Search (437 results, page 1 of 22)

  • × theme_ss:"Elektronisches Publizieren"
  1. Hars, A.: From publishing to knowledge networks : reinventing online knowledge infrastructures (2003) 0.10 
    0.09800392 = product of:
  0.35934767 = sum of:
    0.011426214 = weight(_text_:of in 1634) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011426214 = score(doc=1634,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.053998582 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034531306 = queryNorm
        0.21160212 = fieldWeight in 1634, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1634)
    0.13191845 = weight(_text_:technological in 1634) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.13191845 = score(doc=1634,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.18347798 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.3133807 = idf(docFreq=591, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034531306 = queryNorm
        0.7189879 = fieldWeight in 1634, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          5.3133807 = idf(docFreq=591, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1634)
    0.21600302 = weight(_text_:innovations in 1634) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.21600302 = score(doc=1634,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.23478 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.7990475 = idf(docFreq=133, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034531306 = queryNorm
        0.9200231 = fieldWeight in 1634, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          6.7990475 = idf(docFreq=133, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1634)
  0.27272728 = coord(3/11)
    Abstract
    Today's publishing infrastructure is rapidly changing. As electronic journals, digital libraries, collaboratories, logic servers, and other knowledge infrastructures emerge an the internet, the key aspects of this transformation need to be identified. Knowledge is becoming increasingly dynamic and integrated. Instead of writing self-contained articles, authors are turning to the new practice of embedding their findings into dynamic networks of knowledge. Here, the author details the implications that this transformation is having an the creation, dissemination and organization of academic knowledge. The author Shows that many established publishing principles need to be given up in order to facilitate this transformation. The text provides valuable insights for knowledge managers, designers of internet-based knowledge infrastructures, and professionals in the publishing industry. Researchers will find the scenarios and implications for research processes stimulating and thought-provoking.
    LCSH
    Science publishing / Technological innovations
    Communication in science / Technological innovations
    Learning and scholarship / Technological innovations
    Subject
    Science publishing / Technological innovations
    Communication in science / Technological innovations
    Learning and scholarship / Technological innovations
  2. Wakeling, S.; Spezi, V.; Fry, J.; Creaser, C.; Pinfield, S.; Willett, P.: Academic communities : the role of journals and open-access mega-journals in scholarly communication (2019) 0.09 
    0.08819861 = product of:
  0.19403693 = sum of:
    0.05263353 = weight(_text_:higher in 4627) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05263353 = score(doc=4627,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18138453 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.252756 = idf(docFreq=628, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034531306 = queryNorm
        0.2901765 = fieldWeight in 4627, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.252756 = idf(docFreq=628, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4627)
    0.014751178 = weight(_text_:of in 4627) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014751178 = score(doc=4627,freq=20.0), product of:
        0.053998582 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034531306 = queryNorm
        0.27317715 = fieldWeight in 4627, product of:
          4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
            20.0 = termFreq=20.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4627)
    0.013050207 = weight(_text_:on in 4627) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013050207 = score(doc=4627,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.07594867 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034531306 = queryNorm
        0.1718293 = fieldWeight in 4627, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4627)
    0.060481843 = weight(_text_:great in 4627) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.060481843 = score(doc=4627,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19443816 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034531306 = queryNorm
        0.31105953 = fieldWeight in 4627, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4627)
    0.053120166 = product of:
      0.10624033 = sum of:
        0.10624033 = weight(_text_:britain in 4627) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10624033 = score(doc=4627,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25769958 = queryWeight, product of:
              7.462781 = idf(docFreq=68, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.4122643 = fieldWeight in 4627, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              7.462781 = idf(docFreq=68, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4627)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.45454547 = coord(5/11)
    Abstract
    Purpose The purpose of this paper is to provide insights into publication practices from the perspective of academics working within four disciplinary communities: biosciences, astronomy/physics, education and history. The paper explores the ways in which these multiple overlapping communities intersect with the journal landscape and the implications for the adoption and use of new players in the scholarly communication system, particularly open-access mega-journals (OAMJs). OAMJs (e.g. PLOS ONE and Scientific Reports) are large, broad scope, open-access journals that base editorial decisions solely on the technical/scientific soundness of the article. Design/methodology/approach Focus groups with active researchers in these fields were held in five UK Higher Education Institutions across Great Britain, and were complemented by interviews with pro-vice-chancellors for research at each institution. Findings A strong finding to emerge from the data is the notion of researchers belonging to multiple overlapping communities, with some inherent tensions in meeting the requirements for these different audiences. Researcher perceptions of evaluation mechanisms were found to play a major role in attitudes towards OAMJs, and interviews with the pro-vice-chancellors for research indicate that there is a difference between researchers' perceptions and the values embedded in institutional frameworks. Originality/value This is the first purely qualitative study relating to researcher perspectives on OAMJs. The findings of the paper will be of interest to publishers, policy-makers, research managers and academics.
