-
Mingers, J.; Burrell, Q.L.: Modeling citation behavior in Management Science journals (2006)
0.07
0.0736098 = product of:
0.1472196 = sum of:
0.071168706 = weight(_text_:management in 994) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.071168706 = score(doc=994,freq=8.0), product of:
0.15925534 = queryWeight, product of:
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.047248192 = queryNorm
0.44688427 = fieldWeight in 994, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=994)
0.07605089 = sum of:
0.03764203 = weight(_text_:science in 994) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03764203 = score(doc=994,freq=6.0), product of:
0.124457374 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.047248192 = queryNorm
0.30244917 = fieldWeight in 994, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=994)
0.038408864 = weight(_text_:22 in 994) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.038408864 = score(doc=994,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16545512 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.047248192 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 994, 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=994)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Abstract
- Citation rates are becoming increasingly important in judging the research quality of journals, institutions and departments, and individual faculty. This paper looks at the pattern of citations across different management science journals and over time. A stochastic model is proposed which views the generating mechanism of citations as a gamma mixture of Poisson processes generating overall a negative binomial distribution. This is tested empirically with a large sample of papers published in 1990 from six management science journals and found to fit well. The model is extended to include obsolescence, i.e., that the citation rate for a paper varies over its cited lifetime. This leads to the additional citations distribution which shows that future citations are a linear function of past citations with a time-dependent and decreasing slope. This is also verified empirically in a way that allows different obsolescence functions to be fitted to the data. Conclusions concerning the predictability of future citations, and future research in this area are discussed.
- Date
- 26.12.2007 19:22:05
- Source
- Information processing and management. 42(2006) no.6, S.1451-1464
-
Nicolaisen, J.: Citation analysis (2007)
0.04
0.04009433 = product of:
0.16037732 = sum of:
0.16037732 = sum of:
0.057953686 = weight(_text_:science in 6091) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.057953686 = score(doc=6091,freq=2.0), product of:
0.124457374 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.047248192 = queryNorm
0.4656509 = fieldWeight in 6091, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=6091)
0.102423646 = weight(_text_:22 in 6091) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.102423646 = score(doc=6091,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16545512 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.047248192 = 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)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Date
- 13. 7.2008 19:53:22
- Source
- Annual review of information science and technology. 41(2007), S.xxx-xxx
-
Marion, L.S.; McCain, K.W.: Contrasting views of software engineering journals : author cocitation choices and indexer vocabulary assignments (2001)
0.03
0.033522885 = product of:
0.06704577 = sum of:
0.05136159 = weight(_text_:management in 5767) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05136159 = score(doc=5767,freq=6.0), product of:
0.15925534 = queryWeight, product of:
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.047248192 = queryNorm
0.32251096 = fieldWeight in 5767, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5767)
0.015684178 = product of:
0.031368356 = sum of:
0.031368356 = weight(_text_:science in 5767) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.031368356 = score(doc=5767,freq=6.0), product of:
0.124457374 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.047248192 = queryNorm
0.25204095 = fieldWeight in 5767, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5767)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Abstract
- We explore the intellectual subject structure and research themes in software engineering through the identification and analysis of a core journal literature. We examine this literature via two expert perspectives: that of the author, who identified significant work by citing it (journal cocitation analysis), and that of the professional indexer, who tags published work with subject terms to facilitate retrieval from a bibliographic database (subject profile analysis). The data sources are SCISEARCH (the on-line version of Science Citation Index), and INSPEC (a database covering software engineering, computer science, and information systems). We use data visualization tools (cluster analysis, multidimensional scaling, and PFNets) to show the "intellectual maps" of software engineering. Cocitation and subject profile analyses demonstrate that software engineering is a distinct interdisciplinary field, valuing practical and applied aspects, and spanning a subject continuum from "programming-in-the-smalI" to "programming-in-the-large." This continuum mirrors the software development life cycle by taking the operating system or major application from initial programming through project management, implementation, and maintenance. Object orientation is an integral but distinct subject area in software engineering. Key differences are the importance of management and programming: (1) cocitation analysis emphasizes project management and systems development; (2) programming techniques/languages are more influential in subject profiles; (3) cocitation profiles place object-oriented journals separately and centrally while the subject profile analysis locates these journals with the programming/languages group
