Search (11 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Cronin, B."
  1. Cronin, B.; Meho, L.I.: ¬The shifting balance of intellectual trade in information studies (2008) 0.04
    0.039208744 = product of:
      0.15683497 = sum of:
        0.059237804 = weight(_text_:case in 1377) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.059237804 = score(doc=1377,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1742197 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.3964143 = idf(docFreq=1480, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03962768 = queryNorm
            0.34001783 = fieldWeight in 1377, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.3964143 = idf(docFreq=1480, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1377)
        0.09759717 = weight(_text_:studies in 1377) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09759717 = score(doc=1377,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.15812531 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9902744 = idf(docFreq=2222, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03962768 = queryNorm
            0.6172141 = fieldWeight in 1377, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              3.9902744 = idf(docFreq=2222, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1377)
      0.25 = coord(2/8)
    
    Abstract
    The authors describe a large-scale, longitudinal citation analysis of intellectual trading between information studies and cognate disciplines. The results of their investigation reveal the extent to which information studies draws on and, in turn, contributes to the ideational substrates of other academic domains. Their data show that the field has become a more successful exporter of ideas as well as less introverted than was previously the case. In the last decade, information studies has begun to contribute significantly to the literatures of such disciplines as computer science and engineering on the one hand and business and management on the other, while also drawing more heavily on those same literatures.
  2. Snyder, H.; Cronin, B.; Davenport, E.: What's the use of citation? : Citation analysis as a literature topic in selected disciplines of the social sciences (1995) 0.02
    0.021875493 = product of:
      0.08750197 = sum of:
        0.02834915 = weight(_text_:libraries in 1825) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02834915 = score(doc=1825,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13017908 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03962768 = queryNorm
            0.2177704 = fieldWeight in 1825, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1825)
        0.05915282 = weight(_text_:studies in 1825) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05915282 = score(doc=1825,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.15812531 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9902744 = idf(docFreq=2222, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03962768 = queryNorm
            0.37408823 = fieldWeight in 1825, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.9902744 = idf(docFreq=2222, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1825)
      0.25 = coord(2/8)
    
    Abstract
    Reports results of a study to investigate the place and role of citation analysis in selected disciplines in the social sciences, including library and information science. 5 core library and information science periodicals: Journal of documentation; Library quarterly; Journal of the American Society for Information Science; College and research libraries; and the Journal of information science, were studed to determine the percentage of articles devoted to citation analysis and develop an indictive typology to categorize the major foci of research being conducted under the rubric of citation analysis. Similar analysis was conducted for periodicals in other social sciences disciplines. Demonstrates how the rubric can be used to dertermine how citatiion analysis is applied within library and information science and other disciplines. By isolating citation from bibliometrics in general, this work is differentiated from other, previous studies. Analysis of data from a 10 year sample of transdisciplinary social sciences literature suggests that 2 application areas predominate: the validity of citation as an evaluation tool; and impact or performance studies of authors, periodicals, and institutions
  3. Cronin, B.: ¬The sociological turn in information science (2009) 0.01
    0.009858803 = product of:
      0.07887042 = sum of:
        0.07887042 = weight(_text_:studies in 3655) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07887042 = score(doc=3655,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.15812531 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9902744 = idf(docFreq=2222, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03962768 = queryNorm
            0.4987843 = fieldWeight in 3655, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.9902744 = idf(docFreq=2222, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3655)
      0.125 = coord(1/8)
    
    Abstract
    This paper explores the history of 'the social' in information science. It traces the influence of social scientific thinking on the development of the field's intellectual base. The continuing appropriation of both theoretical and methodological insights from domains such as social studies of science, science and technology studies, and socio-technical systems is discussed.
  4. Cronin, B.; Weaver-Wozniak, S.: Online access to acknowledgements (1993) 0.01
    0.0074047255 = product of:
      0.059237804 = sum of:
        0.059237804 = weight(_text_:case in 7827) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.059237804 = score(doc=7827,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1742197 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.3964143 = idf(docFreq=1480, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03962768 = queryNorm
            0.34001783 = fieldWeight in 7827, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.3964143 = idf(docFreq=1480, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=7827)
      0.125 = coord(1/8)
    
    Abstract
    Reviews the scale, range and consistency of acknowledgement behaviour, in citations, for a number of academic disciplines. The qualitative and quantitative evidence suggests a pervasive and consistent practice in which acknowledgements define a variety of social, cognitive and instrumental relationships between scholars and within and across disciplines. As such they may be used alongside other bibliometric indicators, such as citations, to map networks of influence. Considers the case for using acknowledgements data in the assessment of academic performance and proposes an online acknowledgement index to facilitate this process, perhaps as a logical extension of ISI's citation indexing products
  5. Cronin, B.; Shaw, D.: Banking (on) different forms of symbolic capital (2002) 0.01
    0.0069712265 = product of:
      0.055769812 = sum of:
        0.055769812 = weight(_text_:studies in 1263) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.055769812 = score(doc=1263,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15812531 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9902744 = idf(docFreq=2222, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03962768 = queryNorm
            0.35269377 = fieldWeight in 1263, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.9902744 = idf(docFreq=2222, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1263)
      0.125 = coord(1/8)
    
