Search (733 results, page 1 of 37)

  • × theme_ss:"Informetrie"
  1. Kreider, J.: ¬The correlation of local citation data with citation data from Journal Citation Reports (1999) 0.27 
    0.26587605 = product of:
  0.39881408 = sum of:
    0.2417184 = weight(_text_:citation in 102) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.2417184 = score(doc=102,freq=22.0), product of:
        0.23445003 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04999695 = queryNorm
        1.0310018 = fieldWeight in 102, product of:
          4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
            22.0 = termFreq=22.0
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=102)
    0.15709569 = sum of:
      0.11645231 = weight(_text_:reports in 102) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.11645231 = score(doc=102,freq=6.0), product of:
          0.2251839 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.503953 = idf(docFreq=1329, maxDocs=44218)
            0.04999695 = queryNorm
          0.51714313 = fieldWeight in 102, product of:
            2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
              6.0 = termFreq=6.0
            4.503953 = idf(docFreq=1329, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=102)
      0.04064338 = weight(_text_:22 in 102) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04064338 = score(doc=102,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1750808 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.04999695 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 102, 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=102)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    University librarians continue to face the difficult task of determining which journals remain crucial for their collections during these times of static financial resources and escalating journal costs. One evaluative tool, Journal Citation Reports (JCR), recently has become available on CD-ROM, making it simpler for librarians to use its citation data as input for ranking journals. But many librarians remain unconvinced that the global citation data from the JCR bears enough correspondence to their local situation to be useful. In this project, I explore the correlation between global citation data available from JCR with local citation data generated specifically for the University of British Columbia, for 20 subject fields in the sciences and social sciences. The significant correlations obtained in this study suggest that large research-oriented university libraries could consider substituting global citation data for local citation data when evaluating their journals, with certain cautions.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
    Object
    Journal Citation Reports
  2. Osareh, F.: Bibliometrics, citation analysis and co-citation analysis : a review of literature II (1996) 0.22 
    0.22423057 = product of:
  0.33634585 = sum of:
    0.29152334 = weight(_text_:citation in 7105) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.29152334 = score(doc=7105,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.23445003 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04999695 = queryNorm
        1.2434349 = fieldWeight in 7105, product of:
          4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
            18.0 = termFreq=18.0
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=7105)
    0.044822514 = product of:
      0.08964503 = sum of:
        0.08964503 = weight(_text_:reports in 7105) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08964503 = score(doc=7105,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.2251839 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.503953 = idf(docFreq=1329, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04999695 = queryNorm
            0.39809695 = fieldWeight in 7105, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.503953 = idf(docFreq=1329, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=7105)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    Part 2 of a 2 part article reviewing the technique of bibliometrics and one of its most widely used methods, citation analysis. Reports on studies of author co-citation, periodical by periodical citation analysis and country by country citation analysis in addition to the mapping of science as an application of citation analysis. Considers the limitations, problems and reliability of citation analysis
    Theme
    Citation indexing
  3. Neuhaus, C.; Daniel, H.-D.: Data sources for performing citation analysis : an overview (2008) 0.22 
    0.22250943 = product of:
  0.33376414 = sum of:
    0.29454443 = weight(_text_:citation in 1735) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.29454443 = score(doc=1735,freq=24.0), product of:
        0.23445003 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04999695 = queryNorm
        1.2563207 = fieldWeight in 1735, product of:
          4.8989797 = tf(freq=24.0), with freq of:
            24.0 = termFreq=24.0
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1735)
    0.039219696 = product of:
      0.07843939 = sum of:
        0.07843939 = weight(_text_:reports in 1735) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07843939 = score(doc=1735,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.2251839 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.503953 = idf(docFreq=1329, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04999695 = queryNorm
            0.34833482 = fieldWeight in 1735, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.503953 = idf(docFreq=1329, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1735)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to provide an overview of new citation-enhanced databases and to identify issues to be considered when they are used as a data source for performing citation analysis. Design/methodology/approach - The paper reports the limitations of Thomson Scientific's citation indexes and reviews the characteristics of the citation-enhanced databases Chemical Abstracts, Google Scholar and Scopus. Findings - The study suggests that citation-enhanced databases need to be examined carefully, with regard to both their potentialities and their limitations for citation analysis. Originality/value - The paper presents a valuable overview of new citation-enhanced databases in the context of research evaluation.