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and technology. 52(2001) no.4, S.297-308
-
Pao, M.L.: Term and citation retrieval : a field study (1993)
0.03
0.030967113 = product of:
0.061934225 = sum of:
0.047445804 = weight(_text_:management in 3741) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.047445804 = score(doc=3741,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15925534 = queryWeight, product of:
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.047248192 = queryNorm
0.29792285 = fieldWeight in 3741, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3741)
0.014488421 = product of:
0.028976843 = sum of:
0.028976843 = weight(_text_:science in 3741) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.028976843 = score(doc=3741,freq=2.0), product of:
0.124457374 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.047248192 = queryNorm
0.23282544 = fieldWeight in 3741, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3741)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Abstract
- Investigates the relative efficacy of searching by terms and by citations in searches collected in health science libraries. In pilot and field studies the odds that overlap items retrieved would be relevant or partially relevant were greatly improved. In the field setting citation searching was able to add average of 24% recall to traditional subject retrieval. Attempts to identify distinguishing characteristics in queries which might benefit most from additional citation searches proved inclusive. Online access of citation databases has been hampered by their high cost
- Source
- Information processing and management. 29(1993) no.1, S.95-112
-
Garfield, E.; Stock, W.G.: Citation Consciousness : Interview with Eugene Garfiels, chairman emeritus of ISI; Philadelphia (2002)
0.03
0.028809771 = product of:
0.115239084 = sum of:
0.115239084 = sum of:
0.051224306 = weight(_text_:science in 613) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.051224306 = score(doc=613,freq=4.0), product of:
0.124457374 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.047248192 = queryNorm
0.41158113 = fieldWeight in 613, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=613)
0.06401478 = weight(_text_:22 in 613) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06401478 = score(doc=613,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16545512 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.047248192 = 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)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- 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
-
Ma, N.; Guan, J.; Zhao, Y.: Bringing PageRank to the citation analysis (2008)
0.03
0.027394392 = product of:
0.054788783 = sum of:
0.035584353 = weight(_text_:management in 2064) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.035584353 = score(doc=2064,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15925534 = queryWeight, product of:
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.047248192 = queryNorm
0.22344214 = fieldWeight in 2064, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2064)
0.019204432 = product of:
0.038408864 = sum of:
0.038408864 = weight(_text_:22 in 2064) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.038408864 = score(doc=2064,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16545512 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.047248192 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2064, 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=2064)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Date
- 31. 7.2008 14:22:05
- Source
- Information processing and management. 44(2008) no.2, S.800-810
-
Marshakova-Shaikevich, I.: Bibliometric maps of field of science (2005)
0.03
0.027202684 = product of:
0.05440537 = sum of:
0.035584353 = weight(_text_:management in 1069) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.035584353 = score(doc=1069,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15925534 = queryWeight, product of:
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.047248192 = queryNorm
0.22344214 = fieldWeight in 1069, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1069)
0.018821014 = product of:
0.03764203 = sum of:
0.03764203 = weight(_text_:science in 1069) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03764203 = score(doc=1069,freq=6.0), product of:
0.124457374 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.047248192 = queryNorm
0.30244917 = fieldWeight in 1069, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1069)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Abstract
- The present paper is devoted to two directions in algorithmic classificatory procedures: the journal co-citation analysis as an example of citation networks and lexical analysis of keywords in the titles and texts. What is common to those approaches is the general idea of normalization of deviations of the observed data from the mathematical expectation. The application of the same formula leads to discovery of statistically significant links between objects (journals in one case, keywords - in the other). The results of the journal co-citation analysis are reflected in tables and map for field "Women's Studies" and for field "Information Science and Library Science". An experimental attempt at establishing textual links between words was carried out on two samples from SSCI Data base: (1) EDUCATION and (2) ETHICS. The EDUCATION file included 2180 documents (of which 751 had abstracts); the ETHICS file included 807 documents (289 abstracts). Some examples of the results of this pilot study are given in tabular form . The binary links between words discovered in this way may form triplets or other groups with more than two member words.