    Source
    Journal of documentation. 75(2019) no.1, S.120-139
  3. Internet publishing and beyond : the economics of digital information and intellectual property ; a publication of the Harvard Information Infrastructure Project in collab. with the School of Information Management and Systems at the Univ. of California at Berkeley (2000) 0.08 
    0.08025896 = product of:
  0.29428282 = sum of:
    0.0130612515 = weight(_text_:of in 526) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0130612515 = score(doc=526,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.053998582 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034531306 = queryNorm
        0.24188137 = fieldWeight in 526, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=526)
    0.10662842 = weight(_text_:technological in 526) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10662842 = score(doc=526,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.18347798 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.3133807 = idf(docFreq=591, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034531306 = queryNorm
        0.581151 = fieldWeight in 526, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.3133807 = idf(docFreq=591, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=526)
    0.17459315 = weight(_text_:innovations in 526) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.17459315 = score(doc=526,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.23478 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.7990475 = idf(docFreq=133, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034531306 = queryNorm
        0.7436458 = fieldWeight in 526, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          6.7990475 = idf(docFreq=133, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=526)
  0.27272728 = coord(3/11)
    LCSH
    Technological innovations / Economic aspects
    Subject
    Technological innovations / Economic aspects
  4. Mountifield, H.M.; Brakel, P.A. v.: Network-based electronic journals : a new source of information (1994) 0.08 
    0.07854047 = product of:
  0.21598628 = sum of:
    0.018281942 = weight(_text_:of in 8419) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.018281942 = score(doc=8419,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.053998582 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034531306 = queryNorm
        0.33856338 = fieldWeight in 8419, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=8419)
    0.08616877 = weight(_text_:technological in 8419) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08616877 = score(doc=8419,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18347798 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.3133807 = idf(docFreq=591, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034531306 = queryNorm
        0.46964094 = fieldWeight in 8419, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.3133807 = idf(docFreq=591, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=8419)
    0.014764623 = weight(_text_:on in 8419) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014764623 = score(doc=8419,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.07594867 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034531306 = queryNorm
        0.19440265 = fieldWeight in 8419, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=8419)
    0.09677095 = weight(_text_:great in 8419) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09677095 = score(doc=8419,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19443816 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034531306 = queryNorm
        0.49769527 = fieldWeight in 8419, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=8419)
  0.36363637 = coord(4/11)
    Abstract
    An alternative publishing system for scholarly communication and information is emerging on international computer networks such as Internet and Bitnet. This is evident as a growing number of electronic periodicals (e-journals) provide scholarly articles, columns and reviews and have advantages over print publications, such as the speed of publication and dissemination. Electronic periodicals hold great promise, but technological problems and academic acceptance could limit their effectiveness. Some examples of electronic periodicals were investigated as well as the advantages and problems currently associated with this new source of information
    Source
    South African journal of library and information science. 62(1994) no.1, S.28-33
  5. Martin, K.; Quan-Haase, A.: Are e-books replacing print books? : tradition, serendipity, and opportunity in the adoption and use of e-books for historical research and teaching (2013) 0.07 
    0.07463513 = product of:
  0.20524661 = sum of:
    0.01745383 = weight(_text_:of in 748) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01745383 = score(doc=748,freq=28.0), product of:
        0.053998582 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034531306 = queryNorm
        0.32322758 = fieldWeight in 748, product of:
          5.2915025 = tf(freq=28.0), with freq of:
            28.0 = termFreq=28.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=748)
    0.053855482 = weight(_text_:technological in 748) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.053855482 = score(doc=748,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18347798 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.3133807 = idf(docFreq=591, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034531306 = queryNorm
        0.29352558 = fieldWeight in 748, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.3133807 = idf(docFreq=591, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=748)
    0.12470941 = weight(_text_:innovations in 748) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.12470941 = score(doc=748,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.23478 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.7990475 = idf(docFreq=133, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034531306 = queryNorm
        0.5311756 = fieldWeight in 748, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          6.7990475 = idf(docFreq=133, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=748)
    0.009227889 = weight(_text_:on in 748) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009227889 = score(doc=748,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.07594867 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034531306 = queryNorm
        0.121501654 = fieldWeight in 748, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=748)
  0.36363637 = coord(4/11)
    Abstract
    This article aims to understand the adoption of e-books by academic historians for the purpose of teaching and research. This includes an investigation into their knowledge about and perceived characteristics of this evolving research tool. The study relied on Rogers's model of the innovation-decision process to guide the development of an interview guide. Ten semistructured interviews were conducted with history faculty between October 2010 and December 2011. A grounded theory approach was employed to code and analyze the data. Findings about tradition, cost, teaching innovations, and the historical research process provide the background for designing learning opportunities for the professional development of historians and the academic librarians who work with them. While historians are open to experimenting with e-books, they are also concerned about the loss of serendipity in digital environments, the lack of availability of key resources, and the need for technological transparency. The findings show that Rogers's knowledge and persuasion stages are cyclical in nature, with scholars moving back and forth between these two stages. Participants interviewed were already weighing the five characteristics of the persuasion stage without having much knowledge about e-books. The study findings have implications for our understanding of the diffusion of innovations in academia: both print and digital collections are being used in parallel without one replacing the other.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 64(2013) no.5, S.1016-1028
