas between current and past work, and for evaluating works of individual authors or library collections. The concept of citation indexing is not new. It has been applied to legal literature since 1873 in a legal reference tool called Shepard's Citations. In the 1950s Eugene Garfield, a documentation consultant and founder and President of the Institute for Scientific Information (Philadelphia), developed the technique of citation indexing for scientific literature. This new application was facilitated by the availability of computer technology, resulting in a series of services: Science Citation Index (1955- ), Social Sciences Citation Index (1966- ), and the Arts & Humanities Index (1976- ). All three appear in printed versions and as machine-readable databases. In the following essay, the first in a series of articles and books elucidating the citation indexing system, Garfield traces the origin and beginning of this idea, its advantages, and the methods of preparing such indexes.