- Source
- Information processing and management. 41(2005) no.6, S.1534-1547
-
Zhao, D.: Challenges of scholarly publications on the Web to the evaluation of science : a comparison of author visibility on the Web and in print journals (2005)
0.03
0.027096223 = product of:
0.054192446 = sum of:
0.04151508 = weight(_text_:management in 1065) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04151508 = score(doc=1065,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15925534 = queryWeight, product of:
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.047248192 = queryNorm
0.2606825 = fieldWeight in 1065, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1065)
0.01267737 = product of:
0.02535474 = sum of:
0.02535474 = weight(_text_:science in 1065) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02535474 = score(doc=1065,freq=2.0), product of:
0.124457374 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.047248192 = queryNorm
0.20372227 = fieldWeight in 1065, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1065)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Source
- Information processing and management. 41(2005) no.6, S.1403-1418
-
Trivison, D.: Term co-occurrence in cited/citing journal articles as a measure of document similarity (1987)
0.02
0.023722902 = product of:
0.09489161 = sum of:
0.09489161 = weight(_text_:management in 5656) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09489161 = score(doc=5656,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15925534 = queryWeight, product of:
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.047248192 = queryNorm
0.5958457 = fieldWeight in 5656, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=5656)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Source
- Information processing and management. 23(1987), S.183-194
-
Sidiropoulos, A.; Manolopoulos, Y.: ¬A new perspective to automatically rank scientific conferences using digital libraries (2005)
0.02
0.023225334 = product of:
0.046450667 = sum of:
0.035584353 = weight(_text_:management in 1011) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.035584353 = score(doc=1011,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15925534 = queryWeight, product of:
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.047248192 = queryNorm
0.22344214 = fieldWeight in 1011, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1011)
0.010866316 = product of:
0.021732632 = sum of:
0.021732632 = weight(_text_:science in 1011) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.021732632 = score(doc=1011,freq=2.0), product of:
0.124457374 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.047248192 = queryNorm
0.17461908 = fieldWeight in 1011, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1011)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Abstract
- Citation analysis is performed in order to evaluate authors and scientific collections, such as journals and conference proceedings. Currently, two major systems exist that perform citation analysis: Science Citation Index (SCI) by the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI) and CiteSeer by the NEC Research Institute. The SCI, mostly a manual system up until recently, is based on the notion of the ISI Impact Factor, which has been used extensively for citation analysis purposes. On the other hand the CiteSeer system is an automatically built digital library using agents technology, also based on the notion of ISI Impact Factor. In this paper, we investigate new alternative notions besides the ISI impact factor, in order to provide a novel approach aiming at ranking scientific collections. Furthermore, we present a web-based system that has been built by extracting data from the Databases and Logic Programming (DBLP) website of the University of Trier. Our system, by using the new citation metrics, emerges as a useful tool for ranking scientific collections. In this respect, some first remarks are presented, e.g. on ranking conferences related to databases.
- Source
- Information processing and management. 41(2005) no.2, S.289-312
-
Garfield, E.: Recollections of Irving H. Sher 1924-1996 : Polymath/information scientist extraordinaire (2001)
0.02
0.02218151 = product of:
0.08872604 = sum of:
0.08872604 = sum of:
0.0439157 = weight(_text_:science in 6920) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0439157 = score(doc=6920,freq=6.0), product of:
0.124457374 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.047248192 = queryNorm
0.35285735 = fieldWeight in 6920, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6920)
0.044810344 = weight(_text_:22 in 6920) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.044810344 = score(doc=6920,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16545512 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.047248192 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 6920, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6920)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Abstract
- Over a 35-year period, Irving H. Sher played a critical role in the development and implementation of the Science Citation Index and other ISI products. Trained as a biochemist, statistician, and linguist, Sher brought a unique combination of talents to ISI as Director of Quality Control and Director of Research and Development. His talents as a teacher and mentor evoked loyalty. He was a particularly inventive but self-taught programmer. In addition to the SCI, Social Sciences Citation Index, and Arts and Humanities Citation Index,
- Date
- 16.12.2001 14:01:22
- Object
- Science Citation Index
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and technology. 52(2001) no.14, S.1197-1202
-
Moed, H.F.; Leeuwen, T.N. van; Reedijk, J.: ¬A new classification system to describe the ageing of scientific journals and their impact factors (1998)
0.02
0.021897057 = product of:
0.043794114 = sum of:
0.033549253 = weight(_text_:management in 4719) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.033549253 = score(doc=4719,freq=4.0), product of:
0.15925534 = queryWeight, product of:
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.047248192 = queryNorm
0.21066327 = fieldWeight in 4719, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4719)
0.010244861 = product of:
0.020489722 = sum of:
0.020489722 = weight(_text_:science in 4719) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.020489722 = score(doc=4719,freq=4.0), product of:
0.124457374 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.047248192 = queryNorm
0.16463245 = fieldWeight in 4719, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4719)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Abstract
- During the past decades, journal impact data obtained from the Journal Citation Reports (JCR) have gained relevance in library management, research management and research evaluation. Hence, both information scientists and bibliometricians share the responsibility towards the users of the JCR to analyse the reliability and validity of its measures thoroughly, to indicate pitfalls and to suggest possible improvements. In this article, ageing patterns are examined in 'formal' use or impact of all scientific journals processed for the Science Citation Index (SCI) during 1981-1995. A new classification system of journals in terms of their ageing characteristics is introduced. This system has been applied to as many as 3,098 journals covered by the Science Citation Index. Following an earlier suggestion by Glnzel and Schoepflin, a maturing and a decline phase are distinguished. From an analysis across all subfields it has been concluded that ageing characteristics are primarily specific to the individual journal rather than to the subfield, while the distribution of journals in terms of slowly or rapidly maturing or declining types is specific to the subfield. It is shown that the cited half life (CHL), printed in the JCR, is an inappropriate measure of decline of journal impact. Following earlier work by Line and others, a more adequate parameter of decline is calculated taking into account the size of annual volumes during a range of fifteen years. For 76 per cent of SCI journals the relative difference between this new parameter and the ISI CHL exceeds 5 per cent. The current JCR journal impact factor is proven to be biased towards journals revealing a rapid maturing and decline in impact. Therefore, a longer term impact factor is proposed, as well as a normalised impact statistic, taking into account citation characteristics of the research subfield covered by a journal and the type of documents published in it. When these new measures are combined with the proposed ageing classification system, they provide a significantly improved picture of a journal's impact to that obtained from the JCR.