  6. Zhang, Y.: ¬The effect of open access on citation impact : a comparison study based on Web citation analysis (2006) 0.06 
    0.06378719 = product of:
  0.17541477 = sum of:
    0.091163956 = weight(_text_:higher in 5071) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.091163956 = score(doc=5071,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.18138453 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.252756 = idf(docFreq=628, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034531306 = queryNorm
        0.5026005 = fieldWeight in 5071, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          5.252756 = idf(docFreq=628, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5071)
    0.053516448 = weight(_text_:effect in 5071) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.053516448 = score(doc=5071,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18289955 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034531306 = queryNorm
        0.2926002 = fieldWeight in 5071, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5071)
    0.014751178 = weight(_text_:of in 5071) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014751178 = score(doc=5071,freq=20.0), product of:
        0.053998582 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034531306 = queryNorm
        0.27317715 = fieldWeight in 5071, product of:
          4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
            20.0 = termFreq=20.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5071)
    0.015983174 = weight(_text_:on in 5071) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015983174 = score(doc=5071,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.07594867 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034531306 = queryNorm
        0.21044704 = fieldWeight in 5071, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5071)
  0.36363637 = coord(4/11)
    Abstract
    The academic impact advantage of Open Access (OA) is a prominent topic of debate in the library and publishing communities. Web citations have been proposed as comparable to, even replacements for, bibliographic citations in assessing the academic impact of journals. In our study, we compare Web citations to articles in an OA journal, the Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication (JCMC), and a traditional access journal, New Media & Society (NMS), in the communication discipline. Web citation counts for JCMC are significantly higher than those for NMS. Furthermore, JCMC receives significantly higher Web citations from the formal scholarly publications posted on the Web than NMS does. The types of Web citations for journal articles were also examined. In the Web context, the impact of a journal can be assessed using more than one type of source: citations from scholarly articles, teaching materials and non-authoritative documents. The OA journal has higher percentages of citations from the third type, which suggests that, in addition to the research community, the impact advantage of open access is also detectable among ordinary users participating in Web-based academic communication. Moreover, our study also proves that the OA journal has impact advantage in developing countries. Compared with NMS, JCMC has more Web citations from developing countries.
  7. Arnold, K.: Virtual transformation : the evolution of publication media (1995) 0.05 
    0.051665734 = product of:
  0.18944103 = sum of:
    0.01865893 = weight(_text_:of in 2441) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01865893 = score(doc=2441,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.053998582 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034531306 = queryNorm
        0.34554482 = fieldWeight in 2441, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2441)
    0.15232632 = weight(_text_:technological in 2441) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.15232632 = score(doc=2441,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.18347798 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.3133807 = idf(docFreq=591, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034531306 = queryNorm
        0.83021575 = fieldWeight in 2441, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.3133807 = idf(docFreq=591, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2441)
    0.018455777 = weight(_text_:on in 2441) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.018455777 = score(doc=2441,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.07594867 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034531306 = queryNorm
        0.24300331 = fieldWeight in 2441, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2441)
  0.27272728 = coord(3/11)
    Abstract
    Examines the developing publication forms in the elctronic environment in the light of recent critical perspectives on textuality, historical dimensions of technological change, and practical considerations of economic and political culture. The book in the networked future and transformed into something new, but impediments to change are cultural, not economical or technological
  8. Kim, L.; Portenoy, J.H.; West, J.D.; Stovel, K.W.: Scientific journals still matter in the era of academic search engines and preprint archives (2020) 0.05 
    0.050937064 = product of:
  0.14007692 = sum of:
    0.05263353 = weight(_text_:higher in 5961) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05263353 = score(doc=5961,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18138453 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.252756 = idf(docFreq=628, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034531306 = queryNorm
        0.2901765 = fieldWeight in 5961, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.252756 = idf(docFreq=628, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5961)
    0.053516448 = weight(_text_:effect in 5961) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.053516448 = score(doc=5961,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18289955 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034531306 = queryNorm
        0.2926002 = fieldWeight in 5961, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5961)
    0.015471167 = weight(_text_:of in 5961) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015471167 = score(doc=5961,freq=22.0), product of:
        0.053998582 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034531306 = queryNorm
        0.28651062 = fieldWeight in 5961, product of:
          4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
            22.0 = termFreq=22.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5961)
    0.018455777 = weight(_text_:on in 5961) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.018455777 = score(doc=5961,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.07594867 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034531306 = queryNorm
        0.24300331 = fieldWeight in 5961, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5961)
  0.36363637 = coord(4/11)
    Abstract
    Journals play a critical role in the scientific process because they evaluate the quality of incoming papers and offer an organizing filter for search. However, the role of journals has been called into question because new preprint archives and academic search engines make it easier to find articles independent of the journals that publish them. Research on this issue is complicated by the deeply confounded relationship between article quality and journal reputation. We present an innovative proxy for individual article quality that is divorced from the journal's reputation or impact factor: the number of citations to preprints posted on arXiv.org. Using this measure to study three subfields of physics that were early adopters of arXiv, we show that prior estimates of the effect of journal reputation on an individual article's impact (measured by citations) are likely inflated. While we find that higher-quality preprints in these subfields are now less likely to be published in journals compared to prior years, we find little systematic evidence that the role of journal reputation on article performance has declined.
