-
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
-
Diodato, V.: Dictionary of bibliometrics (1994)
0.08
0.07776078 = product of:
0.15552156 = sum of:
0.15552156 = sum of:
0.05619901 = weight(_text_:science in 5666) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05619901 = score(doc=5666,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13793045 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.052363027 = queryNorm
0.40744454 = fieldWeight in 5666, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=5666)
0.09932254 = weight(_text_:22 in 5666) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09932254 = score(doc=5666,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1833664 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052363027 = queryNorm
0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 5666, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=5666)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Footnote
- Rez. in: Journal of library and information science 22(1996) no.2, S.116-117 (L.C. Smith)
-
Bookstein, A.: Informetric distributions : I. Unified overview (1990)
0.08
0.07776078 = product of:
0.15552156 = sum of:
0.15552156 = sum of:
0.05619901 = weight(_text_:science in 6902) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05619901 = score(doc=6902,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13793045 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.052363027 = queryNorm
0.40744454 = fieldWeight in 6902, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6902)
0.09932254 = weight(_text_:22 in 6902) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09932254 = score(doc=6902,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1833664 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052363027 = queryNorm
0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 6902, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6902)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 7.2006 18:55:29
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 41(1990) no.5, S.368-375
-
Bookstein, A.: Informetric distributions : II. Resilience to ambiguity (1990)
0.08
0.07776078 = product of:
0.15552156 = sum of:
0.15552156 = sum of:
0.05619901 = weight(_text_:science in 4689) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05619901 = score(doc=4689,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13793045 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.052363027 = queryNorm
0.40744454 = fieldWeight in 4689, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4689)
0.09932254 = weight(_text_:22 in 4689) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09932254 = score(doc=4689,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1833664 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052363027 = queryNorm
0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 4689, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4689)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 7.2006 18:55:55
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 41(1990) no.5, S.376-386
-
Marx, W.; Bornmann, L.: On the problems of dealing with bibliometric data (2014)
0.07
0.06665209 = product of:
0.13330418 = sum of:
0.13330418 = sum of:
0.048170578 = weight(_text_:science in 1239) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.048170578 = score(doc=1239,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13793045 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.052363027 = queryNorm
0.34923816 = fieldWeight in 1239, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1239)
0.085133605 = weight(_text_:22 in 1239) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.085133605 = score(doc=1239,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1833664 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052363027 = queryNorm
0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 1239, 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=1239)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 18. 3.2014 19:13:22
- Source
- Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 65(2014) no.4, S.866-867
-
Yan, E.: Finding knowledge paths among scientific disciplines (2014)
0.05
0.051634267 = product of:
0.103268534 = sum of:
0.103268534 = sum of:
0.053103074 = weight(_text_:science in 1534) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.053103074 = score(doc=1534,freq=14.0), product of:
0.13793045 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.052363027 = queryNorm
0.38499892 = fieldWeight in 1534, product of:
3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
14.0 = termFreq=14.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1534)
0.05016546 = weight(_text_:22 in 1534) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05016546 = score(doc=1534,freq=4.0), product of:
0.1833664 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052363027 = queryNorm
0.27358043 = fieldWeight in 1534, 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=1534)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- This paper uncovers patterns of knowledge dissemination among scientific disciplines. Although the transfer of knowledge is largely unobservable, citations from one discipline to another have been proven to be an effective proxy to study disciplinary knowledge flow. This study constructs a knowledge-flow network in which a node represents a Journal Citation Reports subject category and a link denotes the citations from one subject category to another. Using the concept of shortest path, several quantitative measurements are proposed and applied to a knowledge-flow network. Based on an examination of subject categories in Journal Citation Reports, this study indicates that social science domains tend to be more self-contained, so it is more difficult for knowledge from other domains to flow into them; at the same time, knowledge from science domains, such as biomedicine-, chemistry-, and physics-related domains, can access and be accessed by other domains more easily. This study also shows that social science domains are more disunified than science domains, because three fifths of the knowledge paths from one social science domain to another require at least one science domain to serve as an intermediate. This work contributes to discussions on disciplinarity and interdisciplinarity by providing empirical analysis.
