-
Nicolaisen, J.: Citation analysis (2007)
0.09
0.08886946 = product of:
0.17773892 = sum of:
0.17773892 = sum of:
0.06422744 = weight(_text_:science in 6091) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06422744 = score(doc=6091,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13793045 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.052363027 = 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)
0.11351148 = weight(_text_:22 in 6091) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.11351148 = score(doc=6091,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1833664 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052363027 = 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)
- Date
- 13. 7.2008 19:53:22
- Source
- Annual review of information science and technology. 41(2007), S.xxx-xxx
-
Garfield, E.; Stock, W.G.: Citation Consciousness : Interview with Eugene Garfiels, chairman emeritus of ISI; Philadelphia (2002)
0.06
0.06385712 = product of:
0.12771425 = sum of:
0.12771425 = sum of:
0.056769572 = weight(_text_:science in 613) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.056769572 = score(doc=613,freq=4.0), product of:
0.13793045 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.052363027 = 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)
0.070944674 = weight(_text_:22 in 613) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.070944674 = score(doc=613,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1833664 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052363027 = 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)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- 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
-
Garfield, E.: Recollections of Irving H. Sher 1924-1996 : Polymath/information scientist extraordinaire (2001)
0.05
0.049165525 = product of:
0.09833105 = sum of:
0.09833105 = sum of:
0.048669774 = weight(_text_:science in 6920) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.048669774 = score(doc=6920,freq=6.0), product of:
0.13793045 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.052363027 = 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)
0.04966127 = weight(_text_:22 in 6920) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04966127 = score(doc=6920,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1833664 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052363027 = 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)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- 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
-
Larivière, V.; Gingras, Y.; Archambault, E.: ¬The decline in the concentration of citations, 1900-2007 (2009)
0.05
0.047130153 = product of:
0.094260305 = sum of:
0.094260305 = sum of:
0.034061745 = weight(_text_:science in 2763) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.034061745 = score(doc=2763,freq=4.0), product of:
0.13793045 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.052363027 = 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)
0.060198557 = weight(_text_:22 in 2763) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.060198557 = score(doc=2763,freq=4.0), product of:
0.1833664 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052363027 = 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)
- 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
-
Tay, A.: ¬The next generation discovery citation indexes : a review of the landscape in 2020 (2020)
0.04
0.044699986 = product of:
0.08939997 = sum of:
0.08939997 = sum of:
0.0397387 = weight(_text_:science in 40) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0397387 = score(doc=40,freq=4.0), product of:
0.13793045 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.052363027 = 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)
0.04966127 = weight(_text_:22 in 40) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04966127 = score(doc=40,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1833664 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052363027 = 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)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- 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
-
H-Index auch im Web of Science (2008)
0.04
0.042141877 = product of:
0.084283754 = sum of:
0.084283754 = sum of:
0.041716952 = weight(_text_:science in 590) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.041716952 = score(doc=590,freq=6.0), product of:
0.13793045 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.052363027 = 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)
0.042566802 = weight(_text_:22 in 590) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.042566802 = score(doc=590,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1833664 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052363027 = 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)
- 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
-
Mingers, J.; Burrell, Q.L.: Modeling citation behavior in Management Science journals (2006)
0.04
0.042141877 = product of:
0.084283754 = sum of:
0.084283754 = sum of:
0.041716952 = weight(_text_:science in 994) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.041716952 = score(doc=994,freq=6.0), product of:
0.13793045 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.052363027 = 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)
0.042566802 = weight(_text_:22 in 994) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.042566802 = score(doc=994,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1833664 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052363027 = 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)
- 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
-
Van der Veer Martens, B.; Goodrum, G.: ¬The diffusion of theories : a functional approach (2006)
0.04
0.03888039 = product of:
0.07776078 = sum of:
0.07776078 = sum of:
0.028099505 = weight(_text_:science in 5269) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.028099505 = score(doc=5269,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13793045 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.052363027 = 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)
0.04966127 = weight(_text_:22 in 5269) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04966127 = score(doc=5269,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1833664 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052363027 = 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)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- 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
-
Campanario, J.M.: Have referees rejected some of the most-cited articles of all times? (1996)
0.03
0.033326045 = product of:
0.06665209 = sum of:
0.06665209 = sum of:
0.024085289 = weight(_text_:science in 4215) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.024085289 = score(doc=4215,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13793045 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.052363027 = queryNorm
0.17461908 = fieldWeight in 4215, 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=4215)
0.042566802 = weight(_text_:22 in 4215) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.042566802 = score(doc=4215,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1833664 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052363027 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4215, 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=4215)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- In this article a quantitative study is reported on the resistance that scientists may encounter when they do innovative work or when they attempt to publish articles that later become highly cited. A set of 205 commentaries by authors of some of the most-cited papers of all times have been examined in order to identify those articles whose authors encountered difficulty in getting his or her work published. There are 22 commentaries (10,7%) in which authors mention some difficulty or resistance in doing or publishing the research reported in the article. Three of the articles which had problems in being published are the most cited from their respective journals. According the authors' commentaries, although sometimes referees' negative evaluations can help improve the articles, in other instances referees and editors wrongly rejected the highly cited articles
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 47(1996) no.4, S.302-310
-
Snyder, H.; Bonzi, S.: Patterns of self-citation across disciplines : 1980-1989 (1998)
0.03
0.033326045 = product of:
0.06665209 = sum of:
0.06665209 = sum of:
0.024085289 = weight(_text_:science in 3692) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.024085289 = score(doc=3692,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13793045 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.052363027 = queryNorm
0.17461908 = fieldWeight in 3692, 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=3692)
0.042566802 = weight(_text_:22 in 3692) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.042566802 = score(doc=3692,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1833664 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052363027 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3692, 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=3692)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 5.1999 19:33:24
- Source
- Journal of information science. 24(1998) no.6, S.431-435
-
Chan, H.C.; Kim, H.-W.; Tan, W.C.: Information systems citation patterns from International Conference on Information Systems articles (2006)
0.03
0.033326045 = product of:
0.06665209 = sum of:
0.06665209 = sum of:
0.024085289 = weight(_text_:science in 201) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.024085289 = score(doc=201,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13793045 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.052363027 = queryNorm
0.17461908 = fieldWeight in 201, 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=201)
0.042566802 = weight(_text_:22 in 201) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.042566802 = score(doc=201,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1833664 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052363027 = 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)
- Date
- 3. 1.2007 17:22:03
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 57(2006) no.9, S.1263-1274
-
Ding, Y.; Zhang, G.; Chambers, T.; Song, M.; Wang, X.; Zhai, C.: Content-based citation analysis : the next generation of citation analysis (2014)
0.03
0.033326045 = product of:
0.06665209 = sum of:
0.06665209 = sum of:
0.024085289 = weight(_text_:science in 1521) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.024085289 = score(doc=1521,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13793045 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.052363027 = queryNorm
0.17461908 = fieldWeight in 1521, 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=1521)
0.042566802 = weight(_text_:22 in 1521) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.042566802 = score(doc=1521,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1833664 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052363027 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1521, 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=1521)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 8.2014 16:52:04
- Source
- Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 65(2014) no.9, S.1820-1833
-
Wildner, B.: Web of Science - Scopus : Auf der Suche nach Zitierungen (2006)
0.03
0.032141052 = product of:
0.064282104 = sum of:
0.064282104 = sum of:
0.035904232 = weight(_text_:science in 5034) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.035904232 = score(doc=5034,freq=10.0), product of:
0.13793045 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.052363027 = queryNorm
0.26030678 = fieldWeight in 5034, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5034)
0.02837787 = weight(_text_:22 in 5034) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02837787 = score(doc=5034,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1833664 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052363027 = queryNorm
0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 5034, 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=5034)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Evaluation ist an der Medizinischen Universität Wien ein wichtiges Thema. So werden die Ressourcen innerhalb der Universität entsprechend der in den Leistungskriterien definierten Bewertungsmethode verteilt, deren Grundlage ein für jeden Fachbereich eigens berechneter normierter Impact Factor darstellt. Wissenschaftliche Leistung kann aber auch auf andere Art gemessen werden. Innerhalb einer Universitätsklinik oder Forschungsgruppe werden die Publikationen der wissenschaftlichen Mitarbeiter mittels Zitierungsanalyse bewertet. Für eine Bewerbung auf bestimmte Stellen müssen die einzelnen Wissenschaftler jeweils aktuelle Zitierungsanalysen vorlegen. Seit 2005 stellt die Universitätsbibliothek der Medizinischen Universität Wien am Campus die Datenbank Scopus zur Verfügung. Dabei handelt es sich nicht nur um eine weitere naturwissenschaftliche Literaturdatenbank, sondern um ein Konkurrenzprodukt zum Web of Science, dessen Schwerpunkt in der Suche der Referenzfelder liegt und so die Beantwortung der Fragestellung, wie oft eine wissenschaftliche Publikation zitiert wird, ermöglicht. Im seltenen Idealfall liegt eine vollständige Publikationsliste vor, von der ausgehend man eine Zitierungsanalyse starten kann. Meist aber besteht der Wunsch, nur anhand eines Autorennamens und dem Wissen, in welchem Fachgebiet jemand wissenschaftlich tätig ist, rasch die Suche nach Zitierungen zu beginnen. Im Web of Science führt der Weg über eine Cited Reference Search zu einem Cited Reference Index, aus dem man die Zitierzahlen (Times Cited) zu den einzelnen Publikationen eines Autors entnehmen kann. Als Cited Author scheinen neben dem Erstautor auch alle Mitautoren auf, vorausgesetzt die Zitierung bezieht sich auf eine Publikation, die als Source Item im Web of Science in dem Zeitraum erscheint, der für die Institution subskribiert wurde. Abschließend müssen die einzelnen Zitierzahlen eigenhändig addiert werden und ergeben so die Gesamtzahl der Zitierungen für einen bestimmten Autor. In Scopus wird nach einer Autorensuche ein Document Citation Overview geboten, der die Publikationen nach Erscheinungsjahr gereiht auflistet und gleichzeitig in einer Übersichtstabelle die Zitierzahlen pro Publikation und Jahr sowie die jeweiligen Gesamtzahlen angibt.
- Date
- 4. 6.2006 17:22:15
- Object
- Web of Science
-
Døsen, K.: One more reference on self-reference (1992)
0.03
0.02837787 = product of:
0.05675574 = sum of:
0.05675574 = product of:
0.11351148 = sum of:
0.11351148 = weight(_text_:22 in 4604) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.11351148 = score(doc=4604,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1833664 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052363027 = queryNorm
0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 4604, 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=4604)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 7. 2.2005 14:10:22
-
Hayer, L.: Lazarsfeld zitiert : eine bibliometrische Analyse (2008)
0.03
0.027771706 = product of:
0.05554341 = sum of:
0.05554341 = sum of:
0.020071074 = weight(_text_:science in 1934) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.020071074 = score(doc=1934,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13793045 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.052363027 = queryNorm
0.1455159 = fieldWeight in 1934, 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=1934)
0.035472337 = weight(_text_:22 in 1934) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.035472337 = score(doc=1934,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1833664 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052363027 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1934, 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=1934)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Um sich einer Antwort auf die Frage anzunähern, welche Bedeutung der Nachlass eines Wissenschaftlers wie jener Paul F. Lazarsfelds (mit zahlreichen noch unveröffentlichten Schriften) für die aktuelle Forschung haben könne, kann untersucht werden, wie häufig dieser Wissenschaftler zitiert wird. Wenn ein Autor zitiert wird, wird er auch genutzt. Wird er über einen langen Zeitraum oft genutzt, ist vermutlich auch die Auseinandersetzung mit seinem Nachlass von Nutzen. Außerdem kann aufgrund der Zitierungen festgestellt werden, was aus dem Lebenswerk eines Wissenschaftlers für die aktuelle Forschung relevant erscheint. Daraus können die vordringlichen Fragestellungen in der Bearbeitung des Nachlasses abgeleitet werden. Die Aufgabe für die folgende Untersuchung lautete daher: Wie oft wird Paul F. Lazarsfeld zitiert? Dabei interessierte auch: Wer zitiert wo? Die Untersuchung wurde mit Hilfe der Meta-Datenbank "ISI Web of Knowledge" durchgeführt. In dieser wurde im "Web of Science" mit dem Werkzeug "Cited Reference Search" nach dem zitierten Autor (Cited Author) "Lazarsfeld P*" gesucht. Diese Suche ergab 1535 Referenzen (References). Werden alle Referenzen gewählt, führt dies zu 4839 Ergebnissen (Results). Dabei wurden die Datenbanken SCI-Expanded, SSCI und A&HCI verwendet. Bei dieser Suche wurden die Publikationsjahre 1941-2008 analysiert. Vor 1956 wurden allerdings nur sehr wenige Zitate gefunden: 1946 fünf, ansonsten maximal drei, 1942-1944 und 1949 überhaupt keines. Zudem ist das Jahr 2008 noch lange nicht zu Ende. (Es gab jedoch schon vor Ende März 24 Zitate!)
