-
Liu, Y.; Rafols, I.; Rousseau, R.: ¬A framework for knowledge integration and diffusion (2012)
0.01
0.014947688 = product of:
0.044843063 = sum of:
0.044843063 = product of:
0.089686126 = sum of:
0.089686126 = weight(_text_:methodology in 297) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.089686126 = score(doc=297,freq=4.0), product of:
0.21236731 = queryWeight, product of:
4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
0.047143444 = queryNorm
0.42231607 = fieldWeight in 297, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=297)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Abstract
- Purpose - This paper aims to introduce a general framework for the analysis of knowledge integration and diffusion using bibliometric data. Design/methodology/approach - The authors propose that in order to characterise knowledge integration and diffusion of a given issue (the source, for example articles on a topic or by an organisation, etc.), one has to choose a set of elements from the source (the intermediary set, for example references, keywords, etc.). This set can then be classified into categories (cats), thus making it possible to investigate its diversity. The set can also be characterised according to the coherence of a network associated to it. Findings - This framework allows a methodology to be developed to assess knowledge integration and diffusion. Such methodologies can be useful for a number of science policy issues, including the assessment of interdisciplinarity in research and dynamics of research networks. Originality/value - The main contribution of this article is to provide a simple and easy to use generalisation of an existing approach to study interdisciplinarity, bringing knowledge integration and knowledge diffusion together in one framework.
-
Rousseau, R.: Robert Fairthorne and the empirical power laws (2005)
0.01
0.012331214 = product of:
0.03699364 = sum of:
0.03699364 = product of:
0.07398728 = sum of:
0.07398728 = weight(_text_:methodology in 4398) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07398728 = score(doc=4398,freq=2.0), product of:
0.21236731 = queryWeight, product of:
4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
0.047143444 = queryNorm
0.348393 = fieldWeight in 4398, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4398)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Abstract
- Purpose - Aims to review Fairthorne's classic article "Empirical hyperbolic distributions (Bradford-Zipf-Mandelbrot) for bibliometric description and prediction" (Journal of Documentation, Vol. 25, pp. 319-343, 1969), as part of a series marking the Journal of Documentation's 60th anniversary. Design/methodology/approach - Analysis of article content, qualitative evaluation of its subsequent impact, citation analysis, and diffusion analysis. Findings - The content, further developments and influence on the field of informetrics of this landmark paper are explained. Originality/value - A review is given of the contents of Fairthorne's original article and its influence on the field of informetrics. Its transdisciplinary reception is measured through a diffusion analysis.
-
Egghe, L.; Guns, R.; Rousseau, R.; Leuven, K.U.: Erratum (2012)
0.01
0.010645477 = product of:
0.03193643 = sum of:
0.03193643 = product of:
0.06387286 = sum of:
0.06387286 = weight(_text_:22 in 4992) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06387286 = score(doc=4992,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16508831 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.047143444 = queryNorm
0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 4992, 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=4992)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Date
- 14. 2.2012 12:53:22
-
Liang, L.; Rousseau, R.: Yield sequences as journal attractivity indicators : "payback times" for Science and Nature (2008)
0.01
0.010569612 = product of:
0.031708833 = sum of:
0.031708833 = product of:
0.063417666 = sum of:
0.063417666 = weight(_text_:methodology in 1737) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.063417666 = score(doc=1737,freq=2.0), product of:
0.21236731 = queryWeight, product of:
4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
0.047143444 = queryNorm
0.29862255 = fieldWeight in 1737, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1737)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Abstract
- Purpose - The yield period of a journal is defined as the time needed to accumulate the same number of citations as the number of references included during the period of study. Yield sequences are proposed as journal attractivity indicators describing dynamic characteristics of a journal. This paper aims to investigate their use. Design/methodology/approach - As a case study the yield sequences of the journals Nature and Science from 1955 onward are determined. Similarities and dissimilarities between these sequences are discussed and factors affecting yield periods are determined. Findings - The study finds that yield sequences make dynamic aspects of a journal visible, as reflected through citations. Exceptional circumstances (here the publication of Laemmli's paper in 1970 in the journal Nature) become clearly visible. The average number of references per article, the citation distribution and the size of the database used to collect citations are factors influencing yield sequences. Originality/value - A new dynamic indicator for the study of journals is introduced.
