Search (10 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × year_i:[1990 TO 2000}
  • × theme_ss:"Citation indexing"
  1. Page, L.; Brin, S.; Motwani, R.; Winograd, T.: ¬The PageRank citation ranking : Bringing order to the Web (1999) 0.03 
    0.028268103 = product of:
  0.16960861 = sum of:
    0.16960861 = weight(_text_:ranking in 496) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.16960861 = score(doc=496,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.20271951 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.4090285 = idf(docFreq=537, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03747799 = queryNorm
        0.8366664 = fieldWeight in 496, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.4090285 = idf(docFreq=537, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=496)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
  2. So, C.Y.K.: Citation ranking versus expert judgement in evaluating communication scholars : effects of research specialty size and individual prominence (1998) 0.03 
    0.027978165 = product of:
  0.16786899 = sum of:
    0.16786899 = weight(_text_:ranking in 327) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.16786899 = score(doc=327,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.20271951 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.4090285 = idf(docFreq=537, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03747799 = queryNorm
        0.828085 = fieldWeight in 327, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          5.4090285 = idf(docFreq=537, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=327)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    Abstract
    Numerous attempts have been made to validate the use of citations as an evaluation method by comparing it with peer review. Unlike past studies using journals, research articles or universities as the subject matter, the present study extends the comparison to the ranking of individual scholars. Results show that citation ranking and expert judgement of communication scholars are highly correlated. The citation methods and the expert judgement method are found to work better in smaller research areas and yield more valid evaluation results for more prominent scholars
  3. Sen, B.K.; Pandalai, T.A.; Karanjai, A.: Ranking of scientists - a new approach (1998) 0.03 
    0.027978165 = product of:
  0.16786899 = sum of:
    0.16786899 = weight(_text_:ranking in 5113) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.16786899 = score(doc=5113,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.20271951 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.4090285 = idf(docFreq=537, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03747799 = queryNorm
        0.828085 = fieldWeight in 5113, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          5.4090285 = idf(docFreq=537, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5113)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    Abstract
    A formula for the ranking of scientists based on diachronous citation counts is proposed. The paper generalises the fact that the citation generation potential (CGP) is not the same for all papers, it differs from paper to paper, and also to a certain extent depends on the subject domain of the papers. The method of ranking proposed in no way replaces peer review. It merely acts as an aid for peers to help them arrive at a better judgement.
  4. Alvarez, P.; Pulgarin, A.: ¬The Rasch model : measuring the impact of scientific journals: analytical chemistry (1996) 0.02 
    0.022844076 = product of:
  0.13706446 = sum of:
    0.13706446 = weight(_text_:ranking in 8505) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.13706446 = score(doc=8505,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.20271951 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.4090285 = idf(docFreq=537, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03747799 = queryNorm
        0.67612857 = fieldWeight in 8505, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.4090285 = idf(docFreq=537, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=8505)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    Abstract
    Focuses on a way to determine a ranking of science journals according to the number of citations-to and items-published data used by Science Citation Insitute of Citation Reports of the Institute for Science Information to determine journal ranking by impact factor. Applies latent traits theory to bibliometrics
  5. Tsay, M.-Y.: From Science Citation Index to Journal Citation Reports, amd criteria for journals evaluation (1997) 0.01 
    0.014134051 = product of:
  0.084804304 = sum of:
    0.084804304 = weight(_text_:ranking in 657) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.084804304 = score(doc=657,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.20271951 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.4090285 = idf(docFreq=537, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03747799 = queryNorm
        0.4183332 = fieldWeight in 657, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.4090285 = idf(docFreq=537, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=657)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    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
  6. Døsen, K.: One more reference on self-reference (1992) 0.00 
    0.0045135557 = product of:
  0.027081333 = sum of:
    0.027081333 = product of:
      0.081244 = sum of:
        0.081244 = weight(_text_:22 in 4604) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.081244 = score(doc=4604,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13124153 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03747799 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 4604, 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=4604)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    Date
    7. 2.2005 14:10:22
  7. Lindholm-Romantschuk, Y.: Scholarly book reviewing in the social sciences and humanities : the flow of ides within and among disciplines (1998) 0.00 
    0.0028465795 = product of:
  0.017079476 = sum of:
    0.017079476 = product of:
      0.051238425 = sum of:
        0.051238425 = weight(_text_:29 in 4063) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.051238425 = score(doc=4063,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13183585 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03747799 = queryNorm
            0.38865322 = fieldWeight in 4063, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4063)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    Date
    29. 3.1996 18:19:32
  8. Pao, M.L.: Term and citation retrieval : a field study (1993) 0.00 
    0.0022772634 = product of:
  0.013663581 = sum of:
    0.013663581 = product of:
      0.04099074 = sum of:
        0.04099074 = weight(_text_:29 in 3741) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04099074 = score(doc=3741,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13183585 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03747799 = queryNorm
            0.31092256 = fieldWeight in 3741, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3741)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    Source
    Information processing and management. 29(1993) no.1, S.95-112
  9. Campanario, J.M.: Have referees rejected some of the most-cited articles of all times? (1996) 0.00 
    0.0016925833 = product of:
  0.0101555 = sum of:
    0.0101555 = product of:
      0.030466499 = sum of:
        0.030466499 = weight(_text_:22 in 4215) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.030466499 = score(doc=4215,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13124153 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03747799 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4215, 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=4215)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    Abstract
    In this article a quantitative study is reported on the resistance that scientists may encounter when they do innovative work or when they attempt to publish articles that later become highly cited. A set of 205 commentaries by authors of some of the most-cited papers of all times have been examined in order to identify those articles whose authors encountered difficulty in getting his or her work published. There are 22 commentaries (10,7%) in which authors mention some difficulty or resistance in doing or publishing the research reported in the article. Three of the articles which had problems in being published are the most cited from their respective journals. According the authors' commentaries, although sometimes referees' negative evaluations can help improve the articles, in other instances referees and editors wrongly rejected the highly cited articles
  10. Snyder, H.; Bonzi, S.: Patterns of self-citation across disciplines : 1980-1989 (1998) 0.00 
    0.0016925833 = product of:
  0.0101555 = sum of:
    0.0101555 = product of:
      0.030466499 = sum of:
        0.030466499 = weight(_text_:22 in 3692) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.030466499 = score(doc=3692,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13124153 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03747799 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3692, 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=3692)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    Date
    22. 5.1999 19:33:24

Authors

Languages

Types

Themes