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 71(2020) no.10, S.1218-1226
  9. Nelson, G.M.; Eggett, D.L.: Citations, mandates, and money : author motivations to publish in chemistry hybrid open access journals (2017) 0.05 
    0.04967938 = product of:
  0.13661829 = sum of:
    0.059548046 = weight(_text_:higher in 3838) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.059548046 = score(doc=3838,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.18138453 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.252756 = idf(docFreq=628, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034531306 = queryNorm
        0.32829726 = fieldWeight in 3838, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.252756 = idf(docFreq=628, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3838)
    0.060546953 = weight(_text_:effect in 3838) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.060546953 = score(doc=3838,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.18289955 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034531306 = queryNorm
        0.33103937 = fieldWeight in 3838, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3838)
    0.009140971 = weight(_text_:of in 3838) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009140971 = score(doc=3838,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.053998582 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034531306 = queryNorm
        0.16928169 = fieldWeight in 3838, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3838)
    0.0073823114 = weight(_text_:on in 3838) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0073823114 = score(doc=3838,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.07594867 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034531306 = queryNorm
        0.097201325 = fieldWeight in 3838, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3838)
  0.36363637 = coord(4/11)
    Abstract
    Hybrid open access refers to articles freely accessible via the Internet but which originate from an academic journal that provides most of its content via subscription. The effect of hybrid open access on citation counts and author behavior in the field of chemistry is something that has not been widely studied. We compared 814 open access articles and 27,621 subscription access articles published from 2006 through 2011 in American Chemical Society journals. As expected, the 2 comparison groups are not equal in all respects. Cumulative citation data were analyzed from years 2-5 following an article's publication date. A citation advantage for open access articles was correlated with the journal impact factor (IF) in low and medium IF journals, but not in high IF journals. Open access articles have a 24% higher mean citation rate than their subscription counterparts in low IF journals (confidence limits 8-42%, p = .0022) and similarly, a 26% higher mean citation rate in medium IF journals (confidence limits 14-40%, p < .001). Open access articles in high IF journals had no significant difference compared to subscription access articles (13% lower mean citation rate, confidence limits -27-3%, p = .10). These results are correlative, not causative, and may not be completely due to an open access effect. Authors of the open access articles were also surveyed to determine why they chose a hybrid open access option, paid the required article processing charge, and whether they believed it was money well spent. Authors primarily chose open access because of funding mandates; however, most considered the money well spent because open access increases information access to the scientific community and the general public, and potentially increases citations to their scholarship.