- Date
- 26.10.2014 20:22:22
- Source
- Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 65(2014) no.11, S.2331-2347
-
Li, T.-C.: Reference sources in periodicals : research note (1995)
0.05
0.0510857 = product of:
0.1021714 = sum of:
0.1021714 = sum of:
0.04541566 = weight(_text_:science in 5092) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04541566 = score(doc=5092,freq=4.0), product of:
0.13793045 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.052363027 = queryNorm
0.3292649 = fieldWeight in 5092, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5092)
0.05675574 = weight(_text_:22 in 5092) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05675574 = score(doc=5092,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1833664 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052363027 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 5092, 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=5092)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Presents a list of 53 periodicals in 22 subject fields which regularly provide bibliographies of theses, research in progress and patents in their particular subject field. The fields of business, economics, history and literature have most periodical listings of dissertations and theses. Also lists 63 periodicals in 25 sub-disciplines which provide rankings or ratings. Rankings and ratings information predominates in the fields of business, sports and games, finance and banking, and library and information science
- Source
- Journal of information; communication; and library science. 2(1995) no.2, S.20-28
-
Mommoh, O.M.: Subject analysis of post-graduate theses in library, archival and information science at Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria (1995/96)
0.05
0.0510857 = product of:
0.1021714 = sum of:
0.1021714 = sum of:
0.04541566 = weight(_text_:science in 673) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04541566 = score(doc=673,freq=4.0), product of:
0.13793045 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.052363027 = queryNorm
0.3292649 = fieldWeight in 673, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=673)
0.05675574 = weight(_text_:22 in 673) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05675574 = score(doc=673,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1833664 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052363027 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 673, 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=673)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Reports results of a bibliometric study of 111 theses accepted by the Department of Library and Information Science, Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, Nigeria, between 1977 and 1992. The analysis was based on year, type and degree awarded, subject, type of library and geographical area. Concludes that the highest number of submissions was 1991, when 108 MLS theses (97,29%) and 3 PhD theses (2,71%) were accepted. Libraries and readers was the most concetrated subject while the academic library was the most discussed type of library
- Source
- Library focus. 13/14(1995/96), S.22-25
-
Siddiqui, M.A.: ¬A bibliometric study of authorship characteristics in four international information science journals (1997)
0.05
0.050781734 = product of:
0.10156347 = sum of:
0.10156347 = sum of:
0.05899667 = weight(_text_:science in 853) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05899667 = score(doc=853,freq=12.0), product of:
0.13793045 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.052363027 = queryNorm
0.42772767 = fieldWeight in 853, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=853)
0.042566802 = weight(_text_:22 in 853) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.042566802 = score(doc=853,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1833664 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052363027 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 853, 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=853)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Reports results of a bibliometric study of the authorship characteristics of articles published in 4 major information science periodicals: JASIS, Information technology and libraries, Journal of information science, and Program. The aim was to determine the details of their authors, such as: sex, occupation, affiliation, geographic distribution, and institutional affiliation. A total of 163 articles published in 1993 and written by 294 authors were analyzed. Results indicate that: men (206 or 70%) publish 3.0 times more articles than women (69 or 23,5%). Schools of library and information science contributed the most authors. The majority of authors came from the USA (148 or 50,3%), with the Midwest region claiming the largest share (110 or 25,0%). Academic libraries (110 or 37,4%) account for the major share of library publication. 12 schools of library and information science, in the USA, contributed 32 authors (50,0%) and assistant professors (25 or 39,1%) publish the most in these library schools. Male school of library and information science authors publish 1,6 times more than their female counterparts
- Source
- International forum on information and documentation. 22(1997) no.3, S.3-23
-
Raan, A.F.J. van: Scaling rules in the science system : influence of field-specific citation characteristics on the impact of research groups (2008)
0.05
0.050781734 = product of:
0.10156347 = sum of:
0.10156347 = sum of:
0.05899667 = weight(_text_:science in 2758) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05899667 = score(doc=2758,freq=12.0), product of:
0.13793045 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.052363027 = queryNorm
0.42772767 = fieldWeight in 2758, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2758)
0.042566802 = weight(_text_:22 in 2758) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.042566802 = score(doc=2758,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1833664 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052363027 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2758, 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=2758)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- A representation of science as a citation density landscape is proposed and scaling rules with the field-specific citation density as a main topological property are investigated. The focus is on the size-dependence of several main bibliometric indicators for a large set of research groups while distinguishing between top-performance and lower-performance groups. It is demonstrated that this representation of the science system is particularly effective to understand the role and the interdependencies of the different bibliometric indicators and related topological properties of the landscape.
