Search (240 results, page 12 of 12)

  • × theme_ss:"Citation indexing"
  1. Pipp, E.: Inhaltlicher Vergleich von Web of Science und Scopus an Hand der erfassten Zeitschriften (2006) 0.00 
    0.001425896 = product of:
  0.0128330635 = sum of:
    0.0128330635 = weight(_text_:of in 5940) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0128330635 = score(doc=5940,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.20947541 = fieldWeight in 5940, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5940)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    Abstract
    Bibliographische Datenbanken sind immer noch von Bedeutung, obwohl diee-Zeitschriften-Plattformen der Verlage (z.B. ScienceDirect) und die Institutional Repositories (Publikationsdatenbanken einzelner wissenschaftlicher Institutionen) auch Suchmöglichkeiten anbieten. Nur in bibliographischen Datenbanken kann verlags- und institutionsübergreifend nach Fachliteratur zu einem Thema bzw. nach wissenschaftlichen Publikationen eines Autors / einer Autorin gesucht werden. Ein wichtiger Ansatzpunktzur Bewertung des Inhaltes einer bibliographischen Datenbank - und erst recht für einen inhaltlichen Vergleich zwischen zwei Konkurrenzdatenbanken - ist daher eine Analyse der darin enthaltenen Zeitschriften hinsichtlich der Anzahl der erfassten Zeitschriften, aber auch hinsichtlich der Wissenschaftlichkeit, der fachlichen Ausrichtung, der Vollständigkeit und der Aktualität derselben. Im Folgenden soll ein solcher Vergleich für das Web of Science und für Scopus versucht werden.
    Object
    Web of Science
  2. Stock, W.G.: ¬Ein Netz wissenschaftlicher Informationen : gesponnen aus Fußnoten (1999) 0.00 
    0.0014112709 = product of:
  0.012701439 = sum of:
    0.012701439 = weight(_text_:of in 3890) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012701439 = score(doc=3890,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.20732689 = fieldWeight in 3890, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3890)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    Abstract
    Das ISI in Philadelphia bündelt seine großen Zitationsdatenbanken und bietet sie (vorzugsweise als Intranet-, aber auch als Internetlösung) als 'Web of Science'an. Im derzeitigen entwicklungsstand geht 'Web of Science' bis in die 70er Jahre zurück und weist damit knapp 20 Mill. Quellenartikel mit darin enthaltenen rund 300 Mill. Zitationen in einer einzigen datenbank nach. Neben 'gewohnten' Suchstrategien etwa nach Sachthemen oder Namen werden zitationsanalytische Suchstrategien geboten: Recherchen nach zitierter Literatur, nach zitierenden Artikeln und nach (im Sinne gemeinsamer Fußnoten) 'verwandten' Artikeln. Die Ausgabefunktionen umfassen Document Delivery via ISI sowie Links zu Artikeln, die parallel zur Druckausgabe im WWW erscheinen. Durch die Multidisziplinarität der ISI-Datenbanken sind als Kundenkreis vor allem Einrichtungen angesprochen, die mehrere Wissenschaftsfächer berühren. Hochschulbibliotheken oder Bibliotheken großer Forschungseinrichtungen dürften am 'Web of Science' kaum vorbeikommen. Parallele Produkte bei Online-Archiven, auf CD-ROM oder als Druckausgabe verlieren an Bedeutung
    Object
    Web of Science
  3. White, H.D.; Wellman, B.; Nazer, N.: Does Citation Reflect Social Structure? : Longitudinal Evidence From the "Globenet" Interdisciplinary Research Group (2004) 0.00 
    0.0014112709 = product of:
  0.012701438 = sum of:
    0.012701438 = weight(_text_:of in 2095) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012701438 = score(doc=2095,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.20732687 = fieldWeight in 2095, product of:
          4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
            18.0 = termFreq=18.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2095)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    Abstract
    Many authors have posited a social component in citation, the consensus being that the citers and citees often have interpersonal as well as intellectual ties. Evidence for this belief has been rather meager, however, in part because social networks researchers have lacked bibliometric data (e.g., pairwise citation counts from online databases), and citation analysts have lacked sociometric data (e.g., pairwise measures of acquaintanceship). In 1997 Nazer extensively measured personal relationships and communication behaviors in what we call "Globenet," an international group of 16 researchers from seven disciplines that was established in 1993 to study human development. Since Globenet's membership is known, it was possible during 2002 to obtain citation records for all members in databases of the Institute for Scientific Information. This permitted examination of how members cited each other (intercited) in journal articles over the past three decades and in a 1999 book to which they all contributed. It was also possible to explore links between the intercitation data and the social and communication data. Using network-analytic techniques, we look at the growth of intercitation over time, the extent to which it follows disciplinary or interdisciplinary lines, whether it covaries with degrees of acquaintanceship, whether it reflects Globenet's organizational structure, whether it is associated with particular in-group communication patterns, and whether it is related to the cocitation of Globenet members. Results show cocitation to be a powerful predictor of intercitation in the journal articles, while being an editor or co-author is an important predictor in the book. Intellectual ties based an shared content did better as predictors than content-neutral social ties like friendship. However, interciters in Globenet communicated more than did noninterciters.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and technology. 55(2004) no.2, S.111-126