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 68(2017) no.10, S.2501-2510
  10. Weibel, S.: ¬An architecture for scholarly publishing on the World Wide Web (1995) 0.05 
    0.048011743 = product of:
  0.13203229 = sum of:
    0.08562632 = weight(_text_:effect in 4555) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08562632 = score(doc=4555,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18289955 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034531306 = queryNorm
        0.46816036 = fieldWeight in 4555, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4555)
    0.012927286 = weight(_text_:of in 4555) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012927286 = score(doc=4555,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.053998582 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034531306 = queryNorm
        0.23940048 = fieldWeight in 4555, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4555)
    0.014764623 = weight(_text_:on in 4555) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014764623 = score(doc=4555,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.07594867 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034531306 = queryNorm
        0.19440265 = fieldWeight in 4555, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4555)
    0.018714061 = product of:
      0.037428122 = sum of:
        0.037428122 = weight(_text_:22 in 4555) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.037428122 = score(doc=4555,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12092275 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 4555, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4555)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.36363637 = coord(4/11)
    Abstract
    OCLC distributes several scholarly journals under its Electronic Journals Online programme, acting, in effect, as an 'electronic printer' for scholarly publishers. It is prototyping a WWW accessible version of these journals. Describes the problems encountered, detail some of the short term solutions, and highlight changes to existing standards that will enhance the use of the WWW for scholarly electronic publishing
    Date
    23. 7.1996 10:22:20
  11. Matheson, N.: Scholarly communication in the sciences : publishing trends and the role for libraries: conference report (1993) 0.04 
    0.044542033 = product of:
  0.16332078 = sum of:
    0.007463572 = weight(_text_:of in 8027) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.007463572 = score(doc=8027,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.053998582 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034531306 = queryNorm
        0.13821793 = fieldWeight in 8027, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=8027)
    0.14109258 = weight(_text_:innovations in 8027) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.14109258 = score(doc=8027,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.23478 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.7990475 = idf(docFreq=133, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034531306 = queryNorm
        0.60095656 = fieldWeight in 8027, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.7990475 = idf(docFreq=133, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=8027)
    0.014764623 = weight(_text_:on in 8027) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014764623 = score(doc=8027,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.07594867 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034531306 = queryNorm
        0.19440265 = fieldWeight in 8027, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=8027)
  0.27272728 = coord(3/11)
    Abstract
    The keynote address focused on the crisis in scholarly communication arising from innovations in publishing: Sessions were devoted to: trends in scientific book publishing; journal publishing; the electronic future; document delivery and alternative access; and the use and effects of electronic media for communication and database searching at Imperial College, London
  12. Moed, H.F.: ¬The effect of "open access" on citation impact : an analysis of ArXiv's condensed matter section (2007) 0.04 
    0.041284245 = product of:
  0.15137556 = sum of:
    0.11966642 = weight(_text_:effect in 621) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.11966642 = score(doc=621,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.18289955 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034531306 = queryNorm
        0.654274 = fieldWeight in 621, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=621)
    0.01865893 = weight(_text_:of in 621) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01865893 = score(doc=621,freq=32.0), product of:
        0.053998582 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034531306 = queryNorm
        0.34554482 = fieldWeight in 621, product of:
          5.656854 = tf(freq=32.0), with freq of:
            32.0 = termFreq=32.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=621)
    0.013050207 = weight(_text_:on in 621) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013050207 = score(doc=621,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.07594867 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034531306 = queryNorm
        0.1718293 = fieldWeight in 621, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=621)
  0.27272728 = coord(3/11)
    Abstract
    This article statistically analyzes how the citation impact of articles deposited in the Condensed Matter section of the preprint server ArXiv (hosted by Cornell University), and subsequently published in a scientific journal, compares to that of articles in the same journal that were not deposited in the archive. Its principal aim is to further illustrate and roughly estimate the effect of two factors, early view and quality bias, on differences in citation impact between these two sets of papers, using citation data from Thomson Scientific's Web of Science. It presents estimates for a number of journals in the field of condensed matter physics. To discriminate between an open access effect and an early view effect, longitudinal citation data were analyzed covering a time period as long as 7 years. Quality bias was measured by calculating ArXiv citation impact differentials at the level of individual authors publishing in a journal, taking into account coauthorship. The analysis provided evidence of a strong quality bias and early view effect. Correcting for these effects, there is in a sample of six condensed matter physics journals studied in detail no sign of a general open access advantage of papers deposited in ArXiv. The study does provide evidence that ArXiv accelerates citation due to the fact that ArXiv makes papers available earlier rather than makes them freely available.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 58(2007) no.13, S.2047-2054
  13. Lancaster, F.W.: Electronic publishing (1989) 0.04 
    0.040901043 = product of:
  0.14997049 = sum of:
    0.016159108 = weight(_text_:of in 2881) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016159108 = score(doc=2881,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.053998582 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034531306 = queryNorm
        0.2992506 = fieldWeight in 2881, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2881)
    0.107710965 = weight(_text_:technological in 2881) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.107710965 = score(doc=2881,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18347798 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.3133807 = idf(docFreq=591, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034531306 = queryNorm
        0.58705115 = fieldWeight in 2881, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.3133807 = idf(docFreq=591, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2881)
    0.026100414 = weight(_text_:on in 2881) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026100414 = score(doc=2881,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.07594867 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034531306 = queryNorm
        0.3436586 = fieldWeight in 2881, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2881)
  0.27272728 = coord(3/11)
    Abstract
    Contribution to an issue on the impact of technological change on libraries and ways in which librarians are applying technology to their collections, services to users and the management of their libraries. Traces the evolution of electronic publishing from the early 60s to the present. Pays particular attention to computer conferencing, and hypermedia.