- Date
- 22. 3.2009 19:03:12
- Footnote
- Vgl. auch: Costas, R., M. Bordons u. T.N. van Leeuwen u.a.: Scaling rules in the science system: Influence of field-specific citation characteristics on the impact of individual researchers. In: Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 60(2009) no.4, S.740-753.
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 59(2008) no.4, S.565-576
-
Levitt, J.M.; Thelwall, M.: Citation levels and collaboration within library and information science (2009)
0.05
0.047522873 = product of:
0.095045745 = sum of:
0.095045745 = sum of:
0.04488029 = weight(_text_:science in 2734) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04488029 = score(doc=2734,freq=10.0), product of:
0.13793045 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.052363027 = queryNorm
0.32538348 = fieldWeight in 2734, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2734)
0.05016546 = weight(_text_:22 in 2734) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05016546 = score(doc=2734,freq=4.0), product of:
0.1833664 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052363027 = 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)
- 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
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 60(2009) no.3, S.434-442
-
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
-
Meho, L.I.; Rogers, Y.: Citation counting, citation ranking, and h-index of human-computer interaction researchers : a comparison of Scopus and Web of Science (2008)
0.05
0.046120957 = product of:
0.09224191 = sum of:
0.09224191 = sum of:
0.056769572 = weight(_text_:science in 2352) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.056769572 = score(doc=2352,freq=16.0), product of:
0.13793045 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.052363027 = queryNorm
0.41158113 = fieldWeight in 2352, product of:
4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
16.0 = termFreq=16.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2352)
0.035472337 = weight(_text_:22 in 2352) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.035472337 = score(doc=2352,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1833664 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052363027 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2352, 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=2352)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- This study examines the differences between Scopus and Web of Science in the citation counting, citation ranking, and h-index of 22 top human-computer interaction (HCI) researchers from EQUATOR - a large British Interdisciplinary Research Collaboration project. Results indicate that Scopus provides significantly more coverage of HCI literature than Web of Science, primarily due to coverage of relevant ACM and IEEE peer-reviewed conference proceedings. No significant differences exist between the two databases if citations in journals only are compared. Although broader coverage of the literature does not significantly alter the relative citation ranking of individual researchers, Scopus helps distinguish between the researchers in a more nuanced fashion than Web of Science in both citation counting and h-index. Scopus also generates significantly different maps of citation networks of individual scholars than those generated by Web of Science. The study also presents a comparison of h-index scores based on Google Scholar with those based on the union of Scopus and Web of Science. The study concludes that Scopus can be used as a sole data source for citation-based research and evaluation in HCI, especially when citations in conference proceedings are sought, and that researchers should manually calculate h scores instead of relying on system calculations.