-
De Bellis, N.: Bibliometrics and citation analysis : from the Science citation index to cybermetrics (2008)
0.02
0.021444641 = product of:
0.042889282 = sum of:
0.023722902 = weight(_text_:management in 3585) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023722902 = score(doc=3585,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15925534 = queryWeight, product of:
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.047248192 = queryNorm
0.14896142 = fieldWeight in 3585, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3585)
0.019166382 = product of:
0.038332764 = sum of:
0.038332764 = weight(_text_:science in 3585) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.038332764 = score(doc=3585,freq=14.0), product of:
0.124457374 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.047248192 = queryNorm
0.30799913 = fieldWeight in 3585, product of:
3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
14.0 = termFreq=14.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3585)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- 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.
- LCSH
- Information science / Statistical methods
- Object
- Science Citation Index
- Subject
- Information science / Statistical methods
-
Larivière, V.; Gingras, Y.; Archambault, E.: ¬The decline in the concentration of citations, 1900-2007 (2009)
0.02
0.021263232 = product of:
0.08505293 = sum of:
0.08505293 = sum of:
0.030734586 = weight(_text_:science in 2763) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030734586 = score(doc=2763,freq=4.0), product of:
0.124457374 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.047248192 = queryNorm
0.24694869 = fieldWeight in 2763, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2763)
0.054318342 = weight(_text_:22 in 2763) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.054318342 = score(doc=2763,freq=4.0), product of:
0.16545512 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.047248192 = 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)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- 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
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 60(2009) no.4, S.858-862
-
Kwok, K.L.: ¬The use of titles and cited titles as document representations for automatic classification (1975)
0.02
0.02075754 = product of:
0.08303016 = sum of:
0.08303016 = weight(_text_:management in 4347) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08303016 = score(doc=4347,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15925534 = queryWeight, product of:
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.047248192 = queryNorm
0.521365 = fieldWeight in 4347, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4347)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Source
- Information processing and management. 11(1975), S.201-206
-
He, Y.; Hui, S.C.: Mining a web database for author cocitation analysis (2002)
0.02
0.02075754 = product of:
0.08303016 = sum of:
0.08303016 = weight(_text_:management in 2584) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08303016 = score(doc=2584,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15925534 = queryWeight, product of:
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.047248192 = queryNorm
0.521365 = fieldWeight in 2584, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=2584)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Source
- Information processing and management. 38(2002) no.4, S.491-508
-
Tay, A.: ¬The next generation discovery citation indexes : a review of the landscape in 2020 (2020)
0.02
0.02016684 = product of:
0.08066736 = sum of:
0.08066736 = sum of:
0.035857014 = weight(_text_:science in 40) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.035857014 = score(doc=40,freq=4.0), product of:
0.124457374 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.047248192 = queryNorm
0.2881068 = fieldWeight in 40, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=40)
0.044810344 = weight(_text_:22 in 40) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.044810344 = score(doc=40,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16545512 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.047248192 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 40, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=40)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Abstract
- Conclusion There is a reason why Google Scholar and Web of Science/Scopus are kings of the hills in their various arenas. They have strong brand recogniton, a head start in development and a mass of eyeballs and users that leads to an almost virtious cycle of improvement. Competing against such well established competitors is not easy even when one has deep pockets (Microsoft) or a killer idea (scite). It will be interesting to see how the landscape will look like in 2030. Stay tuned for part II where I review each particular index.
