Search (5784 results, page 2 of 290)

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

0.20145741 = product of:
  0.3021861 = sum of:
    0.21070267 = weight(_text_:citation in 50) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.21070267 = score(doc=50,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.23479973 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050071523 = queryNorm
        0.8973719 = fieldWeight in 50, 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=50)
    0.09148343 = product of:
      0.18296686 = sum of:
        0.18296686 = weight(_text_:index in 50) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.18296686 = score(doc=50,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.21880072 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050071523 = queryNorm
            0.836226 = fieldWeight in 50, 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=50)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Der Data Citation Index (DCI) stellt eine durchsuchbare Sammlung bibliografischer Metadaten zu Forschungsdaten in Datensätzen und Datenstudien ausgewählter Repositorien dar. Der DCI deckt alle wissenschaftlichen Disziplinen ab.

Object

Data Citation Index

0.20111732 = product of:
  0.30167598 = sum of:
    0.2308132 = weight(_text_:citation in 86) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.2308132 = score(doc=86,freq=20.0), product of:
        0.23479973 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050071523 = queryNorm
        0.9830216 = fieldWeight in 86, product of:
          4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
            20.0 = termFreq=20.0
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=86)
    0.070862755 = product of:
      0.14172551 = sum of:
        0.14172551 = weight(_text_:index in 86) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.14172551 = score(doc=86,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.21880072 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050071523 = queryNorm
            0.64773786 = fieldWeight in 86, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=86)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

The invention of the citation index was credited to Shepard (1873) and Shapiro described a legal citation index published in 1743. A similar index was embedded in the Talmud 2 centuries earlier (1546). The 1st Hebrew citation index to a printed book is dated 1511. The earliest Hebrew manuscript citation index, ascribed to Maimonides, dates from the 12th century. Considerable knowledge was assumed for users of these tools. The substantial knowledge of their compilers contrats with the semi-automatic production of modern citation indexes. The terms citation, quotation, reference, cross-reference, locator, and concordance are employed inconsistently in publications about Hebrew indexes. There is a lack of citation links between the secondary literature on Hebrew indexes and that of citation analysis

Theme

Citation indexing

0.19949517 = product of:
  0.29924273 = sum of:
    0.22529756 = weight(_text_:citation in 657) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.22529756 = score(doc=657,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.23479973 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050071523 = 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)
    0.073945165 = product of:
      0.14789033 = sum of:
        0.14789033 = weight(_text_:index in 657) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.14789033 = score(doc=657,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.21880072 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050071523 = queryNorm
            0.67591333 = fieldWeight in 657, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, 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

0.19764213 = product of:
  0.2964632 = sum of:
    0.14597909 = weight(_text_:citation in 4460) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.14597909 = score(doc=4460,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.23479973 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050071523 = 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)
    0.1504841 = sum of:
      0.1097801 = weight(_text_:index in 4460) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.1097801 = score(doc=4460,freq=6.0), product of:
          0.21880072 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050071523 = queryNorm
          0.50173557 = fieldWeight in 4460, product of:
            2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
              6.0 = termFreq=6.0
            4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4460)
      0.040703997 = weight(_text_:22 in 4460) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.040703997 = score(doc=4460,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17534193 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050071523 = 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

0.19026572 = product of:
  0.28539857 = sum of:
    0.21070267 = weight(_text_:citation in 376) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.21070267 = score(doc=376,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.23479973 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050071523 = queryNorm
        0.8973719 = fieldWeight in 376, 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=376)
    0.0746959 = product of:
      0.1493918 = sum of:
        0.1493918 = weight(_text_:index in 376) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.1493918 = score(doc=376,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.21880072 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050071523 = queryNorm
            0.6827756 = fieldWeight in 376, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=376)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Footnote

Ein Leserbrief zu Sinn und Nutzen des Science Citation Index als Erwiderung auf einen Beitrag von A. Octavio in Mathematical intelligencer 18(1996) no.4, S.9-11