  4. Larsen, B.: Exploiting citation overlaps for information retrieval : generating a boomerang effect from the network of scientific papers (2002) 0.00 
    0.0014112709 = product of:
  0.012701439 = sum of:
    0.012701439 = weight(_text_:of in 4175) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012701439 = score(doc=4175,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.20732689 = fieldWeight in 4175, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4175)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
  5. Burrell, Q.L.: Will this paper ever be cited? (2002) 0.00 
    0.001330559 = product of:
  0.011975031 = sum of:
    0.011975031 = weight(_text_:of in 3183) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011975031 = score(doc=3183,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.19546966 = fieldWeight in 3183, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3183)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    Abstract
    A recently proposed stochastic model to describe the citation process in the presence of obsolescence is used to answer the question: If a paper has not been cited by time t after its publication, what is the probability that it will ever be cited?
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and technology. 53(2002) no.3, S.232-235
  6. Castro, R. de; Grossmann, J.W.: Famous trails to Paul Erdös (1999) 0.00 
    0.001330559 = product of:
  0.011975031 = sum of:
    0.011975031 = weight(_text_:of in 3991) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011975031 = score(doc=3991,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.19546966 = fieldWeight in 3991, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3991)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    Abstract
    The notion of Erdös number has floated around the mathematical research community for more than 40 years, as a way to quantify the common knowledge that mathematical and scientific research has become a very collaborative process in the 20th century, not an activity engaged in solely by isolated individualists. In this paper we explore some (fairly short) collaboration paths that one can follow from Paul Erdös to researchers inside and outside of mathematics
  7. Kurtz, M.J.; Eichhorn, G.; Accomazzi, A.; Grant, C.; Demleitner, M.; Henneken, E.; Murray, S.S.: ¬The effect of use and access on citations (2005) 0.00 
    0.001330559 = product of:
  0.011975031 = sum of:
    0.011975031 = weight(_text_:of in 1064) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011975031 = score(doc=1064,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.19546966 = fieldWeight in 1064, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1064)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    Abstract
    It has been shown (Lawrence, S. (2001). Online or invisible? Nature, 411, 521) that journal articles which have been posted without charge on the internet are more heavily cited than those which have not been. Using data from the NASA Astrophysics Data System (ads.harvard.edu) and from the ArXiv e-print archive at Cornell University (arXiv.org) we examine the causes of this effect.
  8. De Bellis, N.: Bibliometrics and citation analysis : from the Science citation index to cybermetrics (2008) 0.00 
    0.001330559 = product of:
  0.011975031 = sum of:
    0.011975031 = weight(_text_:of in 3585) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011975031 = score(doc=3585,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.19546966 = fieldWeight in 3585, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3585)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    Content
    Inhalt: Biblio/sciento/infor-metrics : terminological issues and early historical developments -- The empirical foundations of bibliometrics : the Science citation index -- The philosophical foundations of bibliometrics : Bernal, Merton, Price, Garfield, and Small -- The mathematical foundations of bibliometrics -- Maps and paradigms : bibliographic citations at the service of the history and sociology of science -- Impact factor and the evaluation of scientists : bibliographic citations at the service of science policy and management -- On the shoulders of dwarfs : citation as rhetorical device and the criticisms to the normative model -- Measuring scientific communication in the twentieth century : from bibliometrics to cybermetrics.