  14. Joint, N.: Is digitisation the new circulation? : borrowing trends, digitisation and the nature of reading in US and UK libraries (2008) 0.04 
    0.04043374 = product of:
  0.11119278 = sum of:
    0.042106826 = weight(_text_:higher in 1901) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.042106826 = score(doc=1901,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18138453 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.252756 = idf(docFreq=628, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034531306 = queryNorm
        0.23214121 = fieldWeight in 1901, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.252756 = idf(docFreq=628, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1901)
    0.04281316 = weight(_text_:effect in 1901) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04281316 = score(doc=1901,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18289955 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034531306 = queryNorm
        0.23408018 = fieldWeight in 1901, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1901)
    0.015832627 = weight(_text_:of in 1901) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015832627 = score(doc=1901,freq=36.0), product of:
        0.053998582 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034531306 = queryNorm
        0.2932045 = fieldWeight in 1901, product of:
          6.0 = tf(freq=36.0), with freq of:
            36.0 = termFreq=36.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1901)
    0.010440165 = weight(_text_:on in 1901) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010440165 = score(doc=1901,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.07594867 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034531306 = queryNorm
        0.13746344 = fieldWeight in 1901, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1901)
  0.36363637 = coord(4/11)
    Abstract
    Purpose - To explore the belief that digital technology has created a steep and irreversible decline in traditional library use, particularly in borrowing from public and higher education library print collections, with a concomitant effect on familiar patterns of reading and reflection. If digital technology has led to a fundamental change in the way young people in HE process information, should traditional assumptions about library use and educational reading habits be abandoned? Design/methodology/approach - This is a comparative analysis of statistics of library use available in the public domain in the USA and UK. Findings - That reading habits shown in the use of public libraries are arguably conservative in nature; and that recent statistics for the circulation of print stock in US and UK university libraries indisputably show year on year increases, not decreases, except where the digitisation of print originals has provided a generous supply of effective digital surrogates for print holdings. The nature of reading has not changed fundamentally in nature. But where copyright law permits large-scale provision of digital collections to be derived from print originals, these will readily displace borrowing from print collections, leading to lower circulation figures of hard copy items. Research limitations/implications - This paper asserts that the restrictive nature of UK copyright law, which is demonstrably backward by international standards, is a major factor inhibiting university teachers from helping their students migrate from print to digital media. This assertion should be researched in greater depth, with a view to using such research to influence the development of future intellectual property legislation in the UK. Practical implications - Because of the essentially conservative nature of reflective reading for educational purposes, digitisation programmes offer an important way forward for academic library service development. Library managers should not underestimate the persistent demand for traditional reading materials: where such materials are provided in digital or print formats, in most cases the digital formats will be preferred; but where high quality educational resources are only available in print, there is no evidence that the format of alternative digital media is in itself sufficient to lure students away from quality content. Originality/value - This paper questions some of the more casual assumptions about the "death" of traditional library services.
  15. Siler, K.; Larivière, V.: Varieties of diffusion in academic publishing : how status and legitimacy influence growth trajectories of new innovations (2024) 0.04 
    0.040344957 = product of:
  0.1479315 = sum of:
    0.0139941955 = weight(_text_:of in 1206) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0139941955 = score(doc=1206,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.053998582 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034531306 = queryNorm
        0.25915858 = fieldWeight in 1206, product of:
          4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
            18.0 = termFreq=18.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1206)
    0.12470941 = weight(_text_:innovations in 1206) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.12470941 = score(doc=1206,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.23478 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.7990475 = idf(docFreq=133, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034531306 = queryNorm
        0.5311756 = fieldWeight in 1206, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          6.7990475 = idf(docFreq=133, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1206)
    0.009227889 = weight(_text_:on in 1206) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009227889 = score(doc=1206,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.07594867 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034531306 = queryNorm
        0.121501654 = fieldWeight in 1206, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1206)
  0.27272728 = coord(3/11)
    Abstract
    Open Access (OA) publishing has progressed from an initial fringe idea to a still-growing, major component of modern academic communication. The proliferation of OA publishing presents a context to examine how new innovations and institutions develop. Based on analyses of 1,296,304 articles published in 83 OA journals, we analyze changes in the institutional status, gender, age, citedness, and geographical locations of authors over time. Generally, OA journals tended towards core-to-periphery diffusion patterns. Specifically, journal authors tended to decrease in high-status institutional affiliations, male and highly cited authors over time. Despite these general tendencies, there was substantial variation in the diffusion patterns of OA journals. Some journals exhibited no significant demographic changes, and a few exhibited periphery-to-core diffusion patterns. We find that although both highly and less-legitimate journals generally exhibit core-to-periphery diffusion patterns, there are still demographic differences between such journals. Institutional and cultural legitimacy-or lack thereof-affects the social and intellectual diffusion of new OA journals.
