-
Van der Veer Martens, B.: Do citation systems represent theories of truth? (2001)
0.08
0.077220224 = product of:
0.15444045 = sum of:
0.15444045 = sum of:
0.054452434 = weight(_text_:systems in 3925) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.054452434 = score(doc=3925,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16037072 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.052184064 = queryNorm
0.339541 = fieldWeight in 3925, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3925)
0.09998801 = weight(_text_:22 in 3925) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09998801 = score(doc=3925,freq=4.0), product of:
0.1827397 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052184064 = queryNorm
0.54716086 = fieldWeight in 3925, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3925)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 7.2006 15:22:28
-
Chan, H.C.; Kim, H.-W.; Tan, W.C.: Information systems citation patterns from International Conference on Information Systems articles (2006)
0.06
0.05773846 = product of:
0.11547692 = sum of:
0.11547692 = sum of:
0.0730556 = weight(_text_:systems in 201) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0730556 = score(doc=201,freq=10.0), product of:
0.16037072 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.052184064 = queryNorm
0.45554203 = fieldWeight in 201, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=201)
0.042421322 = weight(_text_:22 in 201) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.042421322 = score(doc=201,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1827397 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052184064 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 201, 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=201)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Research patterns could enhance understanding of the Information Systems (IS) field. Citation analysis is the methodology commonly used to determine such research patterns. In this study, the citation methodology is applied to one of the top-ranked Information Systems conferences - International Conference on Information Systems (ICIS). Information is extracted from papers in the proceedings of ICIS 2000 to 2002. A total of 145 base articles and 4,226 citations are used. Research patterns are obtained using total citations, citations per journal or conference, and overlapping citations. We then provide the citation ranking of journals and conferences. We also examine the difference between the citation ranking in this study and the ranking of IS journals and IS conferences in other studies. Based on the comparison, we confirm that IS research is a multidisciplinary research area. We also identify the most cited papers and authors in the IS research area, and the organizations most active in producing papers in the top-rated IS conference. We discuss the findings and implications of the study.
- Date
- 3. 1.2007 17:22:03
-
Asonuma, A.; Fang, Y.; Rousseau, R.: Reflections on the age distribution of Japanese scientists (2006)
0.04
0.03754639 = product of:
0.07509278 = sum of:
0.07509278 = sum of:
0.03267146 = weight(_text_:systems in 5270) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03267146 = score(doc=5270,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16037072 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.052184064 = queryNorm
0.2037246 = fieldWeight in 5270, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5270)
0.042421322 = weight(_text_:22 in 5270) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.042421322 = score(doc=5270,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1827397 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052184064 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 5270, 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=5270)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- The age distribution of a country's scientists is an important element in the study of its research capacity. In this article we investigate the age distribution of Japanese scientists in order to find out whether major events such as World War II had an appreciable effect on its features. Data have been obtained from population censuses taken in Japan from 1970 to 1995. A comparison with the situation in China and the United States has been made. We find that the group of scientific researchers outside academia is dominated by the young: those younger than age 35. The personnel group in higher education, on the other hand, is dominated by the baby boomers: those who were born after World War II. Contrary to the Chinese situation we could not find any influence of major nondemographic events. The only influence we found was the increase in enrollment of university students after World War II caused by the reform of the Japanese university system. Female participation in the scientific and university systems in Japan, though still low, is increasing.
- Date
- 22. 7.2006 15:26:24
-
Nicolaisen, J.: Citation analysis (2007)
0.03
0.028280882 = product of:
0.056561764 = sum of:
0.056561764 = product of:
0.11312353 = sum of:
0.11312353 = weight(_text_:22 in 6091) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.11312353 = score(doc=6091,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1827397 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052184064 = queryNorm
0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 6091, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=6091)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 13. 7.2008 19:53:22
-
Lewison, G.: ¬The work of the Bibliometrics Research Group (City University) and associates (2005)
0.02
0.021210661 = product of:
0.042421322 = sum of:
0.042421322 = product of:
0.084842645 = sum of:
0.084842645 = weight(_text_:22 in 4890) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.084842645 = score(doc=4890,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1827397 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052184064 = queryNorm
0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 4890, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4890)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 20. 1.2007 17:02:22
-
Wolfram, D.: Applied informetrics for information retrieval research (2003)
0.02
0.01633573 = product of:
0.03267146 = sum of:
0.03267146 = product of:
0.06534292 = sum of:
0.06534292 = weight(_text_:systems in 4589) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06534292 = score(doc=4589,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16037072 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.052184064 = queryNorm
0.4074492 = fieldWeight in 4589, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4589)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- The author demonstrates how informetric analysis of information retrieval system content and use provides valuable insights that have applications for the modelling, design, and evaluation of information retrieval systems.