    Abstract
    The accrual of symbolic capital is an important aspect of academic life. Successful capital formation is commonly signified by the trappings of scholarly distinction or acknowledged status as a public intellectual. We consider and compare three potential indices of symbolic capital: citation counts, Web hits, and media mentions. Our Eindings, which are domain specific, suggest that public intellectuals are notable by their absence within the information studies community.
  6. Cronin, B.: Acknowledgement trends in the research literature of information science (2001) 0.01
    0.0069712265 = product of:
      0.055769812 = sum of:
        0.055769812 = weight(_text_:studies in 4488) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.055769812 = score(doc=4488,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15812531 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9902744 = idf(docFreq=2222, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03962768 = queryNorm
            0.35269377 = fieldWeight in 4488, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.9902744 = idf(docFreq=2222, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4488)
      0.125 = coord(1/8)
    
    Abstract
    Data were gathered on acknowledgements in five leading information science journals for the years 1991-1999. The results were compared with data from two earlier studies of the same journals. Analysis of the aggregate data (1971-1999) confirms the general impression that acknowledgement has become an institutionalised element of the scholarly communication process, reflecting the growing cognitive and structural complexity of contemporary research.
  7. Lee, C.J.; Sugimoto, C.R.; Zhang, G.; Cronin, B.: Bias in peer review (2013) 0.01
    0.00522842 = product of:
      0.04182736 = sum of:
        0.04182736 = weight(_text_:studies in 525) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04182736 = score(doc=525,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15812531 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9902744 = idf(docFreq=2222, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03962768 = queryNorm
            0.26452032 = fieldWeight in 525, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.9902744 = idf(docFreq=2222, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=525)
      0.125 = coord(1/8)
    
    Abstract
    Research on bias in peer review examines scholarly communication and funding processes to assess the epistemic and social legitimacy of the mechanisms by which knowledge communities vet and self-regulate their work. Despite vocal concerns, a closer look at the empirical and methodological limitations of research on bias raises questions about the existence and extent of many hypothesized forms of bias. In addition, the notion of bias is predicated on an implicit ideal that, once articulated, raises questions about the normative implications of research on bias in peer review. This review provides a brief description of the function, history, and scope of peer review; articulates and critiques the conception of bias unifying research on bias in peer review; characterizes and examines the empirical, methodological, and normative claims of bias in peer review research; and assesses possible alternatives to the status quo. We close by identifying ways to expand conceptions and studies of bias to contend with the complexity of social interactions among actors involved directly and indirectly in peer review.
  8. Cronin, B.: Vernacular and vehicular language (2009) 0.00
    0.004697878 = product of:
      0.037583023 = sum of:
        0.037583023 = product of:
          0.07516605 = sum of:
            0.07516605 = weight(_text_:22 in 7192) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.07516605 = score(doc=7192,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.13876937 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03962768 = queryNorm
                0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 7192, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=7192)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.125 = coord(1/8)
    
    Date
    22. 3.2009 11:44:11
  9. Cronin, B.: Thinking about data (2013) 0.00
    0.004697878 = product of:
      0.037583023 = sum of:
        0.037583023 = product of:
          0.07516605 = sum of:
            0.07516605 = weight(_text_:22 in 4347) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.07516605 = score(doc=4347,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.13876937 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03962768 = queryNorm
                0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 4347, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4347)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.125 = coord(1/8)
    
    Date
    22. 3.2013 16:18:36
  10. Cronin, B.: ¬The writing on the wall (2015) 0.00
    0.0040267524 = product of:
      0.03221402 = sum of:
        0.03221402 = product of:
          0.06442804 = sum of:
            0.06442804 = weight(_text_:22 in 7297) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.06442804 = score(doc=7297,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.13876937 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03962768 = queryNorm
                0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 7297, 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=7297)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.125 = coord(1/8)
    
    Date
    26. 4.2015 19:27:22
  11. Davenport, E.; Cronin, B.: Knowledge management : Semantic drift or conceptual shift? (2000) 0.00
    0.003355627 = product of:
      0.026845016 = sum of:
        0.026845016 = product of:
          0.05369003 = sum of:
            0.05369003 = weight(_text_:22 in 2277) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.05369003 = score(doc=2277,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.13876937 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03962768 = queryNorm
                0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 2277, 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=2277)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.125 = coord(1/8)
    
    Date
    31. 7.2001 20:22:57