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 75(2023) no.2, S.132-151
  16. Ortega, J.L.: ¬The presence of academic journals on Twitter and its relationship with dissemination (tweets) and research impact (citations) (2017) 0.04 
    0.036300957 = product of:
  0.099827625 = sum of:
    0.053516448 = weight(_text_:effect in 4410) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.053516448 = score(doc=4410,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18289955 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034531306 = queryNorm
        0.2926002 = fieldWeight in 4410, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4410)
    0.016159108 = weight(_text_:of in 4410) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016159108 = score(doc=4410,freq=24.0), product of:
        0.053998582 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034531306 = queryNorm
        0.2992506 = fieldWeight in 4410, product of:
          4.8989797 = tf(freq=24.0), with freq of:
            24.0 = termFreq=24.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4410)
    0.018455777 = weight(_text_:on in 4410) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.018455777 = score(doc=4410,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.07594867 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034531306 = queryNorm
        0.24300331 = fieldWeight in 4410, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4410)
    0.011696288 = product of:
      0.023392577 = sum of:
        0.023392577 = weight(_text_:22 in 4410) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023392577 = score(doc=4410,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12092275 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4410, 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=4410)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.36363637 = coord(4/11)
    Abstract
    Purpose The purpose of this paper is to analyze the relationship between dissemination of research papers on Twitter and its influence on research impact. Design/methodology/approach Four types of journal Twitter accounts (journal, owner, publisher and no Twitter account) were defined to observe differences in the number of tweets and citations. In total, 4,176 articles from 350 journals were extracted from Plum Analytics. This altmetric provider tracks the number of tweets and citations for each paper. Student's t-test for two-paired samples was used to detect significant differences between each group of journals. Regression analysis was performed to detect which variables may influence the getting of tweets and citations. Findings The results show that journals with their own Twitter account obtain more tweets (46 percent) and citations (34 percent) than journals without a Twitter account. Followers is the variable that attracts more tweets (ß=0.47) and citations (ß=0.28) but the effect is small and the fit is not good for tweets (R2=0.46) and insignificant for citations (R2=0.18). Originality/value This is the first study that tests the performance of research journals on Twitter according to their handles, observing how the dissemination of content in this microblogging network influences the citation of their papers.
    Date
    20. 1.2015 18:30:22
    Source
    Aslib journal of information management. 69(2017) no.6, S.674-687
  17. Worlock, D.R.: Publishing beyond the 1990s : seven key words (1994) 0.04 
    0.035004515 = product of:
  0.19252482 = sum of:
    0.016159108 = weight(_text_:of in 1210) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016159108 = score(doc=1210,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.053998582 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034531306 = queryNorm
        0.2992506 = fieldWeight in 1210, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1210)
    0.17636572 = weight(_text_:innovations in 1210) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.17636572 = score(doc=1210,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.23478 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.7990475 = idf(docFreq=133, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034531306 = queryNorm
        0.75119567 = fieldWeight in 1210, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.7990475 = idf(docFreq=133, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1210)
  0.18181819 = coord(2/11)
    Abstract
    This paper describes future publishing trends in terms of seven key words: convergence, multimedia, spatial, customised publishing, portability, networks and intelligence. The discussion of each of these buzz words in turn provides seven different perspectives from which to examine the various technologies, attitudes and innovations which are currently transforming publishing activity
  18. Moed, H.F.; Halevi, G.: On full text download and citation distributions in scientific-scholarly journals (2016) 0.03 
    0.03376407 = product of:
  0.09285119 = sum of:
    0.05263353 = weight(_text_:higher in 2646) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05263353 = score(doc=2646,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18138453 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.252756 = idf(docFreq=628, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034531306 = queryNorm
        0.2901765 = fieldWeight in 2646, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.252756 = idf(docFreq=628, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2646)
    0.015471167 = weight(_text_:of in 2646) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015471167 = score(doc=2646,freq=22.0), product of:
        0.053998582 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034531306 = queryNorm
        0.28651062 = fieldWeight in 2646, product of:
          4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
            22.0 = termFreq=22.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2646)
    0.013050207 = weight(_text_:on in 2646) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013050207 = score(doc=2646,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.07594867 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034531306 = queryNorm
        0.1718293 = fieldWeight in 2646, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2646)
    0.011696288 = product of:
      0.023392577 = sum of:
        0.023392577 = weight(_text_:22 in 2646) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023392577 = score(doc=2646,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12092275 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2646, 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=2646)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.36363637 = coord(4/11)
    Abstract
    A statistical analysis of full text downloads of articles in Elsevier's ScienceDirect covering all disciplines reveals large differences in download frequencies, their skewness, and their correlation with Scopus-based citation counts, between disciplines, journals, and document types. Download counts tend to be 2 orders of magnitude higher and less skewedly distributed than citations. A mathematical model based on the sum of two exponentials does not adequately capture monthly download counts. The degree of correlation at the article level within a journal is similar to that at the journal level in the discipline covered by that journal, suggesting that the differences between journals are, to a large extent, discipline specific. Despite the fact that in all studied journals download and citation counts per article positively correlate, little overlap may exist between the set of articles appearing in the top of the citation distribution and that with the most frequently downloaded ones. Usage and citation leaks, bulk downloading, differences between reader and author populations in a subject field, the type of document or its content, differences in obsolescence patterns between downloads and citations, and different functions of reading and citing in the research process all provide possible explanations of differences between download and citation distributions.
