-
Norris, M.; Oppenheim, C.: ¬The h-index : a broad review of a new bibliometric indicator (2010)
0.01
0.0116506275 = product of:
0.11650627 = sum of:
0.11650627 = sum of:
0.03442287 = weight(_text_:1990 in 4147) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03442287 = score(doc=4147,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13825724 = queryWeight, product of:
4.506965 = idf(docFreq=1325, maxDocs=44218)
0.03067635 = queryNorm
0.248977 = fieldWeight in 4147, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.506965 = idf(docFreq=1325, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4147)
0.06130229 = weight(_text_:2010 in 4147) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06130229 = score(doc=4147,freq=5.0), product of:
0.14672957 = queryWeight, product of:
4.7831497 = idf(docFreq=1005, maxDocs=44218)
0.03067635 = queryNorm
0.41779095 = fieldWeight in 4147, product of:
2.236068 = tf(freq=5.0), with freq of:
5.0 = termFreq=5.0
4.7831497 = idf(docFreq=1005, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4147)
0.02078111 = weight(_text_:22 in 4147) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02078111 = score(doc=4147,freq=2.0), product of:
0.10742335 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03067635 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4147, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4147)
0.1 = coord(1/10)
- Abstract
- Purpose - This review aims to show, broadly, how the h-index has become a subject of widespread debate, how it has spawned many variants and diverse applications since first introduced in 2005 and some of the issues in its use. Design/methodology/approach - The review drew on a range of material published in 1990 or so sources published since 2005. From these sources, a number of themes were identified and discussed ranging from the h-index's advantages to which citation database might be selected for its calculation. Findings - The analysis shows how the h-index has quickly established itself as a major subject of interest in the field of bibliometrics. Study of the index ranges from its mathematical underpinning to a range of variants perceived to address the indexes' shortcomings. The review illustrates how widely the index has been applied but also how care must be taken in its application. Originality/value - The use of bibliometric indicators to measure research performance continues, with the h-index as its latest addition. The use of the h-index, its variants and many applications to which it has been put are still at the exploratory stage. The review shows the breadth and diversity of this research and the need to verify the veracity of the h-index by more studies.
- Date
- 8. 1.2011 19:22:13
- Source
- Journal of documentation. 66(2010) no.5, S.681-705
- Year
- 2010
-
Summers, R.; Oppenheim, C.; Meadows, J.; McKnight, C.; Kinnell, M.: Information science in 2010 : a Loughborough University view (1999)
0.00
0.0025847314 = product of:
0.025847314 = sum of:
0.025847314 = product of:
0.07754194 = sum of:
0.07754194 = weight(_text_:2010 in 4343) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07754194 = score(doc=4343,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14672957 = queryWeight, product of:
4.7831497 = idf(docFreq=1005, maxDocs=44218)
0.03067635 = queryNorm
0.5284684 = fieldWeight in 4343, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.7831497 = idf(docFreq=1005, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4343)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.1 = coord(1/10)
-
Levitt, J.M.; Thelwall, M.; Oppenheim, C.: Variations between subjects in the extent to which the social sciences have become more interdisciplinary (2011)
0.00
0.0019874056 = product of:
0.019874055 = sum of:
0.019874055 = product of:
0.059622165 = sum of:
0.059622165 = weight(_text_:1990 in 4465) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.059622165 = score(doc=4465,freq=6.0), product of:
0.13825724 = queryWeight, product of:
4.506965 = idf(docFreq=1325, maxDocs=44218)
0.03067635 = queryNorm
0.43124083 = fieldWeight in 4465, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
4.506965 = idf(docFreq=1325, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4465)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.1 = coord(1/10)
- Abstract
- Increasing interdisciplinarity has been a policy objective since the 1990s, promoted by many governments and funding agencies, but the question is: How deeply has this affected the social sciences? Although numerous articles have suggested that research has become more interdisciplinary, yet no study has compared the extent to which the interdisciplinarity of different social science subjects has changed. To address this gap, changes in the level of interdisciplinarity since 1980 are investigated for subjects with many articles in the Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI), using the percentage of cross-disciplinary citing documents (PCDCD) to evaluate interdisciplinarity. For the 14 SSCI subjects investigated, the median level of interdisciplinarity, as measured using cross-disciplinary citations, declined from 1980 to 1990, but rose sharply between 1990 and 2000, confirming previous research. This increase was not fully matched by an increase in the percentage of articles that were assigned to more than one subject category. Nevertheless, although on average the social sciences have recently become more interdisciplinary, the extent of this change varies substantially from subject to subject. The SSCI subject with the largest increase in interdisciplinarity between 1990 and 2000 was Information Science & Library Science (IS&LS) but there is evidence that the level of interdisciplinarity of IS&LS increased less quickly during the first decade of this century.