-
Liu, Y.; Rousseau, R.: Interestingness and the essence of citation : Thomas Reid and bibliographic description (2013)
0.01
0.010569612 = product of:
0.031708833 = sum of:
0.031708833 = product of:
0.063417666 = sum of:
0.063417666 = weight(_text_:methodology in 1764) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.063417666 = score(doc=1764,freq=2.0), product of:
0.21236731 = queryWeight, product of:
4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
0.047143444 = queryNorm
0.29862255 = fieldWeight in 1764, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1764)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Abstract
- Purpose - This paper aims to provide a new insight into the reasons why authors cite. Design/methodology/approach The authors argue that, based on philosophical ideas about the essence of things, pure rational thinking about the role of citations leads to the answer. Findings - Citations originate from the interestingness of the investigated phenomenon. The essence of citation lies in the interaction between different ideas or perspectives on a phenomenon addressed in the citing as well as in the cited articles. Research limitations/implications - The findings only apply to ethical (not whimsical or self-serving) citations. As such citations reflect interactions of scientific ideas, they can reveal the evolution of science, revive the cognitive process of an investigated scientific phenomenon and reveal political and economic factors influencing the development of science. Originality/value - This article is the first to propose interestingness and the interaction of ideas as the basic reason for citing. This view on citations allows reverse engineering from citations to ideas and hence becomes useful for science policy.
-
Frandsen, T.F.; Rousseau, R.; Rowlands, I.: Diffusion factors (2006)
0.01
0.00880801 = product of:
0.02642403 = sum of:
0.02642403 = product of:
0.05284806 = sum of:
0.05284806 = weight(_text_:methodology in 5587) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05284806 = score(doc=5587,freq=2.0), product of:
0.21236731 = queryWeight, product of:
4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
0.047143444 = queryNorm
0.24885213 = fieldWeight in 5587, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5587)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Abstract
- Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to clarify earlier work on journal diffusion metrics. Classical journal indicators such as the Garfield impact factor do not measure the breadth of influence across the literature of a particular journal title. As a new approach to measuring research influence, the study complements these existing metrics with a series of formally described diffusion factors. Design/methodology/approach - Using a publication-citation matrix as an organising construct, the paper develops formal descriptions of two forms of diffusion metric: "relative diffusion factors" and "journal diffusion factors" in both their synchronous and diachronous forms. It also provides worked examples for selected library and information science and economics journals, plus a sample of health information papers to illustrate their construction and use. Findings - Diffusion factors capture different aspects of the citation reception process than existing bibliometric measures. The paper shows that diffusion factors can be applied at the whole journal level or for sets of articles and that they provide a richer evidence base for citation analyses than traditional measures alone. Research limitations/implications - The focus of this paper is on clarifying the concepts underlying diffusion factors and there is unlimited scope for further work to apply these metrics to much larger and more comprehensive data sets than has been attempted here. Practical implications - These new tools extend the range of tools available for bibliometric, and possibly webometric, analysis. Diffusion factors might find particular application in studies where the research questions focus on the dynamic aspects of innovation and knowledge transfer. Originality/value - This paper will be of interest to those with theoretical interests in informetric distributions as well as those interested in science policy and innovation studies.
-
Egghe, L.; Rousseau, R.: Averaging and globalising quotients of informetric and scientometric data (1996)
0.01
0.006387286 = product of:
0.019161858 = sum of:
0.019161858 = product of:
0.038323715 = sum of:
0.038323715 = weight(_text_:22 in 7659) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.038323715 = score(doc=7659,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16508831 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.047143444 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 7659, 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=7659)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Source
- Journal of information science. 22(1996) no.3, S.165-170
-
Asonuma, A.; Fang, Y.; Rousseau, R.: Reflections on the age distribution of Japanese scientists (2006)
0.01
0.006387286 = product of:
0.019161858 = sum of:
0.019161858 = product of:
0.038323715 = sum of:
0.038323715 = weight(_text_:22 in 5270) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.038323715 = score(doc=5270,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16508831 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.047143444 = 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)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Date
- 22. 7.2006 15:26:24
-
Ahlgren, P.; Jarneving, B.; Rousseau, R.: Requirements for a cocitation similarity measure, with special reference to Pearson's correlation coefficient (2003)
0.00
0.0042581907 = product of:
0.012774572 = sum of:
0.012774572 = product of:
0.025549144 = sum of:
0.025549144 = weight(_text_:22 in 5171) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.025549144 = score(doc=5171,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16508831 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.047143444 = 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)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
- Date
- 9. 7.2006 10:22:35