    Object
    Science citation index
    Social sciences citation index
    Arts and humanities citation index
    Theme
    Citation indexing
  4. Nicolaisen, J.: Citation analysis (2007) 0.22 
    0.21936135 = product of:
  0.32904202 = sum of:
    0.27485085 = weight(_text_:citation in 6091) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.27485085 = score(doc=6091,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.23445003 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04999695 = queryNorm
        1.1723217 = fieldWeight in 6091, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=6091)
    0.054191172 = product of:
      0.108382344 = sum of:
        0.108382344 = weight(_text_:22 in 6091) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.108382344 = score(doc=6091,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1750808 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04999695 = 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)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Date
    13. 7.2008 19:53:22
    Theme
    Citation indexing
  5. Tsay, M.-Y.: From Science Citation Index to Journal Citation Reports, amd criteria for journals evaluation (1997) 0.20 
    0.19526169 = product of:
  0.29289252 = sum of:
    0.224962 = weight(_text_:citation in 657) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.224962 = score(doc=657,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.23445003 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04999695 = queryNorm
        0.9595307 = fieldWeight in 657, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=657)
    0.06793051 = product of:
      0.13586102 = sum of:
        0.13586102 = weight(_text_:reports in 657) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.13586102 = score(doc=657,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.2251839 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.503953 = idf(docFreq=1329, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04999695 = queryNorm
            0.60333365 = fieldWeight in 657, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              4.503953 = idf(docFreq=1329, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=657)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    Investigates the characteristics of Journal Citation Reports (JCR) through the study of the Science Citation Index (SCI). Other criteria for evaluating a journal are also discussed. The compilation process of SCI data, and the characteristics, applications and limitations of SCI are studied. A detailed description of JCR is provided including: journal ranking listing, citing journal listing, cited journal listing, subject category listing, source data, impact factor, immediacy index, cited half-life and citing half-life. The applications and limitations of JCR are also explored. In addition to the criteria listed in JCR, the size, circulation and influence of journals are also considered significant criteria fir evaluation purposes
    Object
    Science Citation Index
    Journal Citation Reports
    Theme
    Citation indexing
  6. Lercher, A.: Correlation over time for citations to mathematics articles (2013) 0.19 
    0.18797033 = product of:
  0.28195548 = sum of:
    0.19205788 = weight(_text_:citation in 661) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.19205788 = score(doc=661,freq=20.0), product of:
        0.23445003 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04999695 = queryNorm
        0.8191847 = fieldWeight in 661, product of:
          4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
            20.0 = termFreq=20.0
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=661)
    0.08989762 = sum of:
      0.05602814 = weight(_text_:reports in 661) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.05602814 = score(doc=661,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.2251839 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.503953 = idf(docFreq=1329, maxDocs=44218)
            0.04999695 = queryNorm
          0.24881059 = fieldWeight in 661, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.503953 = idf(docFreq=1329, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=661)
      0.033869483 = weight(_text_:22 in 661) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.033869483 = score(doc=661,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1750808 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.04999695 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 661, 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=661)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    Explicit definition of the limits of citation analysis demands additional tests for the validity of citation analysis. The stability of citation rankings over time can be regarded as confirming the validity of evaluative citation analysis. This stability over time was investigated for two sets of citation records from the Web of Science (Thomson Reuters, Philadelphia, PA) for articles published in journals classified in Journal Citation Reports as Mathematics. These sets are of all such articles for the 1960s and for the 1970s. This study employs only descriptive statistics and draws no inferences to any larger population. The study found a high correlation from one decade to the next of rankings among sets of most highly cited articles. However, the study found a low correlation for rankings among articles whose ranks were the 500 directly below those of the 500 most cited. This perhaps expected result is discussed in terms of the Glänzel-Schubert-Schoepflin stochastic model for citation processes and also in connection with an account of the purposes of evaluative citation analysis. This interpretative context suggests why the limitations of citation analysis may be inherent to citation analysis even when it is done well.