  9. Kousha, K.; Thelwall, M.: Google Scholar citations and Google Web/URL citations : a multi-discipline exploratory analysis (2007) 0.00 
    0.0013148742 = product of:
  0.011833867 = sum of:
    0.011833867 = weight(_text_:of in 337) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011833867 = score(doc=337,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.19316542 = fieldWeight in 337, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=337)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    Abstract
    We use a new data gathering method, "Web/URL citation," Web/URL and Google Scholar to compare traditional and Web-based citation patterns across multiple disciplines (biology, chemistry, physics, computing, sociology, economics, psychology, and education) based upon a sample of 1,650 articles from 108 open access (OA) journals published in 2001. A Web/URL citation of an online journal article is a Web mention of its title, URL, or both. For each discipline, except psychology, we found significant correlations between Thomson Scientific (formerly Thomson ISI, here: ISI) citations and both Google Scholar and Google Web/URL citations. Google Scholar citations correlated more highly with ISI citations than did Google Web/URL citations, indicating that the Web/URL method measures a broader type of citation phenomenon. Google Scholar citations were more numerous than ISI citations in computer science and the four social science disciplines, suggesting that Google Scholar is more comprehensive for social sciences and perhaps also when conference articles are valued and published online. We also found large disciplinary differences in the percentage overlap between ISI and Google Scholar citation sources. Finally, although we found many significant trends, there were also numerous exceptions, suggesting that replacing traditional citation sources with the Web or Google Scholar for research impact calculations would be problematic.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 58(2007) no.7, S.1055-1065
  10. Xie, J.; Lu, H.; Kang, L.; Cheng, Y.: Citing criteria and its effects on researcher's intention to cite : a mixed-method study (2022) 0.00 
    0.0012221966 = product of:
  0.010999769 = sum of:
    0.010999769 = weight(_text_:of in 634) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010999769 = score(doc=634,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.17955035 = fieldWeight in 634, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=634)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    Abstract
    This study explored users' criteria for citation decisions and investigated the effects on users' intention to cite using a mixed-method approach. A qualitative study was conducted first, where 16 citing criteria were identified based on interviews and inductive analysis. The findings were then used to develop hypotheses and extend the information adoption model. A questionnaire was designed to collect data from users in Chinese universities to test the research model. The findings indicated that pleasure, topicality, and functionality significantly increased users' perceived information usefulness, while familiarity and accessibility significantly enhanced users' perceived ease of use. Information usefulness and information ease of use further contributed to users' intention to cite with adjusted R2 equaling 44.6%. It is also found that perceived academic quality based on 5 antecedents (i.e., reliability, comprehensiveness, novelty, author credibility, and source reputation) significantly increased users' pleasure. Implications and limitations were provided.
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 73(2022) no.8, S.1079-1091
  11. Garfield, E.: Essays of an information scientist (1977-) 0.00 
    0.0011760591 = product of:
  0.010584532 = sum of:
    0.010584532 = weight(_text_:of in 2015) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010584532 = score(doc=2015,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.17277241 = fieldWeight in 2015, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2015)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
  12. Lindholm-Romantschuk, Y.: Scholarly book reviewing in the social sciences and humanities : the flow of ides within and among disciplines (1998) 0.00 
    0.0011760591 = product of:
  0.010584532 = sum of:
    0.010584532 = weight(_text_:of in 4063) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010584532 = score(doc=4063,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.17277241 = fieldWeight in 4063, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4063)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
  13. Gabel, J.: Improving information retrieval of subjects through citation-analysis : a study (2006) 0.00 
    0.0011760591 = product of:
  0.010584532 = sum of:
    0.010584532 = weight(_text_:of in 225) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010584532 = score(doc=225,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.17277241 = fieldWeight in 225, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=225)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    Abstract
    Citation-chasing is proposed as a method of discovering additional terms to enhance subjectsearch retrieval. Subjects attached to OCLC records for cited works are compared to those attached to original citing sources. Citing sources were produced via a subject-list search in a library catalog using the LCSH "Language and languages-Origin." A subject-search was employed to avoid subjectivity in choosing sources. References from the sources were searched in OCLC where applicable, and the subject headings were retrieved. The subjects were ranked by citation-frequency and tiered into 3 groups in a Bradford-like distribution. Highly cited subjects were produced that were not revealed through the original search. A difference in relative importance among the subjects was also revealed. Broad extra-linguistic topics like evolution are more prominent than specific linguistic topics like phonology. There are exceptions, which appear somewhat predictable by the amount of imbalance in citation-representation among the 2 sources. Citation leaders were also produced for authors and secondary-source titles.