-
Oppenheim, C.; Morris, A.; McKnight, C.: ¬The evaluation of WWW search engines (2000)
0.00
0.0012212053 = product of:
0.012212053 = sum of:
0.012212053 = product of:
0.03663616 = sum of:
0.03663616 = weight(_text_:problem in 4546) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03663616 = score(doc=4546,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1302053 = queryWeight, product of:
4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
0.03067635 = queryNorm
0.28137225 = fieldWeight in 4546, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4546)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.1 = coord(1/10)
- Abstract
- The literature of the evaluation of Internet search engines is reviewed. Although there have been many studies, there has been little consistency in the way such studies have been carried out. This problem is exacerbated by the fact that recall is virtually impossible to calculate in the fast changing Internet environment, and therefore the traditional Cranfield type of evaluation is not usually possible. A variety of alternative evaluation methods has been suggested to overcome this difficulty. The authors recommend that a standardised set of tools is developed for the evaluation of web search engines so that, in future, comparisons can be made between search engines more effectively, and that variations in performance of any given search engine over time can be tracked. The paper itself does not provide such a standard set of tools, but it investigates the issues and makes preliminary recommendations of the types of tools needed
-
Oppenheim, C.: ¬The implications of copyright legislation for electronic access to journal collections (1994)
0.00
0.0011083259 = product of:
0.011083259 = sum of:
0.011083259 = product of:
0.033249777 = sum of:
0.033249777 = weight(_text_:22 in 7245) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.033249777 = score(doc=7245,freq=2.0), product of:
0.10742335 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03067635 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 7245, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=7245)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.1 = coord(1/10)
- Source
- Journal of document and text management. 2(1994) no.1, S.10-22
-
Oppenheim, C.: ¬An agenda for action to achieve the information society in the UK (1996)
0.00
0.0011083259 = product of:
0.011083259 = sum of:
0.011083259 = product of:
0.033249777 = sum of:
0.033249777 = weight(_text_:22 in 7670) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.033249777 = score(doc=7670,freq=2.0), product of:
0.10742335 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03067635 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 7670, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=7670)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.1 = coord(1/10)
- Source
- Journal of information science. 22(1996) no.6, S.407-421
-
Eager, C.; Oppenheim, C.: ¬An observational method for undertaking user needs studies (1996)
0.00
0.0010176711 = product of:
0.010176711 = sum of:
0.010176711 = product of:
0.03053013 = sum of:
0.03053013 = weight(_text_:problem in 3671) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03053013 = score(doc=3671,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1302053 = queryWeight, product of:
4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
0.03067635 = queryNorm
0.23447686 = fieldWeight in 3671, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3671)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.1 = coord(1/10)
- Abstract
- The study of information needs has long be acknowlegded as one of the most important factors in the design of information services but has been hampered by the severe problem of designing user studies that will reliably measure them. Reviews the literature of previous research in this field, concluding that time and money are the chief constraints on information seeking behaviour. Describes a new observational technique for identifying the information needs of users and reports results of a small scale experiment to test the methodology. The observational technique involves the researcher being with the subject continuously throughout the day and observing their actions. The behaviour recorded was any action taken in order to answer a question. A small scale study was undertaken of 3 academics from the Psychology Department, University of Strathclyde, using the observational technique. The preferred technique of all the academics was to carry out their own research, followed by consultation with other individuals. One lecturer was a significantly heavier user of electronic media than the other two. The preferred physical locations of the information sources were personal collections and the University Library. One lecturer consistently used a wide range of sources while the other two strongly preferred to use personal contacts. Informal sources were found to be twice as popular as formal sources. A follow up questionnaire survey examined the possibility that previous training in the use of the library could explain the differences in the use of electronic information sources but results were found to be negative. Concludes that the new research tool developed for this type of study is both robust and likely to yield reliable information about user information needs
-
Oppenheim, C.: Intellectual property : legal and other issues (1997)
0.00
8.3124434E-4 = product of:
0.008312443 = sum of:
0.008312443 = product of:
0.02493733 = sum of:
0.02493733 = weight(_text_:22 in 42) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02493733 = score(doc=42,freq=2.0), product of:
0.10742335 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03067635 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 42, 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=42)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.1 = coord(1/10)
- Source
- Information studies. 3(1997) no.1, S.5-22
-
Oppenheim, C.: Electronic scholarly publishing and open access (2009)
0.00
8.3124434E-4 = product of:
0.008312443 = sum of:
0.008312443 = product of:
0.02493733 = sum of:
0.02493733 = weight(_text_:22 in 3662) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02493733 = score(doc=3662,freq=2.0), product of:
0.10742335 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03067635 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3662, 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=3662)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.1 = coord(1/10)
- Date
- 8. 7.2010 19:22:45