    Date
    22. 3.2013 19:23:35
  7. Neth, M.: Citation analysis and the Web (1998) 0.18 
    0.18208592 = product of:
  0.27312887 = sum of:
    0.14727221 = weight(_text_:citation in 108) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.14727221 = score(doc=108,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.23445003 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04999695 = queryNorm
        0.62816036 = fieldWeight in 108, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=108)
    0.12585667 = sum of:
      0.07843939 = weight(_text_:reports in 108) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.07843939 = score(doc=108,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.2251839 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.503953 = idf(docFreq=1329, maxDocs=44218)
            0.04999695 = queryNorm
          0.34833482 = fieldWeight in 108, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.503953 = idf(docFreq=1329, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=108)
      0.047417276 = weight(_text_:22 in 108) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.047417276 = score(doc=108,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1750808 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.04999695 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 108, 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=108)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    Citation analysis has long been used by librarians as an important tool of collection development and the advent of Internet technology and especially the WWW adds a new facet to the role played by citation analysis. One of the reasons why librarians create WWW homepages is to provide users with further sources of interest or reference and to do this libraries include links from their own homepages to other information sources. Reports current research on the analysis of WWW pages as an introduction to an examination of the homepages of 25 art libraries to determine what sites are most often included. The types of linked sites are analyzed based on 3 criteria: location, focus and evidence that the link was evaluated before the connection was establisheds
    Date
    10. 1.1999 16:22:37
  8. Leydesdorff, L.: Betweenness centrality as an indicator of the interdisciplinarity of scientific journals (2007) 0.18 
    0.17745599 = product of:
  0.26618397 = sum of:
    0.21864252 = weight(_text_:citation in 453) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.21864252 = score(doc=453,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.23445003 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04999695 = queryNorm
        0.9325762 = fieldWeight in 453, product of:
          4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
            18.0 = termFreq=18.0
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=453)
    0.047541454 = product of:
      0.09508291 = sum of:
        0.09508291 = weight(_text_:reports in 453) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09508291 = score(doc=453,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.2251839 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.503953 = idf(docFreq=1329, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04999695 = queryNorm
            0.4222456 = fieldWeight in 453, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.503953 = idf(docFreq=1329, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=453)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    In addition to science citation indicators of journals like impact and immediacy, social network analysis provides a set of centrality measures like degree, betweenness, and closeness centrality. These measures are first analyzed for the entire set of 7,379 journals included in the Journal Citation Reports of the Science Citation Index and the Social Sciences Citation Index 2004 (Thomson ISI, Philadelphia, PA), and then also in relation to local citation environments that can be considered as proxies of specialties and disciplines. Betweenness centrality is shown to be an indicator of the interdisciplinarity of journals, but only in local citation environments and after normalization; otherwise, the influence of degree centrality (size) overshadows the betweenness-centrality measure. The indicator is applied to a variety of citation environments, including policy-relevant ones like biotechnology and nanotechnology. The values of the indicator remain sensitive to the delineations of the set because of the indicator's local character. Maps showing interdisciplinarity of journals in terms of betweenness centrality can be drawn using information about journal citation environments, which is available online.
    Object
    Journal Citation Reports
  9. Bensman, S.J.: Distributional differences of the impact factor in the sciences versus the social sciences : an analysis of the probabilistic structure of the 2005 journal citation reports (2008) 0.18 
    0.17624287 = product of:
  0.2643643 = sum of:
    0.20613813 = weight(_text_:citation in 1953) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.20613813 = score(doc=1953,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.23445003 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04999695 = queryNorm
        0.8792412 = fieldWeight in 1953, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1953)
    0.058226153 = product of:
      0.11645231 = sum of:
        0.11645231 = weight(_text_:reports in 1953) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11645231 = score(doc=1953,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.2251839 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.503953 = idf(docFreq=1329, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04999695 = queryNorm
            0.51714313 = fieldWeight in 1953, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              4.503953 = idf(docFreq=1329, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1953)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    This paper examines the probability structure of the 2005 Science Citation Index (SCI) and Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI) Journal Citation Reports (JCR) by analyzing the Impact Factor distributions of their journals. The distribution of the SCI journals corresponded with a distribution generally modeled by the negative binomial distribution, whereas the SSCI distribution fit the Poisson distribution modeling random, rare events. Both Impact Factor distributions were positively skewed - the SCI much more so than the SSCI - indicating excess variance. One of the causes of this excess variance was that the journals highest in the Impact Factor in both JCRs tended to class in subject categories well funded by the National Institutes of Health. The main reason for the SCI Impact Factor distribution being more skewed than the SSCI one was that review journals defining disciplinary paradigms play a much more important role in the sciences than in the social sciences.