Theme

Citation indexing

0.18938124 = product of:
  0.28407186 = sum of:
    0.2064456 = weight(_text_:citation in 3848) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.2064456 = score(doc=3848,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.23479973 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050071523 = queryNorm
        0.8792412 = fieldWeight in 3848, 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=3848)
    0.07762626 = product of:
      0.15525252 = sum of:
        0.15525252 = weight(_text_:index in 3848) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.15525252 = score(doc=3848,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.21880072 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050071523 = queryNorm
            0.7095612 = fieldWeight in 3848, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3848)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

The Web of Science, an online database of bibliographic information produced by Thomson Reuters- draws its real value from the scholarly citation index at its core. By indexing the cited references from each paper as a separate part of the bibliographic data, a citation index creates a pathway by which a paper can be linked backward in time to the body of work that preceded it, as well as linked forward in time to its scholarly descendants. This entry provides a brief history of the development of the citation index, its core functionalities, and the way these unique data are provided to users through the Web of Science.

Object

Science Citation Index
Social Sciences Citation Index
Arts and Humanities Citation Index

Theme

Citation indexing

0.18609837 = product of:
  0.27914754 = sum of:
    0.19463879 = weight(_text_:citation in 4049) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.19463879 = score(doc=4049,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.23479973 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050071523 = queryNorm
        0.8289566 = fieldWeight in 4049, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4049)
    0.084508754 = product of:
      0.16901751 = sum of:
        0.16901751 = weight(_text_:index in 4049) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.16901751 = score(doc=4049,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.21880072 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050071523 = queryNorm
            0.7724724 = fieldWeight in 4049, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4049)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

The Science Citation Index Compact Disc Edition (SCI CDE) is a multidisciplinary database providing complete bibliographic information on cited references for each article, meeting, abstract, editorial, review, footnote and letter. Trough a CD-ROM version produced by the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI), the related records feature enables extended cross referencing. Describes ISI's improvements to searching the databses, covering the search engine and by comparing CSI CDE with MEDLINE on CD-ROM. Assesses SCI CDE's special options and documentation

Object

Science Citation Index

0.18609837 = product of:
  0.27914754 = sum of:
    0.19463879 = weight(_text_:citation in 6207) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.19463879 = score(doc=6207,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.23479973 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050071523 = queryNorm
        0.8289566 = fieldWeight in 6207, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=6207)
    0.084508754 = product of:
      0.16901751 = sum of:
        0.16901751 = weight(_text_:index in 6207) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.16901751 = score(doc=6207,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21880072 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050071523 = queryNorm
            0.7724724 = fieldWeight in 6207, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=6207)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Object

Science citation index

0.18481234 = product of:
  0.2772185 = sum of:
    0.24329849 = weight(_text_:citation in 613) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.24329849 = score(doc=613,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.23479973 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050071523 = queryNorm
        1.0361958 = fieldWeight in 613, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=613)
    0.03392 = product of:
      0.06784 = sum of:
        0.06784 = weight(_text_:22 in 613) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06784 = score(doc=613,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17534193 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050071523 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 613, 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=613)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Content

Abschnitte zu: The origins of citation indexing in science - Citation analysis in sociology, history and philosophy of science - From ASIS to ASIST

Source

Password. 2002, H.6, S.22-25

Theme

Citation indexing

0.18174893 = product of:
  0.2726234 = sum of:
    0.208585 = weight(_text_:citation in 8281) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.208585 = score(doc=8281,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.23479973 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050071523 = 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)
    0.064038396 = product of:
      0.12807679 = sum of:
        0.12807679 = weight(_text_:index in 8281) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.12807679 = score(doc=8281,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.21880072 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050071523 = queryNorm
            0.5853582 = fieldWeight in 8281, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, 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

0.18174893 = product of:
  0.2726234 = sum of:
    0.208585 = weight(_text_:citation in 1676) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.208585 = score(doc=1676,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.23479973 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050071523 = queryNorm
        0.8883528 = fieldWeight in 1676, 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=1676)
    0.064038396 = product of:
      0.12807679 = sum of:
        0.12807679 = weight(_text_:index in 1676) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.12807679 = score(doc=1676,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.21880072 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050071523 = queryNorm
            0.5853582 = fieldWeight in 1676, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1676)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Reviews the Web of Science, a new Web interface to the citation indexes produced by ISI. The Web of Science carries the past 10 years of ISI's 3 major citation indexes: AHCI, SSCI, and SCI. Combined, the 3 indexes provide access to article citations from about 8.000 journals and over 10 million records. Topics covered in the review include: pricing; searching in 2 modes: Quick Search and Full Search; lateral searching and citation matching; document delivery; full text; and documentation and help. Provides a list of selected databases that link to full text, a facility not yet available on the Web of Science