    Source
    Knowledge organization for a global learning society: Proceedings of the 9th International ISKO Conference, 4-7 July 2006, Vienna, Austria. Hrsg.: G. Budin, C. Swertz u. K. Mitgutsch
  14. Braun, T.; Glanzel, W.; Grupp, H.: ¬The scientometric weight of 50 nations in 27 scientific areas, 1989-1993 : Pt.1: All fields combined, mathematics, engineering, chemistry and physics (1995) 0.00 
    0.0011642392 = product of:
  0.010478153 = sum of:
    0.010478153 = weight(_text_:of in 761) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010478153 = score(doc=761,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.17103596 = fieldWeight in 761, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=761)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    Abstract
    Attempts some new approaches to the presentation of bibliometric macro level indicators. Mathematics, engineering, physics and chemistry subfields are assigned to 13 science areas. Each science area then appears on 1 table (left page) and 2 graphs (right page). The 1st graph shows the main citation rates with respect to the world average on a relational chart. The countries are represented by letter codes that can be found in the corresponding table on the facing page. The 2nd graph visualizes the countries' relative research activity in the given science areas as compared to the world standard
  15. He, Y.; Hui, S.C.: PubSearch : a Web citation-based retrieval system (2001) 0.00 
    9.979192E-4 = product of:
  0.0089812735 = sum of:
    0.0089812735 = weight(_text_:of in 4806) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0089812735 = score(doc=4806,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.14660224 = fieldWeight in 4806, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4806)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    Abstract
    Many scientific publications are now available on the World Wide Web for researchers to share research findings. However, they tend to be poorly organised, making the search of relevant publications difficult and time-consuming. Most existing search engines are ineffective in searching these publications, as they do not index Web publications that normally appear in PDF (portable document format) or PostScript formats. Proposes a Web citation-based retrieval system, known as PubSearch, for the retrieval of Web publications. PubSearch indexes Web publications based on citation indices and stores them into a Web Citation Database. The Web Citation Database is then mined to support publication retrieval. Apart from supporting the traditional cited reference search, PubSearch also provides document clustering search and author clustering search. Document clustering groups related publications into clusters, while author clustering categorizes authors into different research areas based on author co-citation analysis.
  16. Oppenheim, C.: Do citations count? : Citation indexing and the Research Assessment Exercise (RAE) (1996) 0.00 
    9.408473E-4 = product of:
  0.008467626 = sum of:
    0.008467626 = weight(_text_:of in 6673) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008467626 = score(doc=6673,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.13821793 = fieldWeight in 6673, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6673)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    Abstract
    Citations are used to illustrate or elaborate on a point, or to criticize. Citation studies, based on ISI's citation indexes, can help evaluate scientific research, while impact factors aid libraries in deciding which journals to cancel or purchase. Suggests that citiation counts can replace the costly RAE in assessing the research output of university departments
  17. Rousseau, R.: Timelines in citation research (2006) 0.00 
    9.408473E-4 = product of:
  0.008467626 = sum of:
    0.008467626 = weight(_text_:of in 1746) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008467626 = score(doc=1746,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.13821793 = fieldWeight in 1746, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1746)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 57(2006) no.10, S.1404-1405
  18. Schneider, K.: Scopus contra ISI-WOS : Versuch einer vergleichenden Bewertung aus pharmakognostischer Sicht (2006) 0.00 
    7.0563547E-4 = product of:
  0.0063507194 = sum of:
    0.0063507194 = weight(_text_:of in 39) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0063507194 = score(doc=39,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.103663445 = fieldWeight in 39, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=39)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    Object
    Web of Science
  19. Garfield, E.: Citation indexing : its theory and application in science, technology, and humanities (1979) 0.00 
    7.0563547E-4 = product of:
  0.0063507194 = sum of:
    0.0063507194 = weight(_text_:of in 348) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0063507194 = score(doc=348,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.103663445 = fieldWeight in 348, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=348)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    Footnote
    Rez. in: Journal of library automation 13(1980) S.289-290 (E. Svenonius)
  20. Umstätter, W.: Szientometrische Verfahren (2004) 0.00 
    4.7042366E-4 = product of:
  0.004233813 = sum of:
    0.004233813 = weight(_text_:of in 2920) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.004233813 = score(doc=2920,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.06910896 = fieldWeight in 2920, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2920)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    Abstract
    Die Szientometrie beschäftigt sich mit der Messbarkeit wissenschaftlicher Leistungen anhand bibliothekarisch nachweisbarer Publikationsergebnisse. Bei genauer Betrachtung ist es ihr Ziel, die Wissenszunahme der Wissenschaft zu messen. Die wissenschaftliche Produktion in Form von Publikationen wächst seit über dreihundert Jahren konstant mit ca. 3,5% pro Jahr. Das entspricht einerVerdopplungsrate von 20 Jahren, die zuerst dem Bibliothekar Fremont Rider 1948 bei Büchern auffiel und die 1963 von Derek J. de Solla Price auch für das Wachstum von Zeitschriften und Bibliografien bestätigt wurde. Die Konstanz dieser Evolution, unabhängig aller sich ereignenden Katastrophen, ist nur zum Teil verstanden, macht aber den unaufhaltsamen Fortschritt der Wissenschaft deutlich. Alle 20 Jahre wird so viel publiziert wie in allen Jahrhunderten davor. Eine etwa gleiche Zunahme verzeichnen die Wissenschaftler, die damit etwa gleich produktiv bleiben. Von ihnen allen sind damit ca. 87% unsere heutigen Zeitgenossen. Aus diesem Wachstum heraus können wir abschätzen, dass in 100.000 laufenden Zeitschriften heute etwa 10 Mio. Publikationen jährlich erscheinen, die von 10 Mio. Wissenschaftlern verfasst werden. Dabei definieren sich nur die als Wissenschaftler, die durchschnittlich eine Publikation jährlich verfassen. Die gesamte Produktion an Buchtiteln, die bisher erschien, dürfte bei etwa 100 Mio. liegen. Davon sind etwa 20 Mio. als wissenschaftlich einzustufen. Wenn folglich 87% aller Wissenschaftler noch heute leben, so betrug die Gesamtzahl der Wissenschaftler in der Welt bisher 11,5 Mio., die in ihrem Leben durchschnittlich 1,5 Bücher pro Kopf verfassten, und etwa das 10-20fache an Zeitschriftenbeiträgen leisteten. Ein Teil dieser Bücher sind allerdings Neuauflagen und Übersetzungen. Nach Lotka, A. J. ist die Produktivität der Wissenschaftler eine schiefe Verteilung von der Form A/n**2, wobei A die Zahl der Autoren mit nur einer Publikation ist und n die Publikationen pro Autor. Während Price in seinen "Networks of Scientific Papers" Vergleichswerte von n**2,5 bis n**3 angab, zeigten Untersuchungen am Science Citation Index (SCI), die auf die gesamte naturwissenschaftliche Literatur hochgerechnet wurden, eher einen Wert von n**1,7. Auf die Tatsache, dass eine Verdopplungsrate der Wissenschaftler von 20 Jahren und eine solche der Menschheit von etwa 50 Jahren dazu führt, dass eines Tages alle Menschen Wissenschaftler werden, hat Price bereits 1963 hingewiesen. Dieser Zustand müsste bei 10 Mio. Wissenschaftlern und 6 Mrd. Menschen in etwa 300 Jahren eintreten, ein nur scheinbar absurder Gedanke, wenn man bedenkt, dass man sich vor 300 Jahren auch kaum vorstellen konnte, dass alle Menschen Lesen, Schreiben und Rechnen lernen können, und dass wir uns ungebildete Menschen immer weniger leisten können.

Authors

Years

Languages

  • e 224
  • d 14
  • chi 2
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 232
  • el 5
  • m 5
  • s 3
  • r 1
  • More… Less…

Themes

Subjects

Classifications