    Object
    Science Citation Index
    Social Sciences Citation Index
    Journal Citation Reports
    Theme
    Citation indexing
  10. Tonta, Y.: Scholarly communication and the use of networked information sources (1996) 0.17 
    0.17463975 = product of:
  0.2619596 = sum of:
    0.12623332 = weight(_text_:citation in 6389) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.12623332 = score(doc=6389,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.23445003 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04999695 = queryNorm
        0.5384232 = fieldWeight in 6389, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=6389)
    0.13572629 = sum of:
      0.09508291 = weight(_text_:reports in 6389) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.09508291 = score(doc=6389,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.2251839 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.503953 = idf(docFreq=1329, maxDocs=44218)
            0.04999695 = queryNorm
          0.4222456 = fieldWeight in 6389, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            4.503953 = idf(docFreq=1329, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=6389)
      0.04064338 = weight(_text_:22 in 6389) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04064338 = score(doc=6389,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1750808 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.04999695 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 6389, 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=6389)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    Examines the use of networked information sources in scholarly communication. Networked information sources are defined broadly to cover: documents and images stored on electronic network hosts; data files; newsgroups; listservs; online information services and electronic periodicals. Reports results of a survey to determine how heavily, if at all, networked information sources are cited in scholarly printed periodicals published in 1993 and 1994. 27 printed periodicals, representing a wide range of subjects and the most influential periodicals in their fields, were identified through the Science Citation Index and Social Science Citation Index Journal Citation Reports. 97 articles were selected for further review and references, footnotes and bibliographies were checked for references to networked information sources. Only 2 articles were found to contain such references. Concludes that, although networked information sources facilitate scholars' work to a great extent during the research process, scholars have yet to incorporate such sources in the bibliographies of their published articles
    Source
    IFLA journal. 22(1996) no.3, S.240-245
  11. Magri, M.; Solari, A.: ¬The SCI Journal Citation Reports : a potential tool for studying journals? (1996) 0.17 
    0.17203873 = product of:
  0.2580581 = sum of:
    0.1901276 = weight(_text_:citation in 5076) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.1901276 = score(doc=5076,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.23445003 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04999695 = queryNorm
        0.8109515 = fieldWeight in 5076, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5076)
    0.06793051 = product of:
      0.13586102 = sum of:
        0.13586102 = weight(_text_:reports in 5076) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.13586102 = score(doc=5076,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.2251839 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.503953 = idf(docFreq=1329, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04999695 = queryNorm
            0.60333365 = fieldWeight in 5076, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              4.503953 = idf(docFreq=1329, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5076)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    Analyses 6 indicators of the Science Citation Index Journals Citation Reports over a 19 year period: number of total citations, number of citations to the previous 2 years, number of source items, impact factor, immediacy index and cited half life. Proposes a box plot method to aggregate the values of each indicator so as to obtain at a glance portrayals of the JCR population from 1974 to 1993. This 'rereading' of the JCR, which presents the JCR product differently, makes it possible to shed new light on the large sub population of journals not at the top of the rankings
    Object
    Journal Citation Reports
    Theme
    Citation indexing
  12. Leydesdorff, L.: Can networks of journal-journal citations be used as indicators of change in the social sciences? (2003) 0.17 
    0.16909254 = product of:
  0.2536388 = sum of:
    0.14576167 = weight(_text_:citation in 4460) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.14576167 = score(doc=4460,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.23445003 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04999695 = queryNorm
        0.62171745 = fieldWeight in 4460, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4460)
    0.10787715 = sum of:
      0.06723377 = weight(_text_:reports in 4460) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.06723377 = score(doc=4460,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.2251839 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.503953 = idf(docFreq=1329, maxDocs=44218)
            0.04999695 = queryNorm
          0.29857272 = fieldWeight in 4460, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.503953 = idf(docFreq=1329, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4460)
      0.04064338 = weight(_text_:22 in 4460) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04064338 = score(doc=4460,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1750808 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.04999695 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4460, 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=4460)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    Aggregated journal-journal citations can be used for mapping the intellectual organization of the sciences in terms of specialties because the latter can be considered as interreading communities. Can the journal-journal citations also be used as early indicators of change by comparing the files for two subsequent years? Probabilistic entropy measures enable us to analyze changes in large datasets at different levels of aggregation and in considerable detail. Compares Journal Citation Reports of the Social Science Citation Index for 1999 with similar data for 1998 and analyzes the differences using these measures. Compares the various indicators with similar developments in the Science Citation Index. Specialty formation seems a more important mechanism in the development of the social sciences than in the natural and life sciences, but the developments in the social sciences are volatile. The use of aggregate statistics based on the Science Citation Index is ill-advised in the case of the social sciences because of structural differences in the underlying dynamics.
