Search (641 results, page 2 of 33)

  • × theme_ss:"Informetrie"
  1. Levitt, J.M.; Thelwall, M.: Citation levels and collaboration within library and information science (2009) 0.01 
    0.013307041 = product of:
  0.07651548 = sum of:
    0.012935456 = product of:
      0.025870912 = sum of:
        0.025870912 = weight(_text_:bibliothekswesen in 2734) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.025870912 = score(doc=2734,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10505787 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
              0.023567878 = queryNorm
            0.24625391 = fieldWeight in 2734, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2734)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.026419718 = weight(_text_:informationswissenschaft in 2734) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026419718 = score(doc=2734,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.10616633 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.023567878 = queryNorm
        0.24885213 = fieldWeight in 2734, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2734)
    0.025870912 = weight(_text_:bibliothekswesen in 2734) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.025870912 = score(doc=2734,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.10505787 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
          0.023567878 = queryNorm
        0.24625391 = fieldWeight in 2734, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2734)
    0.011289392 = product of:
      0.022578783 = sum of:
        0.022578783 = weight(_text_:22 in 2734) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.022578783 = score(doc=2734,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.08253069 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.023567878 = queryNorm
            0.27358043 = fieldWeight in 2734, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2734)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.17391305 = coord(4/23)
    Abstract
    Collaboration is a major research policy objective, but does it deliver higher quality research? This study uses citation analysis to examine the Web of Science (WoS) Information Science & Library Science subject category (IS&LS) to ascertain whether, in general, more highly cited articles are more highly collaborative than other articles. It consists of two investigations. The first investigation is a longitudinal comparison of the degree and proportion of collaboration in five strata of citation; it found that collaboration in the highest four citation strata (all in the most highly cited 22%) increased in unison over time, whereas collaboration in the lowest citation strata (un-cited articles) remained low and stable. Given that over 40% of the articles were un-cited, it seems important to take into account the differences found between un-cited articles and relatively highly cited articles when investigating collaboration in IS&LS. The second investigation compares collaboration for 35 influential information scientists; it found that their more highly cited articles on average were not more highly collaborative than their less highly cited articles. In summary, although collaborative research is conducive to high citation in general, collaboration has apparently not tended to be essential to the success of current and former elite information scientists.
    Date
    22. 3.2009 12:43:51
    Field
    Bibliothekswesen
    Informationswissenschaft
  2. Zhao, L.: How librarians used e-resources : an analysis of citations in CCQ (2006) 0.01 
    0.013100539 = product of:
  0.10043747 = sum of:
    0.02069673 = product of:
      0.04139346 = sum of:
        0.04139346 = weight(_text_:bibliothekswesen in 5766) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04139346 = score(doc=5766,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10505787 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
              0.023567878 = queryNorm
            0.39400625 = fieldWeight in 5766, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5766)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.04139346 = weight(_text_:bibliothekswesen in 5766) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04139346 = score(doc=5766,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.10505787 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
          0.023567878 = queryNorm
        0.39400625 = fieldWeight in 5766, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5766)
    0.03834728 = sum of:
      0.012570425 = weight(_text_:1 in 5766) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.012570425 = score(doc=5766,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.057894554 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
            0.023567878 = queryNorm
          0.2171262 = fieldWeight in 5766, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5766)
      0.025776858 = weight(_text_:29 in 5766) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.025776858 = score(doc=5766,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.08290443 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
            0.023567878 = queryNorm
          0.31092256 = fieldWeight in 5766, 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=5766)
  0.13043478 = coord(3/23)
    Date
    29. 9.2008 18:49:25
    Field
    Bibliothekswesen
    Source
    Cataloging and classification quarterly. 42(2006) no.1, S.117-131
  3. Gorraiz, J.; Schlögl, C.: Zusammenhang von Zeitschriftennachfrage und -zitationshäufigkeiten : ¬Eine bibliometrische Analyse eines Dokumentlieferdienstes am Beispiel von Subito (2003) 0.01 
    0.012939349 = product of:
  0.07440125 = sum of:
    0.015349354 = weight(_text_:und in 718) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015349354 = score(doc=718,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.052235067 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.023567878 = queryNorm
        0.29385152 = fieldWeight in 718, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=718)
    0.015522547 = product of:
      0.031045094 = sum of:
        0.031045094 = weight(_text_:bibliothekswesen in 718) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.031045094 = score(doc=718,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10505787 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
              0.023567878 = queryNorm
            0.2955047 = fieldWeight in 718, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=718)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.031045094 = weight(_text_:bibliothekswesen in 718) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.031045094 = score(doc=718,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.10505787 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
          0.023567878 = queryNorm
        0.2955047 = fieldWeight in 718, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=718)
    0.012484257 = weight(_text_:im in 718) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012484257 = score(doc=718,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.066621356 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.8267863 = idf(docFreq=7115, maxDocs=44218)
          0.023567878 = queryNorm
        0.18739122 = fieldWeight in 718, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.8267863 = idf(docFreq=7115, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=718)
  0.17391305 = coord(4/23)
    Abstract
    Im vorliegenden Beitrag wird eine bibliometrische Analyse des Dokumentlieferdienstes Subito vorgestellt. Der Aufsatz ist folgendermaßen gegliedert: Nach einer kurzen Einführung folgt eine Beschreibung von Subito. Den Hauptteil der Arbeit stellt die bibliometrische Analyse dar. Bei dieser wird zunächst untersucht, ob ein großer Anteil der bei Subito bestellten Artikel von relativ wenigen Periodika abgedeckt werden kann. Weiters wird der Frage nachgegangen,ob sich Konzentrationsmuster auch in Hinblick auf den Marktanteil der Verlage erkennen lassen. Danach wird die fachliche Verteilung jener 100 Periodika genauer analysiert, von denen bei Subito die meisten Aufsätze bestellt werden. Schließlich wird herausgearbeitet, ob sich ein Zusammenhang zwischen den Bestellhäufigkeiten von Zeitschriften bei Subito und den Zitationshäufigkeiten laut den Journal Citation Reports (JCR) herstellen lässt. Am Ende des Beitrages werden die der Studie zugrunde liegenden Einschränkungen aufgezeigt und die wichtigsten Ergebnisse zusammengefasst.
    Source
    Zeitschrift für Bibliothekswesen und Bibliographie. 50(2003) H.3, S.131-140
  4. Jovanovic, M.: ¬Eine kleine Frühgeschichte der Bibliometrie (2012) 0.01 
    0.012882188 = product of:
  0.07407258 = sum of:
    0.020305287 = weight(_text_:und in 326) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020305287 = score(doc=326,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.052235067 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.023567878 = queryNorm
        0.38872904 = fieldWeight in 326, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=326)
    0.031703662 = weight(_text_:informationswissenschaft in 326) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.031703662 = score(doc=326,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.10616633 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.023567878 = queryNorm
        0.29862255 = fieldWeight in 326, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=326)
    0.012484257 = weight(_text_:im in 326) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012484257 = score(doc=326,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.066621356 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.8267863 = idf(docFreq=7115, maxDocs=44218)
          0.023567878 = queryNorm
        0.18739122 = fieldWeight in 326, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.8267863 = idf(docFreq=7115, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=326)
    0.009579366 = product of:
      0.019158732 = sum of:
        0.019158732 = weight(_text_:22 in 326) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.019158732 = score(doc=326,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08253069 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.023567878 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 326, 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=326)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.17391305 = coord(4/23)
    Abstract
    In der Bibliometrie werden meist zwei Größen vermessen: die Anzahl von Publikationen und Zitationen. Publiziert und zitiert haben Menschen bereits sehr früh in der Geschichte. Schon in der Antike sind bei überlieferten Werken Zitationen zu finden. Der englische Begriff "Bibliometrics" selbst wurde aber erst 1969 definiert. In dem folgenden Artikel wird eine kleine Frühgeschichte der Bibliometrie, einer Unterdisziplin der Informationswissenschaft, bis zu diesem wichtigen Jahr anhand von beispielhaften Studien und Arbeiten dargestellt. Es wird auf die Anfänge von Publikationen und Zitationen und den fachlichen Rahmen der Bibliometrie eingegangen. Der Ursprung der Bibliometriegeschichte selbst wird von unterschiedlichen Autoren unterschiedlich früh angesetzt. Die verschiedenen Ansätze werden vorgestellt und diskutiert. Der Artikel schließt mit einer Beschreibung der wachsenden Bedeutung dieses Fachs im heutigen Informationszeitalter.
