Rousseau, R.; Zuccala, A.: ¬A classification of author co-citations : definitions and search strategies (2004)
0.00
0.0029591531 = product of:
0.008877459 = sum of:
0.008877459 = product of:
0.017754918 = sum of:
0.017754918 = weight(_text_:of in 2266) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.017754918 = score(doc=2266,freq=18.0), product of:
0.06850986 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.043811057 = queryNorm
0.25915858 = fieldWeight in 2266, 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=2266)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Abstract
- The term author co-citation is defined and classified according to four distinct forms: the pure first-author co-citation, the pure author co-citation, the general author co-citation, and the special co-authorlco-citation. Each form can be used to obtain one count in an author co-citation study, based an a binary counting rule, which either recognizes the co-citedness of two authors in a given reference list (1) or does not (0). Most studies using author co-citations have relied solely an first-author cocitation counts as evidence of an author's oeuvre or body of work contributed to a research field. In this article, we argue that an author's contribution to a selected field of study should not be limited, but should be based an his/her complete list of publications, regardless of author ranking. We discuss the implications associated with using each co-citation form and show where simple first-author co-citations fit within our classification scheme. Examples are given to substantiate each author co-citation form defined in our classification, including a set of sample Dialog(TM) searches using references extracted from the SciSearch database.
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 55(2004) no.6, S.513-529