Search (191 results, page 1 of 10)

0.20145741 = product of:
  0.3021861 = sum of:
    0.21070267 = weight(_text_:citation in 6148) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.21070267 = score(doc=6148,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.23479973 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050071523 = queryNorm
        0.8973719 = fieldWeight in 6148, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=6148)
    0.09148343 = product of:
      0.18296686 = sum of:
        0.18296686 = weight(_text_:index in 6148) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.18296686 = score(doc=6148,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.21880072 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050071523 = queryNorm
            0.836226 = fieldWeight in 6148, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=6148)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

This article illustrates a numer of uses for Science Citation Index as an unusual reference tool. It is shown to be useful beyond its intended purpose. Its value is limited only by one's imagination. Inaccessible information can be made readily available by creatively using this well-known but under-used reference tool

Object

Science citation index

0.12297632 = product of:
  0.18446447 = sum of:
    0.14749189 = weight(_text_:citation in 7324) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.14749189 = score(doc=7324,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.23479973 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050071523 = queryNorm
        0.62816036 = fieldWeight in 7324, 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=7324)
    0.036972582 = product of:
      0.073945165 = sum of:
        0.073945165 = weight(_text_:index in 7324) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.073945165 = score(doc=7324,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21880072 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050071523 = queryNorm
            0.33795667 = fieldWeight in 7324, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=7324)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Outlines a proposed reference model to promote more effective interaction between reference librarians and graduate students. Drawing on sociological studies of scientific communities, the model uses a sequential set of search strategies to enable students to conduct a thourough literature review and identify significant research. The aim of the model is to enable librarians to play a genuine role in the education and socialization of future scientists. Steps involved in the model consist of: searching subject indexes; identifying review articles; searching for ancestors (also known as footnote tracing) and using lists of references from relevant publications to find earlier research studies; searching for descendants (citation searching using citation indexes such as ISI's Science Citation Index); identifying key documents; and current awareness

0.04344636 = product of:
  0.13033907 = sum of:
    0.13033907 = sum of:
      0.089635074 = weight(_text_:index in 3069) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.089635074 = score(doc=3069,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.21880072 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050071523 = queryNorm
          0.40966535 = fieldWeight in 3069, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3069)
      0.040703997 = weight(_text_:22 in 3069) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.040703997 = score(doc=3069,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17534193 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050071523 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3069, 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=3069)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Content

Vgl.: https://yis.univie.ac.at/index.php/yis/article/view/1324/1234. Diesem Beitrag liegt folgende Abschlussarbeit zugrunde: Lamparter, Anna: Kompetenzprofil für Information Professionals in Unternehmen. Masterarbeit (M.A.), Hochschule Hannover, 2015. Volltext: https://serwiss.bib.hs-hannover.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/528 Vgl. auch: (geb. Lamparter): Kompetenzprofil von Information Professionals in Unternehmen. In:

Date

28. 7.2016 16:22:54

0.040549748 = product of:
  0.12164924 = sum of:
    0.12164924 = weight(_text_:citation in 1729) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.12164924 = score(doc=1729,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.23479973 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050071523 = queryNorm
        0.5180979 = fieldWeight in 1729, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1729)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

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.

Theme

Citation indexing

0.035117112 = product of:
  0.10535134 = sum of:
    0.10535134 = weight(_text_:citation in 2713) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10535134 = score(doc=2713,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.23479973 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050071523 = queryNorm
        0.44868594 = fieldWeight in 2713, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2713)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

This study uses bibliometric analysis and citation context analysis to identify the influence of the main concepts embedded in Taylor's 1968 classic article entitled Question-Negotiation and Information-Seeking in Libraries. This study analyses articles published between 1969 and 2010 which cite Taylor's article. The results show that Taylor's article on a question-negotiation model is increasingly visible and its influence is not limited to the discipline of library and information science. Of the 14 cited concepts identified, the concept of "four levels of information needs" was cited most (31.7%), followed by "question negotiation" (20.5%) and "other concepts relating to information needs" (17.9%). The results indicate an increasing trend in the citations of "four levels of information needs" and this concept also received the most attention from information retrieval research. A decreasing trend was evident for the concept of "question negotiation" and this concept was frequently cited by reference service researchers. In addition, among the 10 citation functions, "related literature" was dominant (30.8%). Both "evidence" and "views" were in second place with the same percentage (18.7%), followed by "terms" (9.2%) and "background information" (7.2%). A decreasing trend was identified in the top three citation functions, whereas an increasing trend was observed in the "term" and "background information" functions.