Object

Arts and Humanities Citation Index
Social Sciences Citation Index
Science Citation Index

0.17988479 = product of:
  0.2698272 = sum of:
    0.2064456 = weight(_text_:citation in 58) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.2064456 = score(doc=58,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.23479973 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050071523 = queryNorm
        0.8792412 = fieldWeight in 58, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=58)
    0.06338157 = product of:
      0.12676314 = sum of:
        0.12676314 = weight(_text_:index in 58) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.12676314 = score(doc=58,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21880072 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050071523 = queryNorm
            0.5793543 = fieldWeight in 58, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=58)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Theme

Citation indexing

0.17988479 = product of:
  0.2698272 = sum of:
    0.2064456 = weight(_text_:citation in 1953) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.2064456 = score(doc=1953,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.23479973 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050071523 = 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)
    0.06338157 = product of:
      0.12676314 = sum of:
        0.12676314 = weight(_text_:index in 1953) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.12676314 = score(doc=1953,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.21880072 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050071523 = queryNorm
            0.5793543 = fieldWeight in 1953, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, 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

0.17715108 = product of:
  0.26572663 = sum of:
    0.15930942 = weight(_text_:citation in 2597) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.15930942 = score(doc=2597,freq=28.0), product of:
        0.23479973 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050071523 = queryNorm
        0.67849064 = fieldWeight in 2597, product of:
          5.2915025 = tf(freq=28.0), with freq of:
            28.0 = termFreq=28.0
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=2597)
    0.10641721 = sum of:
      0.082673214 = weight(_text_:index in 2597) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.082673214 = score(doc=2597,freq=10.0), product of:
          0.21880072 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050071523 = queryNorm
          0.37784708 = fieldWeight in 2597, product of:
            3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
              10.0 = termFreq=10.0
            4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
            0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=2597)
      0.023743998 = weight(_text_:22 in 2597) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.023743998 = score(doc=2597,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17534193 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050071523 = queryNorm
          0.1354154 = fieldWeight in 2597, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=2597)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to analyse the author self-citation behavior in the field of Library and Information Science. Various factors governing the author self-citation behavior have also been studied. Design/methodology/approach The 2012 edition of Social Science Citation Index was consulted for the selection of LIS journals. Under the subject heading "Information Science and Library Science" there were 84 journals and out of these 12 journals were selected for the study based on systematic sampling. The study was confined to original research and review articles that were published in select journals in the year 2009. The main reason to choose 2009 was to get at least five years (2009-2013) citation data from Web of Science Core Collection (excluding Book Citation Index) and SciELO Citation Index. A citation was treated as self-citation whenever one of the authors of citing and cited paper was common, i.e., the set of co-authors of the citing paper and that of the cited one are not disjoint. To minimize the risk of homonyms, spelling variances and misspelling in authors' names, the authors compared full author names in citing and cited articles. Findings A positive correlation between number of authors and total number of citations exists with no correlation between number of authors and number/share of self-citations, i.e., self-citations are not affected by the number of co-authors in a paper. Articles which are produced in collaboration attract more self-citations than articles produced by only one author. There is no statistically significant variation in citations counts (total and self-citations) in works that are result of different types of collaboration. A strong and statistically significant positive correlation exists between total citation count and frequency of self-citations. No relation could be ascertained between total citation count and proportion of self-citations. Authors tend to cite more of their recent works than the work of other authors. Total citation count and number of self-citations are positively correlated with the impact factor of source publication and correlation coefficient for total citations is much higher than that for self-citations. A negative correlation exhibits between impact factor and the share of self-citations. Of particular note is that the correlation in all the cases is of weak nature. Research limitations/implications The research provides an understanding of the author self-citations in the field of LIS. readers are encouraged to further the study by taking into account large sample, tracing citations also from Book Citation Index (WoS) and comparing results with other allied subjects so as to validate the robustness of the findings of this study. Originality/value Readers are encouraged to further the study by taking into account large sample, tracing citations also from Book Citation Index (WoS) and comparing results with other allied subjects so as to validate the robustness of the findings of this study.