- Object
- Web of Science
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 59(2008) no.11, S.1711-1726
-
Crespo, J.A.; Herranz, N.; Li, Y.; Ruiz-Castillo, J.: ¬The effect on citation inequality of differences in citation practices at the web of science subject category level (2014)
0.05
0.045153804 = product of:
0.09030761 = sum of:
0.09030761 = sum of:
0.04014215 = weight(_text_:science in 1291) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04014215 = score(doc=1291,freq=8.0), product of:
0.13793045 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.052363027 = queryNorm
0.2910318 = fieldWeight in 1291, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1291)
0.05016546 = weight(_text_:22 in 1291) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05016546 = score(doc=1291,freq=4.0), product of:
0.1833664 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052363027 = queryNorm
0.27358043 = fieldWeight in 1291, 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=1291)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- This article studies the impact of differences in citation practices at the subfield, or Web of Science subject category level, using the model introduced in Crespo, Li, and Ruiz-Castillo (2013a), according to which the number of citations received by an article depends on its underlying scientific influence and the field to which it belongs. We use the same Thomson Reuters data set of about 4.4 million articles used in Crespo et al. (2013a) to analyze 22 broad fields. The main results are the following: First, when the classification system goes from 22 fields to 219 subfields the effect on citation inequality of differences in citation practices increases from ?14% at the field level to 18% at the subfield level. Second, we estimate a set of exchange rates (ERs) over a wide [660, 978] citation quantile interval to express the citation counts of articles into the equivalent counts in the all-sciences case. In the fractional case, for example, we find that in 187 of 219 subfields the ERs are reliable in the sense that the coefficient of variation is smaller than or equal to 0.10. Third, in the fractional case the normalization of the raw data using the ERs (or subfield mean citations) as normalization factors reduces the importance of the differences in citation practices from 18% to 3.8% (3.4%) of overall citation inequality. Fourth, the results in the fractional case are essentially replicated when we adopt a multiplicative approach.
- Object
- Web of Science
- Source
- Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 65(2014) no.6, S.1244-1256
-
Ding, Y.: Applying weighted PageRank to author citation networks (2011)
0.04
0.044699986 = product of:
0.08939997 = sum of:
0.08939997 = sum of:
0.0397387 = weight(_text_:science in 4188) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0397387 = score(doc=4188,freq=4.0), product of:
0.13793045 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.052363027 = queryNorm
0.2881068 = fieldWeight in 4188, 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=4188)
0.04966127 = weight(_text_:22 in 4188) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04966127 = score(doc=4188,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1833664 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052363027 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 4188, 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=4188)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- This article aims to identify whether different weighted PageRank algorithms can be applied to author citation networks to measure the popularity and prestige of a scholar from a citation perspective. Information retrieval (IR) was selected as a test field and data from 1956-2008 were collected from Web of Science. Weighted PageRank with citation and publication as weighted vectors were calculated on author citation networks. The results indicate that both popularity rank and prestige rank were highly correlated with the weighted PageRank. Principal component analysis was conducted to detect relationships among these different measures. For capturing prize winners within the IR field, prestige rank outperformed all the other measures
- Date
- 22. 1.2011 13:02:21
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 62(2011) no.2, S.236-245
-
Schlögl, C.: Internationale Sichtbarkeit der europäischen und insbesondere der deutschsprachigen Informationswissenschaft (2013)
0.04
0.044699986 = product of:
0.08939997 = sum of:
0.08939997 = sum of:
0.0397387 = weight(_text_:science in 900) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0397387 = score(doc=900,freq=4.0), product of:
0.13793045 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.052363027 = queryNorm
0.2881068 = fieldWeight in 900, 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=900)
0.04966127 = weight(_text_:22 in 900) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04966127 = score(doc=900,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1833664 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052363027 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 900, 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=900)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- In diesem Beitrag wird eine Publikationsanalyse von Beiträgen in von im Web of Science (WoS) indexierten bibliotheks- und informationswissenschaftlichen Zeitschriften vorgestellt. Die Ergebnisse dieser Analyse bestätigen die anglo-amerikanische Dominanz in der facheinschlägigen Literatur, die bei den primär informationswissenschaftlichen Zeitschriften sogar noch deutlicher ausfällt. Die skandinavischen Länder und der Bereich der Szientometrie stellen gewisse Ausnahmen dar. Die internationale Sichtbarkeit Deutschlands und Österreichs ist hingegen "ausbaufähig".
- Content
- Eine englische Version dieses Beitrags erscheint unter dem Titel "International visibility of European and in particular German language publications in library and information science" im Tagungsband des 13. Internationalen Symposiums für Informationswissenschaft (ISI 2013). Vgl.: http://www.degruyter.com/view/j/iwp.2013.64.issue-1/iwp-2013-0001/iwp-2013-0001.xml?format=INT.