    Date
    22. 1.2016 14:11:17
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 67(2016) no.2, S.412-431
  19. Levy, D.M.: Document reuse and document systems (1993) 0.03 
    0.032438613 = product of:
  0.118941575 = sum of:
    0.0159967 = weight(_text_:of in 8409) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0159967 = score(doc=8409,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.053998582 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034531306 = queryNorm
        0.29624295 = fieldWeight in 8409, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=8409)
    0.01827029 = weight(_text_:on in 8409) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01827029 = score(doc=8409,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.07594867 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034531306 = queryNorm
        0.24056101 = fieldWeight in 8409, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=8409)
    0.08467458 = weight(_text_:great in 8409) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08467458 = score(doc=8409,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19443816 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034531306 = queryNorm
        0.43548337 = fieldWeight in 8409, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=8409)
  0.27272728 = coord(3/11)
    Abstract
    While reuse is currently the focus of much attention in the programming language community, it is also a central, but less noticed, issue in the creation and use of documents, and therefore in the design of document systems. To a great extend, the work of producing new documents, and new versions of old documents, involves reusing pieces of previously existing documents, where reuse involves finding the relevant material, modifying it as needed, and stitching the pieces together. Aims to demonstrate how a focus on reuse can shed light on current efforts to build structured document systems and to design and use standards, such as SGML, ODA and OLE, that address structured and compound documents
  20. Somers, J.: Torching the modern-day library of Alexandria : somewhere at Google there is a database containing 25 million books and nobody is allowed to read them. (2017) 0.03 
    0.031301707 = product of:
  0.08607969 = sum of:
    0.017897017 = weight(_text_:of in 3608) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017897017 = score(doc=3608,freq=46.0), product of:
        0.053998582 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034531306 = queryNorm
        0.33143494 = fieldWeight in 3608, product of:
          6.78233 = tf(freq=46.0), with freq of:
            46.0 = termFreq=46.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3608)
    0.010440165 = weight(_text_:on in 3608) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010440165 = score(doc=3608,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.07594867 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034531306 = queryNorm
        0.13746344 = fieldWeight in 3608, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3608)
    0.048385475 = weight(_text_:great in 3608) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.048385475 = score(doc=3608,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19443816 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034531306 = queryNorm
        0.24884763 = fieldWeight in 3608, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3608)
    0.0093570305 = product of:
      0.018714061 = sum of:
        0.018714061 = weight(_text_:22 in 3608) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.018714061 = score(doc=3608,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12092275 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 3608, 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=3608)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.36363637 = coord(4/11)
    Abstract
    You were going to get one-click access to the full text of nearly every book that's ever been published. Books still in print you'd have to pay for, but everything else-a collection slated to grow larger than the holdings at the Library of Congress, Harvard, the University of Michigan, at any of the great national libraries of Europe-would have been available for free at terminals that were going to be placed in every local library that wanted one. At the terminal you were going to be able to search tens of millions of books and read every page of any book you found. You'd be able to highlight passages and make annotations and share them; for the first time, you'd be able to pinpoint an idea somewhere inside the vastness of the printed record, and send somebody straight to it with a link. Books would become as instantly available, searchable, copy-pasteable-as alive in the digital world-as web pages. It was to be the realization of a long-held dream. "The universal library has been talked about for millennia," Richard Ovenden, the head of Oxford's Bodleian Libraries, has said. "It was possible to think in the Renaissance that you might be able to amass the whole of published knowledge in a single room or a single institution." In the spring of 2011, it seemed we'd amassed it in a terminal small enough to fit on a desk. "This is a watershed event and can serve as a catalyst for the reinvention of education, research, and intellectual life," one eager observer wrote at the time. On March 22 of that year, however, the legal agreement that would have unlocked a century's worth of books and peppered the country with access terminals to a universal library was rejected under Rule 23(e)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. When the library at Alexandria burned it was said to be an "international catastrophe." When the most significant humanities project of our time was dismantled in court, the scholars, archivists, and librarians who'd had a hand in its undoing breathed a sigh of relief, for they believed, at the time, that they had narrowly averted disaster.
    Source
    https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2017/04/the-tragedy-of-google-books/523320/

Authors

Years

Languages

  • e 367
  • d 63
  • f 2
  • es 1
  • m 1
  • sp 1
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 385
  • el 25
  • m 24
  • s 15
  • r 9
  • b 2
  • i 1
  • p 1
  • More… Less…

Themes

Subjects

Classifications