-
Bornmann, L.: What do altmetrics counts mean? : a plea for content analyses (2016)
0.02
0.019988423 = product of:
0.09994212 = sum of:
0.09994212 = weight(_text_:40 in 2858) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09994212 = score(doc=2858,freq=2.0), product of:
0.19765252 = queryWeight, product of:
3.813818 = idf(docFreq=2651, maxDocs=44218)
0.051825367 = queryNorm
0.5056456 = fieldWeight in 2858, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.813818 = idf(docFreq=2651, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=2858)
0.2 = coord(1/5)
- Date
- 19. 3.2016 12:40:15
-
Marx, W.; Bornmann, L.: On the problems of dealing with bibliometric data (2014)
0.02
0.016851893 = product of:
0.08425946 = sum of:
0.08425946 = weight(_text_:22 in 1239) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08425946 = score(doc=1239,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18148361 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.051825367 = 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)
0.2 = coord(1/5)
- Date
- 18. 3.2014 19:13:22
-
Bornmann, L.: How well does a university perform in comparison with its peers? : The use of odds, and odds ratios, for the comparison of institutional citation impact using the Leiden Rankings (2015)
0.01
0.011659914 = product of:
0.058299568 = sum of:
0.058299568 = weight(_text_:40 in 2340) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.058299568 = score(doc=2340,freq=2.0), product of:
0.19765252 = queryWeight, product of:
3.813818 = idf(docFreq=2651, maxDocs=44218)
0.051825367 = queryNorm
0.2949599 = fieldWeight in 2340, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.813818 = idf(docFreq=2651, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2340)
0.2 = coord(1/5)
- Date
- 24.11.2015 16:40:21
-
Bornmann, L.; Mutz, R.: From P100 to P100' : a new citation-rank approach (2014)
0.01
0.011234595 = product of:
0.056172974 = sum of:
0.056172974 = weight(_text_:22 in 1431) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.056172974 = score(doc=1431,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18148361 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.051825367 = 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)
0.2 = coord(1/5)
- Date
- 22. 8.2014 17:05:18
-
Bornmann, L.: Lässt sich die Qualität von Forschung messen? (2013)
0.01
0.009994212 = product of:
0.04997106 = sum of:
0.04997106 = weight(_text_:40 in 928) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04997106 = score(doc=928,freq=2.0), product of:
0.19765252 = queryWeight, product of:
3.813818 = idf(docFreq=2651, maxDocs=44218)
0.051825367 = queryNorm
0.2528228 = fieldWeight in 928, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.813818 = idf(docFreq=2651, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=928)
0.2 = coord(1/5)
- Date
- 24.12.2009 14:16:40
-
Bornmann, L.: How to analyze percentile citation impact data meaningfully in bibliometrics : the statistical analysis of distributions, percentile rank classes, and top-cited papers (2013)
0.01
0.008425946 = product of:
0.04212973 = sum of:
0.04212973 = weight(_text_:22 in 656) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04212973 = score(doc=656,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18148361 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.051825367 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 656, 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=656)
0.2 = coord(1/5)
- Date
- 22. 3.2013 19:44:17
-
Leydesdorff, L.; Bornmann, L.; Wagner, C.S.: ¬The relative influences of government funding and international collaboration on citation impact (2019)
0.01
0.008425946 = product of:
0.04212973 = sum of:
0.04212973 = weight(_text_:22 in 4681) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04212973 = score(doc=4681,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18148361 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.051825367 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4681, 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=4681)
0.2 = coord(1/5)
- Date
- 8. 1.2019 18:22:45
-
Bornmann, L.; Daniel, H.D.: What do citation counts measure? : a review of studies on citing behavior (2008)
0.01
0.00832851 = product of:
0.04164255 = sum of:
0.04164255 = weight(_text_:40 in 1729) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04164255 = score(doc=1729,freq=2.0), product of:
0.19765252 = queryWeight, product of:
3.813818 = idf(docFreq=2651, maxDocs=44218)
0.051825367 = queryNorm
0.21068566 = fieldWeight in 1729, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.813818 = idf(docFreq=2651, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1729)
0.2 = coord(1/5)
- Abstract
- Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to present a narrative review of studies on the citing behavior of scientists, covering mainly research published in the last 15 years. Based on the results of these studies, the paper seeks to answer the question of the extent to which scientists are motivated to cite a publication not only to acknowledge intellectual and cognitive influences of scientific peers, but also for other, possibly non-scientific, reasons. Design/methodology/approach - The review covers research published from the early 1960s up to mid-2005 (approximately 30 studies on citing behavior-reporting results in about 40 publications). Findings - The general tendency of the results of the empirical studies makes it clear that citing behavior is not motivated solely by the wish to acknowledge intellectual and cognitive influences of colleague scientists, since the individual studies reveal also other, in part non-scientific, factors that play a part in the decision to cite. However, the results of the studies must also be deemed scarcely reliable: the studies vary widely in design, and their results can hardly be replicated. Many of the studies have methodological weaknesses. Furthermore, there is evidence that the different motivations of citers are "not so different or 'randomly given' to such an extent that the phenomenon of citation would lose its role as a reliable measure of impact". Originality/value - Given the increasing importance of evaluative bibliometrics in the world of scholarship, the question "What do citation counts measure?" is a particularly relevant and topical issue.
-
Bornmann, L.; Schier, H.; Marx, W.; Daniel, H.-D.: Is interactive open access publishing able to identify high-impact submissions? : a study on the predictive validity of Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics by using percentile rank classes (2011)
0.01
0.00832851 = product of:
0.04164255 = sum of:
0.04164255 = weight(_text_:40 in 4132) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04164255 = score(doc=4132,freq=2.0), product of:
0.19765252 = queryWeight, product of:
3.813818 = idf(docFreq=2651, maxDocs=44218)
0.051825367 = queryNorm
0.21068566 = fieldWeight in 4132, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.813818 = idf(docFreq=2651, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4132)
0.2 = coord(1/5)
- Date
- 8. 1.2011 18:29:40
-
Leydesdorff, L.; Bornmann, L.: How fractional counting of citations affects the impact factor : normalization in terms of differences in citation potentials among fields of science (2011)
0.01
0.0070216223 = product of:
0.03510811 = sum of:
0.03510811 = weight(_text_:22 in 4186) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03510811 = score(doc=4186,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18148361 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.051825367 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4186, 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=4186)
0.2 = coord(1/5)
- Date
- 22. 1.2011 12:51:07
