Search (5 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × theme_ss:"Elektronisches Publizieren"
  • × author_ss:"Thelwall, M."
  1. Li, X.; Thelwall, M.; Kousha, K.: ¬The role of arXiv, RePEc, SSRN and PMC in formal scholarly communication (2015) 0.00
    0.001676621 = product of:
      0.011736346 = sum of:
        0.0050448296 = weight(_text_:information in 2593) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0050448296 = score(doc=2593,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 2593, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2593)
        0.0066915164 = product of:
          0.020074548 = sum of:
            0.020074548 = weight(_text_:22 in 2593) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.020074548 = score(doc=2593,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.103770934 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.029633347 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2593, 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=2593)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    
    Date
    20. 1.2015 18:30:22
    Source
    Aslib journal of information management. 67(2015) no.6, S.614-635
  2. Thelwall, M.; Kousha, K.: SlideShare presentations, citations, users, and trends : a professional site with academic and educational uses (2017) 0.00
    6.241359E-4 = product of:
      0.008737902 = sum of:
        0.008737902 = weight(_text_:information in 3766) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.008737902 = score(doc=3766,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.16796975 = fieldWeight in 3766, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3766)
      0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    
    Abstract
    SlideShare is a free social website that aims to help users distribute and find presentations. Owned by LinkedIn since 2012, it targets a professional audience but may give value to scholarship through creating a long-term record of the content of talks. This article tests this hypothesis by analyzing sets of general and scholarly related SlideShare documents using content and citation analysis and popularity statistics reported on the site. The results suggest that academics, students, and teachers are a minority of SlideShare uploaders, especially since 2010, with most documents not being directly related to scholarship or teaching. About two thirds of uploaded SlideShare documents are presentation slides, with the remainder often being files associated with presentations or video recordings of talks. SlideShare is therefore a presentation-centered site with a predominantly professional user base. Although a minority of the uploaded SlideShare documents are cited by, or cite, academic publications, probably too few articles are cited by SlideShare to consider extracting SlideShare citations for research evaluation. Nevertheless, scholars should consider SlideShare to be a potential source of academic and nonacademic information, particularly in library and information science, education, and business.
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 68(2017) no.8, S.1989-2003
  3. Maflahi, N.; Thelwall, M.: How quickly do publications get read? : the evolution of mendeley reader counts for new articles (2018) 0.00
    5.0960475E-4 = product of:
      0.0071344664 = sum of:
        0.0071344664 = weight(_text_:information in 4015) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0071344664 = score(doc=4015,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 4015, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4015)
      0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    
    Abstract
    Within science, citation counts are widely used to estimate research impact but publication delays mean that they are not useful for recent research. This gap can be filled by Mendeley reader counts, which are valuable early impact indicators for academic articles because they appear before citations and correlate strongly with them. Nevertheless, it is not known how Mendeley readership counts accumulate within the year of publication, and so it is unclear how soon they can be used. In response, this paper reports a longitudinal weekly study of the Mendeley readers of articles in 6 library and information science journals from 2016. The results suggest that Mendeley readers accrue from when articles are first available online and continue to steadily build. For journals with large publication delays, articles can already have substantial numbers of readers by their publication date. Thus, Mendeley reader counts may even be useful as early impact indicators for articles before they have been officially published in a journal issue. If field normalized indicators are needed, then these can be generated when journal issues are published using the online first date.
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 69(2018) no.1, S.158-167
  4. Kousha, K.; Thelwall, M.: ¬An automatic method for assessing the teaching impact of books from online academic syllabi (2016) 0.00
    3.6034497E-4 = product of:
      0.0050448296 = sum of:
        0.0050448296 = weight(_text_:information in 3226) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0050448296 = score(doc=3226,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 3226, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3226)
      0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 67(2016) no.12, S.2993-3007
  5. Kousha, K.; Thelwall, M.; Abdoli, M.: Goodreads reviews to assess the wider impacts of books (2017) 0.00
    3.6034497E-4 = product of:
      0.0050448296 = sum of:
        0.0050448296 = weight(_text_:information in 3768) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0050448296 = score(doc=3768,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 3768, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3768)
      0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 68(2017) no.8, S.2004-2016