    Date
    6.11.2005 19:02:22
  13. Leydesdorff, L.: ¬The generation of aggregated journal-journal citation maps on the basis of the CD-ROM version of the Science Citation Index (1994) 0.16 
    0.16499603 = product of:
  0.24749403 = sum of:
    0.20827433 = weight(_text_:citation in 8281) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.20827433 = score(doc=8281,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.23445003 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04999695 = queryNorm
        0.8883528 = fieldWeight in 8281, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=8281)
    0.039219696 = product of:
      0.07843939 = sum of:
        0.07843939 = weight(_text_:reports in 8281) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07843939 = score(doc=8281,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.2251839 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.503953 = idf(docFreq=1329, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04999695 = queryNorm
            0.34833482 = fieldWeight in 8281, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.503953 = idf(docFreq=1329, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=8281)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    Describes a method for the generation of journal-journal citation maps on the basis of the CD-ROM version of the Science Citation Index. Discusses sources of potential error from this data. Offers strategies to counteract such errors. Analyzes a number of scientometric periodical mappings in relation to mappings from previous studies which have used tape data and/or data from ISI's Journal Citation Reports. Compares the quality of these mappings with the quality of those for previous years in order to demonstrate the use of such mappings as indicators for dynamic developments in the sciences
    Object
    Science Citation Index
  14. Franceschet, M.: ¬The large-scale structure of journal citation networks (2012) 0.16 
    0.16372842 = product of:
  0.24559262 = sum of:
    0.1901276 = weight(_text_:citation in 60) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.1901276 = score(doc=60,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.23445003 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04999695 = queryNorm
        0.8109515 = fieldWeight in 60, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=60)
    0.05546503 = product of:
      0.11093006 = sum of:
        0.11093006 = weight(_text_:reports in 60) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11093006 = score(doc=60,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.2251839 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.503953 = idf(docFreq=1329, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04999695 = queryNorm
            0.49261987 = fieldWeight in 60, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.503953 = idf(docFreq=1329, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=60)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    We analyze the large-scale structure of the journal citation network built from information contained in the Thomson-Reuters Journal Citation Reports. To this end, we explore network properties such as density, percolation robustness, average and largest node distances, reciprocity, incoming and outgoing degree distributions, and assortative mixing by node degrees. We discover that the journal citation network is a dense, robust, small, and reciprocal world. Furthermore, in- and outdegree node distributions display long tails, with few vital journals and many trivial ones, and they are strongly positively correlated.