- Date
- 17.11.2020 12:22:59
- Object
- Web of Science
-
Joint, N.: Bemused by bibliometrics : using citation analysis to evaluate research quality (2008)
0.02
0.019354446 = product of:
0.03870889 = sum of:
0.029653627 = weight(_text_:management in 1900) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.029653627 = score(doc=1900,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15925534 = queryWeight, product of:
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.047248192 = queryNorm
0.18620178 = fieldWeight in 1900, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1900)
0.009055263 = product of:
0.018110527 = sum of:
0.018110527 = weight(_text_:science in 1900) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.018110527 = score(doc=1900,freq=2.0), product of:
0.124457374 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.047248192 = queryNorm
0.1455159 = fieldWeight in 1900, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1900)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Abstract
- Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to examine the way in which library and information science (LIS) issues have been handled in the formulation of recent UK Higher Education policy concerned with research quality evaluation. Design/methodology/approach - A chronological review of decision making about digital rights arrangements for the 2008 Research Assessment Exercise (RAE), and of recent announcements about the new shape of metrics-based assessment in the Research Excellence Framework, which supersedes the RAE. Against this chronological framework, the likely nature of LIS practitioner reactions to the flow of decision making is suggested. Findings - It was found that a weak grasp of LIS issues by decision makers undermines the process whereby effective research evaluation models are created. LIS professional opinion should be sampled before key decisions are made. Research limitations/implications - This paper makes no sophisticated comments on the complex research issues underlying advanced bibliometric research evaluation models. It does point out that sophisticated and expensive bibliometric consultancies arrive at many conclusions about metrics-based research assessment that are common knowledge amongst LIS practitioners. Practical implications - Practical difficulties arise when one announces a decision to move to a new and specific type of research evaluation indicator before one has worked out anything very specific about that indicator. Originality/value - In this paper, the importance of information management issues to the mainstream issues of government and public administration is underlined. The most valuable conclusion of this paper is that, because LIS issues are now at the heart of democratic decision making, LIS practitioners and professionals should be given some sort of role in advising on such matters.
-
H-Index auch im Web of Science (2008)
0.02
0.019012723 = product of:
0.07605089 = sum of:
0.07605089 = sum of:
0.03764203 = weight(_text_:science in 590) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03764203 = score(doc=590,freq=6.0), product of:
0.124457374 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.047248192 = queryNorm
0.30244917 = fieldWeight in 590, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=590)
0.038408864 = weight(_text_:22 in 590) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.038408864 = score(doc=590,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16545512 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.047248192 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 590, 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=590)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Content
- "Zur Kurzmitteilung "Latest enhancements in Scopus: ... h-Index incorporated in Scopus" in den letzten Online-Mitteilungen (Online-Mitteilungen 92, S.31) ist zu korrigieren, dass der h-Index sehr wohl bereits im Web of Science enthalten ist. Allerdings findet man/frau diese Information nicht in der "cited ref search", sondern neben der Trefferliste einer Quick Search, General Search oder einer Suche über den Author Finder in der rechten Navigationsleiste unter dem Titel "Citation Report". Der "Citation Report" bietet für die in der jeweiligen Trefferliste angezeigten Arbeiten: - Die Gesamtzahl der Zitierungen aller Arbeiten in der Trefferliste - Die mittlere Zitationshäufigkeit dieser Arbeiten - Die Anzahl der Zitierungen der einzelnen Arbeiten, aufgeschlüsselt nach Publikationsjahr der zitierenden Arbeiten - Die mittlere Zitationshäufigkeit dieser Arbeiten pro Jahr - Den h-Index (ein h-Index von x sagt aus, dass x Arbeiten der Trefferliste mehr als x-mal zitiert wurden; er ist gegenüber sehr hohen Zitierungen einzelner Arbeiten unempfindlicher als die mittlere Zitationshäufigkeit)."
- Date
- 6. 4.2008 19:04:22
- Object
- Web of Science
-
Van der Veer Martens, B.; Goodrum, G.: ¬The diffusion of theories : a functional approach (2006)
0.02
0.01754127 = product of:
0.07016508 = sum of:
0.07016508 = sum of:
0.02535474 = weight(_text_:science in 5269) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02535474 = score(doc=5269,freq=2.0), product of:
0.124457374 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.047248192 = queryNorm
0.20372227 = fieldWeight in 5269, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5269)
0.044810344 = weight(_text_:22 in 5269) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.044810344 = score(doc=5269,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16545512 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.047248192 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 5269, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5269)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
- Date
- 22. 7.2006 15:20:01
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 57(2006) no.3, S.330-341