-
Raan, A.F.J. van: Statistical properties of bibliometric indicators : research group indicator distributions and correlations (2006)
0.01
0.014998203 = product of:
0.029996406 = sum of:
0.029996406 = product of:
0.059992813 = sum of:
0.059992813 = weight(_text_:22 in 5275) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.059992813 = score(doc=5275,freq=4.0), product of:
0.1827397 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052184064 = queryNorm
0.32829654 = fieldWeight in 5275, 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=5275)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 7.2006 16:20:22
-
Larivière, V.; Gingras, Y.; Archambault, E.: ¬The decline in the concentration of citations, 1900-2007 (2009)
0.01
0.014998203 = product of:
0.029996406 = sum of:
0.029996406 = product of:
0.059992813 = sum of:
0.059992813 = weight(_text_:22 in 2763) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.059992813 = score(doc=2763,freq=4.0), product of:
0.1827397 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052184064 = 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)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 3.2009 19:22:35
-
Thelwall, M.; Ruschenburg, T.: Grundlagen und Forschungsfelder der Webometrie (2006)
0.01
0.014140441 = product of:
0.028280882 = sum of:
0.028280882 = product of:
0.056561764 = sum of:
0.056561764 = weight(_text_:22 in 77) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.056561764 = score(doc=77,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1827397 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052184064 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 77, 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=77)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 4.12.2006 12:12:22
-
Rostaing, H.; Barts, N.; Léveillé, V.: Bibliometrics: representation instrument of the multidisciplinary positioning of a scientific area : Implementation for an Advisory Scientific Committee (2007)
0.01
0.014140441 = product of:
0.028280882 = sum of:
0.028280882 = product of:
0.056561764 = sum of:
0.056561764 = weight(_text_:22 in 1144) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.056561764 = score(doc=1144,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1827397 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052184064 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 1144, 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=1144)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 30.12.2007 11:22:39
-
Cronin, B.: Semiotics and evaluative bibliometrics (2000)
0.01
0.013613109 = product of:
0.027226217 = sum of:
0.027226217 = product of:
0.054452434 = sum of:
0.054452434 = weight(_text_:systems in 4542) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.054452434 = score(doc=4542,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16037072 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.052184064 = queryNorm
0.339541 = fieldWeight in 4542, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4542)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- The reciprocal relationship between bibliographic references and citations in the context of the scholarly communication system is examined. Semiotic analysis of referencing behaviours and citation counting reveals the complexity of prevailing sign systems and associated symbolic practices.
-
Della Mea, V.; Demartini, G.; Di Gaspero, L.; Mizzaro, S.: Measuring retrieval effectiveness with Average Distance Measure (ADM) (2006)
0.01
0.013476291 = product of:
0.026952581 = sum of:
0.026952581 = product of:
0.053905163 = sum of:
0.053905163 = weight(_text_:systems in 774) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.053905163 = score(doc=774,freq=4.0), product of:
0.16037072 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.052184064 = queryNorm
0.33612844 = fieldWeight in 774, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=774)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Most common effectiveness measures for information retrieval systems are based on the assumptions of binary relevance (either a document is relevant to a given query or it is not) and binary retrieval (either a document is retrieved or it is not). In this paper, we describe an information retrieval effectiveness measure named ADM (Average Distance Measure) that questions these assumptions. We compare ADM with other measures, discuss it from a conceptual point of view, and report some experimental results. Both conceptual analysis and experimental evidence demonstrate ADM adequacy in measuring the effectiveness of information retrieval systems.
-
Levitt, J.M.; Thelwall, M.: Citation levels and collaboration within library and information science (2009)
0.01
0.012498502 = product of:
0.024997003 = sum of:
0.024997003 = product of:
0.049994007 = sum of:
0.049994007 = weight(_text_:22 in 2734) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.049994007 = score(doc=2734,freq=4.0), product of:
0.1827397 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052184064 = queryNorm
0.27358043 = fieldWeight in 2734, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2734)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Collaboration is a major research policy objective, but does it deliver higher quality research? This study uses citation analysis to examine the Web of Science (WoS) Information Science & Library Science subject category (IS&LS) to ascertain whether, in general, more highly cited articles are more highly collaborative than other articles. It consists of two investigations. The first investigation is a longitudinal comparison of the degree and proportion of collaboration in five strata of citation; it found that collaboration in the highest four citation strata (all in the most highly cited 22%) increased in unison over time, whereas collaboration in the lowest citation strata (un-cited articles) remained low and stable. Given that over 40% of the articles were un-cited, it seems important to take into account the differences found between un-cited articles and relatively highly cited articles when investigating collaboration in IS&LS. The second investigation compares collaboration for 35 influential information scientists; it found that their more highly cited articles on average were not more highly collaborative than their less highly cited articles. In summary, although collaborative research is conducive to high citation in general, collaboration has apparently not tended to be essential to the success of current and former elite information scientists.