0.034858085 = product of:
  0.104574256 = sum of:
    0.104574256 = product of:
      0.20914851 = sum of:
        0.20914851 = weight(_text_:index in 5604) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.20914851 = score(doc=5604,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.21880072 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050071523 = queryNorm
            0.9558858 = fieldWeight in 5604, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=5604)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

0.020274874 = product of:
  0.06082462 = sum of:
    0.06082462 = weight(_text_:citation in 3267) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06082462 = score(doc=3267,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.23479973 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050071523 = queryNorm
        0.25904894 = fieldWeight in 3267, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3267)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS), along with astronomy's journals and data centers (a collaboration dubbed URANIA), has developed a distributed online digital library which has become the dominant means by which astronomers search, access, and read their technical literature. Digital libraries permit the easy accumulation of a new type of bibliometric measure: the number of electronic accesses ("reads") of individual articles. By combining data from the text, citation, and reference databases with data from the ADS readership logs we have been able to create second-order bibliometric operators, a customizable class of collaborative filters that permits substantially improved accuracy in literature queries. Using the ADS usage logs along with membership statistics from the International Astronomical Union and data an the population and gross domestic product (GDP), we have developed an accurate model for worldwide basic research where the number of scientists in a country is proportional to the GDP of that country, and the amount of basic research done by a country is proportional to the number of scientists in that country times that country's per capita GDP. We introduce the concept of utility time to measure the impact of the ADS/ URANIA and the electronic astronomical library an astronomical research. We find that in 2002 it amounted to the equivalent of 736 full-time researchers, or $250 million, or the astronomical research done in France.

0.020274874 = product of:
  0.06082462 = sum of:
    0.06082462 = weight(_text_:citation in 1733) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06082462 = score(doc=1733,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.23479973 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050071523 = queryNorm
        0.25904894 = fieldWeight in 1733, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1733)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to outline how article genres, or article types, are classified and described in the disciplines of biology, education, and software engineering. By using the expression article genres, emphasis is placed on the social role of journal articles that, as such, accomplish specific communicative functions and are intended for a certain context and audience. Design/methodology/approach - Drawing on this idea, the instructions to authors of the research journals cited in the Journal Citation Reports for each of the three disciplines are analysed. Findings - The information provided by the instructions to authors of major publications in the fields studied allows one to describe the following article genres: major articles, theoretical articles, review articles, short articles, practice-oriented articles, case studies, comment and opinion, and reviews. Research limitations/implications - Results show that article genres reflect the nature of research in each field to the extent that using them to describe items along with topic may improve management and retrieval of scientific documents. In addition, article genres perform specific communicative functions within disciplinary communities, which accounts for both emerging types of articles and variations in traditional types. Originality/value - The paper summarizes the information on article genres available in the instructions to authors of scientific journals in the disciplines of biology, education and software engineering. It attempts to show how results can mirror the nature of research in each field as well as current debates within each discipline on the state and quality of research. Also it shows how article genres convey specific communication needs within disciplinary communities, which proves that genres are social and evolving objects.

0.020274874 = product of:
  0.06082462 = sum of:
    0.06082462 = weight(_text_:citation in 5840) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06082462 = score(doc=5840,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.23479973 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050071523 = queryNorm
        0.25904894 = fieldWeight in 5840, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5840)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Purpose This paper scrutinizes the scholarship on community archives' information work. Community archives and archiving projects represent unprecedentedly democratic venues for information work centering on essential documentary concepts such as custody, collection development and appraisal, processing, arrangement and description, organization, representation and naming, collaboration, resource generation and allocation, activism and social justice, preservation, reuse, and sustainability. Design/methodology/approach Unearthed through databases searches, citation chaining, and browsing, sources examined include peer-reviewed journal articles, books, and book chapters published in the English language between 1985 and 2018. Findings The literature on community archives' information work shows considerable geographical (six continents), topical, and (inter)disciplinary variety. This paper first explores scholars' efforts to define both community and community archives. Second, it unpacks the ways in which community archives include new stakeholders and new record types and formats even as they leverage alternative archival principles and practices. Third, it discusses community archives as political venues for empowerment, activism, and social justice work. Fourth, this paper delves into the benefits and challenges of partnerships and collaborations with mainstream institutions. Fifth, it documents the obstacles community archives face: not only tensions within and among communities, but also sustainability concerns. Finally, it sets forth six directions for future research. Originality/value This paper is the first systematic review of the community archives literature.