Date

20. 1.2015 18:30:22

0.17623757 = product of:
  0.26435634 = sum of:
    0.19041118 = weight(_text_:citation in 6110) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.19041118 = score(doc=6110,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.23479973 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050071523 = queryNorm
        0.8109515 = fieldWeight in 6110, 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=6110)
    0.073945165 = product of:
      0.14789033 = sum of:
        0.14789033 = weight(_text_:index in 6110) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.14789033 = score(doc=6110,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.21880072 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050071523 = queryNorm
            0.67591333 = fieldWeight in 6110, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6110)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

In einer früheren Studie wurde bereits der 'informationelle Mehrwert' von bibliographischen Datenbanken durch bibliometrische Nutzung untersucht. Im folgenden soll nun eine visuelle Oberfläche vorgestellt werden, die mit Hilfe einer bibliometrischen 'Sekundärdatenbank' einerseits die Nutzungsmöglichkeiten der zugrundeliegenden bibliographischen Datenbanken vor allem in den Bereichen Wissenschaftsinformation, Forschungsevaluation und Wissenschaftspolitik erweitern soll, andererseits aber auch eine Rückkopplung zu den Aufgaben des traditionellen Retrievals erlaubt. Die visuelle Oberfläche 'Visual Bibliometrics' ist eine Erweiterung des CD-Edition des 'Science Citation Index' und des 'Social Science Citation Index'

Object

Science Citation Index
Social Sciences Citation Index

Theme

Citation indexing

0.17585745 = product of:
  0.26378617 = sum of:
    0.21896863 = weight(_text_:citation in 453) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.21896863 = score(doc=453,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.23479973 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050071523 = 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)
    0.044817537 = product of:
      0.089635074 = sum of:
        0.089635074 = weight(_text_:index in 453) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.089635074 = score(doc=453,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.21880072 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050071523 = queryNorm
            0.40966535 = fieldWeight in 453, 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=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

0.17568044 = product of:
  0.26352066 = sum of:
    0.21070267 = weight(_text_:citation in 2492) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.21070267 = score(doc=2492,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.23479973 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050071523 = queryNorm
        0.8973719 = fieldWeight in 2492, 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=2492)
    0.052817974 = product of:
      0.10563595 = sum of:
        0.10563595 = weight(_text_:index in 2492) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10563595 = score(doc=2492,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21880072 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050071523 = queryNorm
            0.48279524 = fieldWeight in 2492, 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=2492)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Object

Science citation index

Theme

Citation indexing

0.17536388 = product of:
  0.26304582 = sum of:
    0.16856214 = weight(_text_:citation in 1563) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.16856214 = score(doc=1563,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.23479973 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050071523 = queryNorm
        0.71789753 = fieldWeight in 1563, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1563)
    0.09448367 = product of:
      0.18896735 = sum of:
        0.18896735 = weight(_text_:index in 1563) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.18896735 = score(doc=1563,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.21880072 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050071523 = queryNorm
            0.86365044 = fieldWeight in 1563, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1563)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

The h-index has been shown to increase in many cases mostly because of citations to rather old publications. This inertia can be circumvented by restricting the evaluation to a citation time window. Here I report results of an empirical study analyzing the evolution of the thus defined timed h-index in dependence on the length of the citation time window.

Object

h-index

0.17495397 = product of:
  0.26243094 = sum of:
    0.24207895 = weight(_text_:citation in 102) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.24207895 = score(doc=102,freq=22.0), product of:
        0.23479973 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.6892867 = idf(docFreq=1104, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050071523 = 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)
    0.020351999 = product of:
      0.040703997 = sum of:
        0.040703997 = weight(_text_:22 in 102) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.040703997 = score(doc=102,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17534193 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050071523 = 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)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  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