- Date
- 22. 3.2013 14:04:09
-
Manley, S.: Letters to the editor and the race for publication metrics (2022)
0.04
0.044699986 = product of:
0.08939997 = sum of:
0.08939997 = sum of:
0.0397387 = weight(_text_:science in 547) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0397387 = score(doc=547,freq=4.0), product of:
0.13793045 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.052363027 = queryNorm
0.2881068 = fieldWeight in 547, 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=547)
0.04966127 = weight(_text_:22 in 547) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04966127 = score(doc=547,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1833664 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052363027 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 547, 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=547)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- This article discusses how letters to the editor boost publishing metrics for journals and authors, and then examines letters published since 2015 in six elite journals, including the Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. The initial findings identify some potentially anomalous use of letters and unusual self-citation patterns. The article proposes that Clarivate Analytics consider slightly reconfiguring the Journal Impact Factor to more fairly account for letters and that journals transparently explain their letter submission policies.
- Date
- 6. 4.2022 19:22:26
- Source
- Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 73(2022) no.5, S.702-707
-
Tijssen, R.J.W.; Wijk, E. van: ¬The global science base of information and communication technologies : bibliometric analysis of ICT research papers (1998)
0.04
0.04443473 = product of:
0.08886946 = sum of:
0.08886946 = sum of:
0.03211372 = weight(_text_:science in 3691) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03211372 = score(doc=3691,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13793045 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.052363027 = queryNorm
0.23282544 = fieldWeight in 3691, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3691)
0.05675574 = weight(_text_:22 in 3691) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05675574 = score(doc=3691,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1833664 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052363027 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 3691, 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=3691)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 5.1999 19:26:54
-
Bornmann, L.; Mutz, R.: From P100 to P100' : a new citation-rank approach (2014)
0.04
0.04443473 = product of:
0.08886946 = sum of:
0.08886946 = sum of:
0.03211372 = weight(_text_:science in 1431) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03211372 = score(doc=1431,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13793045 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.052363027 = queryNorm
0.23282544 = fieldWeight in 1431, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1431)
0.05675574 = weight(_text_:22 in 1431) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05675574 = score(doc=1431,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1833664 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052363027 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 1431, 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=1431)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 8.2014 17:05:18
- Source
- Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 65(2014) no.9, S.1939-1943
-
Asubiaro, T.V.; Onaolapo, S.: ¬A comparative study of the coverage of African journals in Web of Science, Scopus, and CrossRef (2023)
0.04
0.044287704 = product of:
0.08857541 = sum of:
0.08857541 = sum of:
0.053103074 = weight(_text_:science in 992) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.053103074 = score(doc=992,freq=14.0), product of:
0.13793045 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.052363027 = queryNorm
0.38499892 = fieldWeight in 992, product of:
3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
14.0 = termFreq=14.0
2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=992)
0.035472337 = weight(_text_:22 in 992) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.035472337 = score(doc=992,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1833664 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052363027 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 992, 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=992)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- This is the first study that evaluated the coverage of journals from Africa in Web of Science, Scopus, and CrossRef. A list of active journals published in each of the 55 African countries was compiled from Ulrich's periodicals directory and African Journals Online (AJOL) website. Journal master lists for Web of Science, Scopus, and CrossRef were searched for the African journals. A total of 2,229 unique active African journals were identified from Ulrich (N = 2,117, 95.0%) and AJOL (N = 243, 10.9%) after removing duplicates. The volume of African journals in Web of Science and Scopus databases is 7.4% (N = 166) and 7.8% (N = 174), respectively, compared to the 45.6% (N = 1,017) covered in CrossRef. While making up only 17.% of all the African journals, South African journals had the best coverage in the two most authoritative databases, accounting for 73.5% and 62.1% of all the African journals in Web of Science and Scopus, respectively. In contrast, Nigeria published 44.5% of all the African journals. The distribution of the African journals is biased in favor of Medical, Life and Health Sciences and Humanities and the Arts in the three databases. The low representation of African journals in CrossRef, a free indexing infrastructure that could be harnessed for building an African-centric research indexing database, is concerning.
- Date
- 22. 6.2023 14:09:06
- Object
- Web of Science
- Source
- Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 74(2023) no.7, S.745-758
