Search (3 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Stuart, D."
  • × author_ss:"Thelwall, M."
  1. Thelwall, M.; Klitkou, A.; Verbeek, A.; Stuart, D.; Vincent, C.: Policy-relevant Webometrics for individual scientific fields (2010) 0.01
    0.014044492 = product of:
      0.06554096 = sum of:
        0.03856498 = weight(_text_:wide in 3574) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03856498 = score(doc=3574,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1312982 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.29372054 = fieldWeight in 3574, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3574)
        0.020922182 = weight(_text_:web in 3574) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020922182 = score(doc=3574,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.21634221 = fieldWeight in 3574, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3574)
        0.0060537956 = weight(_text_:information in 3574) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0060537956 = score(doc=3574,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 3574, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3574)
      0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    
    Abstract
    Despite over 10 years of research there is no agreement on the most suitable roles for Webometric indicators in support of research policy and almost no field-based Webometrics. This article partly fills these gaps by analyzing the potential of policy-relevant Webometrics for individual scientific fields with the help of 4 case studies. Although Webometrics cannot provide robust indicators of knowledge flows or research impact, it can provide some evidence of networking and mutual awareness. The scope of Webometrics is also relatively wide, including not only research organizations and firms but also intermediary groups like professional associations, Web portals, and government agencies. Webometrics can, therefore, provide evidence about the research process to compliment peer review, bibliometric, and patent indicators: tracking the early, mainly prepublication development of new fields and research funding initiatives, assessing the role and impact of intermediary organizations and the need for new ones, and monitoring the extent of mutual awareness in particular research areas.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 61(2010) no.7, S.1464-1475
  2. Thelwall, M.; Stuart, D.: Web crawling ethics revisited : cost, privacy, and denial of service (2006) 0.01
    0.0074666077 = product of:
      0.05226625 = sum of:
        0.042278 = weight(_text_:web in 6098) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.042278 = score(doc=6098,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.43716836 = fieldWeight in 6098, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6098)
        0.009988253 = weight(_text_:information in 6098) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.009988253 = score(doc=6098,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.1920054 = fieldWeight in 6098, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6098)
      0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    
    Abstract
    Ethical aspects of the employment of Web crawlers for information science research and other contexts are reviewed. The difference between legal and ethical uses of communications technologies is emphasized as well as the changing boundary between ethical and unethical conduct. A review of the potential impacts on Web site owners is used to underpin a new framework for ethical crawling, and it is argued that delicate human judgment is required for each individual case, with verdicts likely to change over time. Decisions can be based upon an approximate cost-benefit analysis, but it is crucial that crawler owners find out about the technological issues affecting the owners of the sites being crawled in order to produce an informed assessment.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 57(2006) no.13, S.1771-1779
  3. Angus, E.; Thelwall, M.; Stuart, D.: General patterns of tag usage among university groups in Flickr (2008) 0.01
    0.0050917473 = product of:
      0.03564223 = sum of:
        0.029588435 = weight(_text_:web in 2554) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029588435 = score(doc=2554,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.3059541 = fieldWeight in 2554, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2554)
        0.0060537956 = weight(_text_:information in 2554) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0060537956 = score(doc=2554,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 2554, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2554)
      0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose - The purpose of this research is to investigate general patterns of tag usage and determines the usefulness of the tags used within university image groups to the wider Flickr community. There has been a significant rise in the use of Web 2.0 social network web sites and online applications in recent years. One of the most popular is Flickr, an online image management application. Design/methodology/approach - This study uses a webometric data collection, classification and informetric analysis. Findings - The results show that members of university image groups tend to tag in a manner that is of use to users of the system as a whole rather than merely for the tag creator. Originality/value - This paper gives a valuable insight into the tagging practices of image groups in Flickr.
    Source
    Online information review. 32(2008) no.1, S.89-101