- Date
- 22. 3.2009 12:43:51
-
Burrell, Q.L.: Predicting future citation behavior (2003)
0.01
0.012372886 = product of:
0.024745772 = sum of:
0.024745772 = product of:
0.049491543 = sum of:
0.049491543 = weight(_text_:22 in 3837) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.049491543 = score(doc=3837,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1827397 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052184064 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 3837, 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=3837)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 29. 3.2003 19:22:48
-
Jacobs, N.; Woodfield, J.; Morris, A.: Using local citation data to relate the use of journal articles by academic researchers to the coverage of full-text document access systems (2000)
0.01
0.011551105 = product of:
0.02310221 = sum of:
0.02310221 = product of:
0.04620442 = sum of:
0.04620442 = weight(_text_:systems in 4541) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04620442 = score(doc=4541,freq=4.0), product of:
0.16037072 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.052184064 = queryNorm
0.28811008 = fieldWeight in 4541, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4541)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- The methodology and findings are presented of an empirical study comparing local citation patterns with the holdings lists of a number of sources of journal articles. These sources were the British Library Document Supply Centre (BLDSC) and the BL inside service, library holdings, ProQuest Direct, SearchBank, EiText and a linking system including both the Geobase database and the BLDSC. The value of local citation figures is discussed, as is the concept of a "core" of journal titles, from both theoretical and practical perspectives. Using these figures to represent the local use of journal articles, the coverage of the document sources was found to vary widely. Unsurprisingly, the BLDSC was found to offer the widest coverage. Newer, electronic systems generally fared less well, but may offer other advantages.
-
Sugimoto, C.R.; Pratt , J.A.; Hauser, K.: Using field cocitation analysis to assess reciprocal and shared impact of LIS/MIS fields (2008)
0.01
0.011551105 = product of:
0.02310221 = sum of:
0.02310221 = product of:
0.04620442 = sum of:
0.04620442 = weight(_text_:systems in 1959) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04620442 = score(doc=1959,freq=4.0), product of:
0.16037072 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.052184064 = queryNorm
0.28811008 = fieldWeight in 1959, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1959)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- This study utilized bibliometric tools to analyze the relationship between two separate, but related, fields: Library and Information Science (LIS) and Management Information Systems (MIS). The top-ranked 48 journals in each field were used as the unit of analysis. Using these journals, field cocitation was introduced as a method for evaluating the relationships between the two fields. The three-phased study evaluated (a) the knowledge imported/exported between LIS and MIS, (b) the body of knowledge influenced by both fields, and (c) the overlap in fields as demonstrated by multidimensional scaling. Data collection and analysis were performed using DIALOG and SPSS programs. The primary findings from this study indicate that (a) the MIS impact on LIS is greater than the reverse, (b) there is a growing trend for shared impact between the two disciplines, and (c) the area of overlap between the two fields is predominately those journals focusing on technology systems and digital information. Additionally, this study validated field cocitation as a method by which to evaluate relationships between fields.
-
Leydesdorff, L.: Can networks of journal-journal citations be used as indicators of change in the social sciences? (2003)
0.01
0.010605331 = product of:
0.021210661 = sum of:
0.021210661 = product of:
0.042421322 = sum of:
0.042421322 = weight(_text_:22 in 4460) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.042421322 = score(doc=4460,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1827397 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052184064 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4460, 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=4460)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 6.11.2005 19:02:22
-
Haycock, L.A.: Citation analysis of education dissertations for collection development (2004)
0.01
0.010605331 = product of:
0.021210661 = sum of:
0.021210661 = product of:
0.042421322 = sum of:
0.042421322 = weight(_text_:22 in 135) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.042421322 = score(doc=135,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1827397 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052184064 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 135, 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=135)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 10. 9.2000 17:38:22
-
H-Index auch im Web of Science (2008)
0.01
0.010605331 = product of:
0.021210661 = sum of:
0.021210661 = product of:
0.042421322 = sum of:
0.042421322 = weight(_text_:22 in 590) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.042421322 = score(doc=590,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1827397 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052184064 = 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)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 6. 4.2008 19:04:22
-
Mingers, J.; Burrell, Q.L.: Modeling citation behavior in Management Science journals (2006)
0.01
0.010605331 = product of:
0.021210661 = sum of:
0.021210661 = product of:
0.042421322 = sum of:
0.042421322 = weight(_text_:22 in 994) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.042421322 = score(doc=994,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1827397 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052184064 = 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(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 26.12.2007 19:22:05