- Date
- 22. 6.2008 12:54:12
-
Ahlgren, P.; Jarneving, B.; Rousseau, R.: Requirements for a cocitation similarity measure, with special reference to Pearson's correlation coefficient (2003)
0.03
0.02554285 = product of:
0.0510857 = sum of:
0.0510857 = sum of:
0.02270783 = weight(_text_:science in 5171) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02270783 = score(doc=5171,freq=4.0), product of:
0.13793045 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.052363027 = queryNorm
0.16463245 = fieldWeight in 5171, 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=5171)
0.02837787 = weight(_text_:22 in 5171) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02837787 = score(doc=5171,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1833664 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052363027 = queryNorm
0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 5171, 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=5171)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Ahlgren, Jarneving, and. Rousseau review accepted procedures for author co-citation analysis first pointing out that since in the raw data matrix the row and column values are identical i,e, the co-citation count of two authors, there is no clear choice for diagonal values. They suggest the number of times an author has been co-cited with himself excluding self citation rather than the common treatment as zeros or as missing values. When the matrix is converted to a similarity matrix the normal procedure is to create a matrix of Pearson's r coefficients between data vectors. Ranking by r and by co-citation frequency and by intuition can easily yield three different orders. It would seem necessary that the adding of zeros to the matrix will not affect the value or the relative order of similarity measures but it is shown that this is not the case with Pearson's r. Using 913 bibliographic descriptions form the Web of Science of articles form JASIS and Scientometrics, authors names were extracted, edited and 12 information retrieval authors and 12 bibliometric authors each from the top 100 most cited were selected. Co-citation and r value (diagonal elements treated as missing) matrices were constructed, and then reconstructed in expanded form. Adding zeros can both change the r value and the ordering of the authors based upon that value. A chi-squared distance measure would not violate these requirements, nor would the cosine coefficient. It is also argued that co-citation data is ordinal data since there is no assurance of an absolute zero number of co-citations, and thus Pearson is not appropriate. The number of ties in co-citation data make the use of the Spearman rank order coefficient problematic.
- Date
- 9. 7.2006 10:22:35
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and technology. 54(2003) no.6, S.549-568
-
Van der Veer Martens, B.: Do citation systems represent theories of truth? (2001)
0.03
0.02508273 = product of:
0.05016546 = sum of:
0.05016546 = product of:
0.10033092 = sum of:
0.10033092 = weight(_text_:22 in 3925) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.10033092 = score(doc=3925,freq=4.0), product of:
0.1833664 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052363027 = 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)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 7.2006 15:22:28
-
Huber, C.: Web of science (1999)
0.02
0.02270783 = product of:
0.04541566 = sum of:
0.04541566 = product of:
0.09083132 = sum of:
0.09083132 = weight(_text_:science in 3595) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09083132 = score(doc=3595,freq=4.0), product of:
0.13793045 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.052363027 = queryNorm
0.6585298 = fieldWeight in 3595, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=3595)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Object
- Web of science
-
Garfield, E.: Citation indexes for science : a new dimension in documentation through association of ideas (1955)
0.02
0.02270783 = product of:
0.04541566 = sum of:
0.04541566 = product of:
0.09083132 = sum of:
0.09083132 = weight(_text_:science in 4342) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09083132 = score(doc=4342,freq=4.0), product of:
0.13793045 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.052363027 = queryNorm
0.6585298 = fieldWeight in 4342, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=4342)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Science. 122(1955), S.108-111
-
Malin, M.V.: ¬The Science Citation Index : a new concept in indexing (1968)
0.02
0.02270783 = product of:
0.04541566 = sum of:
0.04541566 = product of:
0.09083132 = sum of:
0.09083132 = weight(_text_:science in 5000) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09083132 = score(doc=5000,freq=4.0), product of:
0.13793045 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.052363027 = queryNorm
0.6585298 = fieldWeight in 5000, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=5000)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Object
- Science Citation Index