0.018090667 = product of:
  0.054272 = sum of:
    0.054272 = product of:
      0.108544 = sum of:
        0.108544 = weight(_text_:22 in 5755) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.108544 = score(doc=5755,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17534193 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050071523 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 5755, 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=5755)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Source

Zentralblatt für Bibliothekswesen. 57(1940), S.16-22

0.018090667 = product of:
  0.054272 = sum of:
    0.054272 = product of:
      0.108544 = sum of:
        0.108544 = weight(_text_:22 in 5761) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.108544 = score(doc=5761,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17534193 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050071523 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 5761, 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=5761)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Source

Bücherei und Bildung. 22(1970), S.63-71

0.018090667 = product of:
  0.054272 = sum of:
    0.054272 = product of:
      0.108544 = sum of:
        0.108544 = weight(_text_:22 in 5772) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.108544 = score(doc=5772,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17534193 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050071523 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 5772, 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=5772)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Source

Bibliothekar. 19(1965), S.15-22

0.018090667 = product of:
  0.054272 = sum of:
    0.054272 = product of:
      0.108544 = sum of:
        0.108544 = weight(_text_:22 in 5341) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.108544 = score(doc=5341,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17534193 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050071523 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 5341, 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=5341)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

17.10.1996 14:22:33

0.018090667 = product of:
  0.054272 = sum of:
    0.054272 = product of:
      0.108544 = sum of:
        0.108544 = weight(_text_:22 in 252) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.108544 = score(doc=252,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17534193 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050071523 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 252, 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=252)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Series

Reference librarian; no.22

0.018090667 = product of:
  0.054272 = sum of:
    0.054272 = product of:
      0.108544 = sum of:
        0.108544 = weight(_text_:22 in 5649) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.108544 = score(doc=5649,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17534193 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050071523 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 5649, 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=5649)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

20. 4.2002 17:30:22

0.018090667 = product of:
  0.054272 = sum of:
    0.054272 = product of:
      0.108544 = sum of:
        0.108544 = weight(_text_:22 in 2504) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.108544 = score(doc=2504,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17534193 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050071523 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 2504, 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=2504)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

27.12.2015 18:22:38

0.017605992 = product of:
  0.052817974 = sum of:
    0.052817974 = product of:
      0.10563595 = sum of:
        0.10563595 = weight(_text_:index in 8343) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10563595 = score(doc=8343,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21880072 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050071523 = queryNorm
            0.48279524 = fieldWeight in 8343, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=8343)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Source

Catalogue and index. 1994, no.112, S.7-9

0.017605992 = product of:
  0.052817974 = sum of:
    0.052817974 = product of:
      0.10563595 = sum of:
        0.10563595 = weight(_text_:index in 1733) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10563595 = score(doc=1733,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21880072 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050071523 = queryNorm
            0.48279524 = fieldWeight in 1733, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1733)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Discusses stage 3 of the Big 6 process, location and access, which has 2 components: locate sources; and find information within sources. Looks at the 3 concepts involved: index, keyword and Boolean searching

0.017429043 = product of:
  0.052287128 = sum of:
    0.052287128 = product of:
      0.104574256 = sum of:
        0.104574256 = weight(_text_:index in 769) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.104574256 = score(doc=769,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.21880072 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050071523 = queryNorm
            0.4779429 = fieldWeight in 769, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=769)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Content

Masterarbeit an der Hochschule Hannover, Fakultät III - Medien, Information und Design. Trägerin des VFI-Förderpreises 2015, Vgl.: urn:nbn:de:bsz:960-opus4-5280. http://serwiss.bib.hs-hannover.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/528. Vgl. auch: Knoll, A. (geb. Lamparter): Kompetenzprofil von Information Professionals in Unternehmen. In: Young information professionals. 1(2016) S.1-11.

0.015829332 = product of:
  0.047487997 = sum of:
    0.047487997 = product of:
      0.09497599 = sum of:
        0.09497599 = weight(_text_:22 in 7585) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09497599 = score(doc=7585,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17534193 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050071523 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 7585, 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=7585)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

22. 1.2000 17:52:11