    Object
    Journal Citation Reports
  15. Snyder, H.; Cronin, B.; Davenport, E.: What's the use of citation? : Citation analysis as a literature topic in selected disciplines of the social sciences (1995) 0.16 
    0.15983668 = product of:
  0.23975502 = sum of:
    0.20613813 = weight(_text_:citation in 1825) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.20613813 = score(doc=1825,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.23445003 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04999695 = queryNorm
        0.8792412 = fieldWeight in 1825, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1825)
    0.033616886 = product of:
      0.06723377 = sum of:
        0.06723377 = weight(_text_:reports in 1825) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06723377 = score(doc=1825,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.2251839 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.503953 = idf(docFreq=1329, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04999695 = queryNorm
            0.29857272 = fieldWeight in 1825, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.503953 = idf(docFreq=1329, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1825)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    Reports results of a study to investigate the place and role of citation analysis in selected disciplines in the social sciences, including library and information science. 5 core library and information science periodicals: Journal of documentation; Library quarterly; Journal of the American Society for Information Science; College and research libraries; and the Journal of information science, were studed to determine the percentage of articles devoted to citation analysis and develop an indictive typology to categorize the major foci of research being conducted under the rubric of citation analysis. Similar analysis was conducted for periodicals in other social sciences disciplines. Demonstrates how the rubric can be used to dertermine how citatiion analysis is applied within library and information science and other disciplines. By isolating citation from bibliometrics in general, this work is differentiated from other, previous studies. Analysis of data from a 10 year sample of transdisciplinary social sciences literature suggests that 2 application areas predominate: the validity of citation as an evaluation tool; and impact or performance studies of authors, periodicals, and institutions
    Theme
    Citation indexing
  16. Leydesdorff, L.; Bornmann, L.; Wagner, C.S.: ¬The relative influences of government funding and international collaboration on citation impact (2019) 0.16 
    0.15607366 = product of:
  0.23411047 = sum of:
    0.12623332 = weight(_text_:citation in 4681) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.12623332 = score(doc=4681,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.23445003 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04999695 = queryNorm
        0.5384232 = fieldWeight in 4681, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4681)
    0.10787715 = sum of:
      0.06723377 = weight(_text_:reports in 4681) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.06723377 = score(doc=4681,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.2251839 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.503953 = idf(docFreq=1329, maxDocs=44218)
            0.04999695 = queryNorm
          0.29857272 = fieldWeight in 4681, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.503953 = idf(docFreq=1329, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4681)
      0.04064338 = weight(_text_:22 in 4681) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04064338 = score(doc=4681,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1750808 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.04999695 = 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)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    A recent publication in Nature reports that public R&D funding is only weakly correlated with the citation impact of a nation's articles as measured by the field-weighted citation index (FWCI; defined by Scopus). On the basis of the supplementary data, we up-scaled the design using Web of Science data for the decade 2003-2013 and OECD funding data for the corresponding decade assuming a 2-year delay (2001-2011). Using negative binomial regression analysis, we found very small coefficients, but the effects of international collaboration are positive and statistically significant, whereas the effects of government funding are negative, an order of magnitude smaller, and statistically nonsignificant (in two of three analyses). In other words, international collaboration improves the impact of research articles, whereas more government funding tends to have a small adverse effect when comparing OECD countries.
    Date
    8. 1.2019 18:22:45
  17. Brown, C.: ¬The evolution of preprints in the scholarly communication of physicists and astronomers (2001) 0.15 
    0.1544505 = product of:
  0.23167576 = sum of:
    0.19205788 = weight(_text_:citation in 5184) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.19205788 = score(doc=5184,freq=20.0), product of:
        0.23445003 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04999695 = queryNorm
        0.8191847 = fieldWeight in 5184, product of:
          4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
            20.0 = termFreq=20.0
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5184)
    0.039617877 = product of:
      0.079235755 = sum of:
        0.079235755 = weight(_text_:reports in 5184) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.079235755 = score(doc=5184,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.2251839 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.503953 = idf(docFreq=1329, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04999695 = queryNorm
            0.3518713 = fieldWeight in 5184, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.503953 = idf(docFreq=1329, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5184)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    In one of two bibliometric papers in this issue Brown looks at formal publication and citation of Eprints as shown by the policies and practices of 37 top tier physics journals, and by citation trends in ISI's SciSearch database and Journal Citation Reports. Citation analysis was carried out if Eprint cites were indicated by editor response, instruction to authors sections, reports in the literature, or actual examination of citation lists. Total contribution to 12 archives and their citation counts in the journals were compiled. Of the 13 editors surveyed that responded, 8 published papers that had appeared in the archive. Two of these required removal from the archive at publication; two of the 13 did not publish papers that have appeared as Eprints. A review journal that solicits its contributions allowed citation of Eprints. Seven allowed citations to Eprints, but were less than enthusiastic.Nearly 36,000 citations were made to the 12 archives. Citations to the 37 journals and their impact factors remain constant over the period of 1991 to 1998. Eprint citations appear to peak about 3 years after appearance as do citations to published papers. Contribution to the archives, and their use as measured by citation, is clearly growing. Citation form and publishing policy varies from journal to journal.
    Theme
    Citation indexing
  18. Wan, X.; Liu, F.: Are all literature citations equally important? : automatic citation strength estimation and its applications (2014) 0.15 
    0.15097323 = product of:
  0.22645983 = sum of:
    0.20613813 = weight(_text_:citation in 1350) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.20613813 = score(doc=1350,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.23445003 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04999695 = queryNorm
        0.8792412 = fieldWeight in 1350, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1350)
    0.02032169 = product of:
      0.04064338 = sum of:
        0.04064338 = weight(_text_:22 in 1350) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04064338 = score(doc=1350,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1750808 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04999695 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1350, 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=1350)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    Literature citation analysis plays a very important role in bibliometrics and scientometrics, such as the Science Citation Index (SCI) impact factor, h-index. Existing citation analysis methods assume that all citations in a paper are equally important, and they simply count the number of citations. Here we argue that the citations in a paper are not equally important and some citations are more important than the others. We use a strength value to assess the importance of each citation and propose to use the regression method with a few useful features for automatically estimating the strength value of each citation. Evaluation results on a manually labeled data set in the computer science field show that the estimated values can achieve good correlation with human-labeled values. We further apply the estimated citation strength values for evaluating paper influence and author influence, and the preliminary evaluation results demonstrate the usefulness of the citation strength values.
    Date
    22. 8.2014 17:12:35
  19. Bensman, S.J.; Leydesdorff, L.: Definition and identification of journals as bibliographic and subject entities : librarianship versus ISI Journal Citation Reports methods and their effect on citation measures (2009) 0.15 
    0.15070823 = product of:
  0.22606233 = sum of:
    0.17852087 = weight(_text_:citation in 2840) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.17852087 = score(doc=2840,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.23445003 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04999695 = queryNorm
        0.7614453 = fieldWeight in 2840, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2840)
    0.047541454 = product of:
      0.09508291 = sum of:
        0.09508291 = weight(_text_:reports in 2840) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09508291 = score(doc=2840,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.2251839 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.503953 = idf(docFreq=1329, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04999695 = queryNorm
            0.4222456 = fieldWeight in 2840, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.503953 = idf(docFreq=1329, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2840)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    This paper explores the ISI Journal Citation Reports (JCR) bibliographic and subject structures through Library of Congress (LC) and American research libraries cataloging and classification methodology. The 2006 Science Citation Index JCR Behavioral Sciences subject category journals are used as an example. From the library perspective, the main fault of the JCR bibliographic structure is that the JCR mistakenly identifies journal title segments as journal bibliographic entities, seriously affecting journal rankings by total cites and the impact factor. In respect to JCR subject structure, the title segment, which constitutes the JCR bibliographic basis, is posited as the best bibliographic entity for the citation measurement of journal subject relationships. Through factor analysis and other methods, the JCR subject categorization of journals is tested against their LC subject headings and classification. The finding is that JCR and library journal subject analyses corroborate, clarify, and correct each other.
    Object
    Journal Citation Report
  20. Leydesdorff, L.: Clusters and maps of science journals based on bi-connected graphs in Journal Citation Reports (2004) 0.15 
    0.14746177 = product of:
  0.22119266 = sum of:
    0.1629665 = weight(_text_:citation in 4427) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.1629665 = score(doc=4427,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.23445003 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04999695 = queryNorm
        0.69510126 = fieldWeight in 4427, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4427)
    0.058226153 = product of:
      0.11645231 = sum of:
        0.11645231 = weight(_text_:reports in 4427) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11645231 = score(doc=4427,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.2251839 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.503953 = idf(docFreq=1329, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04999695 = queryNorm
            0.51714313 = fieldWeight in 4427, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              4.503953 = idf(docFreq=1329, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4427)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    The aggregated journal-journal citation matrix derived from Journal Citation Reports 2001 can be decomposed into a unique subject classification using the graph-analytical algorithm of bi-connected components. This technique was recently incorporated in software tools for social network analysis. The matrix can be assessed in terms of its decomposability using articulation points which indicate overlap between the components. The articulation points of this set did not exhibit a next-order network of "general science" journals. However, the clusters differ in size and in terms of the internal density of their relations. A full classification of the journals is provided in the Appendix. The clusters can also be extracted and mapped for the visualization.
    Object
    Journal Citation Reports
    Theme
    Citation indexing

Authors

Years

Languages

Types

  • a 713
  • m 10
  • s 9
  • el 8
  • r 3
  • More… Less…

Themes

Subjects

Classifications