    Date
    22. 7.2012 19:23:32
    Source
    Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 63(2012) H.2, S.71-80
  5. Xu, L.: Research synthesis methods and library and information science : shared problems, limited diffusion (2016) 0.01 
    0.012744584 = product of:
  0.073281355 = sum of:
    0.012935456 = product of:
      0.025870912 = sum of:
        0.025870912 = weight(_text_:bibliothekswesen in 3057) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.025870912 = score(doc=3057,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10505787 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
              0.023567878 = queryNorm
            0.24625391 = fieldWeight in 3057, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3057)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.026419718 = weight(_text_:informationswissenschaft in 3057) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026419718 = score(doc=3057,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.10616633 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.023567878 = queryNorm
        0.24885213 = fieldWeight in 3057, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3057)
    0.025870912 = weight(_text_:bibliothekswesen in 3057) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.025870912 = score(doc=3057,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.10505787 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
          0.023567878 = queryNorm
        0.24625391 = fieldWeight in 3057, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3057)
    0.008055268 = product of:
      0.016110536 = sum of:
        0.016110536 = weight(_text_:29 in 3057) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016110536 = score(doc=3057,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08290443 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.023567878 = queryNorm
            0.19432661 = fieldWeight in 3057, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3057)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.17391305 = coord(4/23)
    Date
    21. 7.2016 19:23:29
    Field
    Bibliothekswesen
    Informationswissenschaft
  6. Mukherjee, B.: Do open-access journals in library and information science have any scholarly impact? : a bibliometric study of selected open-access journals using Google Scholar (2009) 0.01 
    0.012731981 = product of:
  0.07320889 = sum of:
    0.012935456 = product of:
      0.025870912 = sum of:
        0.025870912 = weight(_text_:bibliothekswesen in 2745) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.025870912 = score(doc=2745,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10505787 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
              0.023567878 = queryNorm
            0.24625391 = fieldWeight in 2745, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2745)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.026419718 = weight(_text_:informationswissenschaft in 2745) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026419718 = score(doc=2745,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.10616633 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.023567878 = queryNorm
        0.24885213 = fieldWeight in 2745, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2745)
    0.025870912 = weight(_text_:bibliothekswesen in 2745) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.025870912 = score(doc=2745,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.10505787 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
          0.023567878 = queryNorm
        0.24625391 = fieldWeight in 2745, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2745)
    0.007982805 = product of:
      0.01596561 = sum of:
        0.01596561 = weight(_text_:22 in 2745) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01596561 = score(doc=2745,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08253069 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.023567878 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2745, 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=2745)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.17391305 = coord(4/23)
    Date
    22. 3.2009 17:54:59
    Field
    Bibliothekswesen
    Informationswissenschaft
  7. Vakkari, P.; Järvelin, K.; Chang, Y.-W.: ¬The association of disciplinary background with the evolution of topics and methods in Library and Information Science research 1995-2015 (2023) 0.01 
    0.012731981 = product of:
  0.07320889 = sum of:
    0.012935456 = product of:
      0.025870912 = sum of:
        0.025870912 = weight(_text_:bibliothekswesen in 998) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.025870912 = score(doc=998,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10505787 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
              0.023567878 = queryNorm
            0.24625391 = fieldWeight in 998, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=998)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.026419718 = weight(_text_:informationswissenschaft in 998) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026419718 = score(doc=998,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.10616633 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.023567878 = queryNorm
        0.24885213 = fieldWeight in 998, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=998)
    0.025870912 = weight(_text_:bibliothekswesen in 998) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.025870912 = score(doc=998,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.10505787 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
          0.023567878 = queryNorm
        0.24625391 = fieldWeight in 998, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=998)
    0.007982805 = product of:
      0.01596561 = sum of:
        0.01596561 = weight(_text_:22 in 998) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01596561 = score(doc=998,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08253069 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.023567878 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 998, 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=998)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.17391305 = coord(4/23)
    Date
    22. 6.2023 18:15:06
    Field
    Bibliothekswesen
    Informationswissenschaft
  8. Stuart, D.: Web metrics for library and information professionals (2014) 0.01 
    0.012722198 = product of:
  0.07315264 = sum of:
    0.04195505 = weight(_text_:allgemeines in 2274) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04195505 = score(doc=2274,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.13446471 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.705423 = idf(docFreq=399, maxDocs=44218)
          0.023567878 = queryNorm
        0.31201532 = fieldWeight in 2274, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.705423 = idf(docFreq=399, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=2274)
    0.0063312855 = weight(_text_:und in 2274) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0063312855 = score(doc=2274,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.052235067 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.023567878 = queryNorm
        0.12120757 = fieldWeight in 2274, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=2274)
    0.0038887768 = product of:
      0.0077775535 = sum of:
        0.0077775535 = weight(_text_:1 in 2274) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0077775535 = score(doc=2274,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.057894554 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
              0.023567878 = queryNorm
            0.13433999 = fieldWeight in 2274, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=2274)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.020977525 = product of:
      0.04195505 = sum of:
        0.04195505 = weight(_text_:allgemeines in 2274) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04195505 = score(doc=2274,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.13446471 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.705423 = idf(docFreq=399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.023567878 = queryNorm
            0.31201532 = fieldWeight in 2274, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              5.705423 = idf(docFreq=399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=2274)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.17391305 = coord(4/23)
    BK
    06.00 Information und Dokumentation: Allgemeines
    Classification
    06.00 Information und Dokumentation: Allgemeines
    Content
    1. Introduction. MetricsIndicators -- Web metrics and Ranganathan's laws of library science -- Web metrics for the library and information professional -- The aim of this book -- The structure of the rest of this book -- 2. Bibliometrics, webometrics and web metrics. Web metrics -- Information science metrics -- Web analytics -- Relational and evaluative metrics -- Evaluative web metrics -- Relational web metrics -- Validating the results -- 3. Data collection tools. The anatomy of a URL, web links and the structure of the web -- Search engines 1.0 -- Web crawlers -- Search engines 2.0 -- Post search engine 2.0: fragmentation -- 4. Evaluating impact on the web. Websites -- Blogs -- Wikis -- Internal metrics -- External metrics -- A systematic approach to content analysis -- 5. Evaluating social media impact. Aspects of social network sites -- Typology of social network sites -- Research and tools for specific sites and services -- Other social network sites -- URL shorteners: web analytic links on any site -- General social media impact -- Sentiment analysis -- 6. Investigating relationships between actors. Social network analysis methods -- Sources for relational network analysis -- 7. Exploring traditional publications in a new environment. More bibliographic items -- Full text analysis -- Greater context -- 8. Web metrics and the web of data. The web of data -- Building the semantic web -- Implications of the web of data for web metrics -- Investigating the web of data today -- SPARQL -- Sindice -- LDSpider: an RDF web crawler -- 9. The future of web metrics and the library and information professional. How far we have come -- The future of web metrics -- The future of the library and information professional and web metrics.
    Isbn
    978-1-85604-874-3
  9. Meho, L.I.; Yang, K.: Impact of data sources on citation counts and rankings of LIS faculty : Web of science versus scopus and google scholar (2007) 0.01 
    0.012603517 = product of:
  0.07247022 = sum of:
    0.012935456 = product of:
      0.025870912 = sum of:
        0.025870912 = weight(_text_:bibliothekswesen in 620) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.025870912 = score(doc=620,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10505787 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
              0.023567878 = queryNorm
            0.24625391 = fieldWeight in 620, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=620)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.026419718 = weight(_text_:informationswissenschaft in 620) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026419718 = score(doc=620,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.10616633 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.023567878 = queryNorm
        0.24885213 = fieldWeight in 620, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=620)
    0.025870912 = weight(_text_:bibliothekswesen in 620) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.025870912 = score(doc=620,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.10505787 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
          0.023567878 = queryNorm
        0.24625391 = fieldWeight in 620, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=620)
    0.0072441325 = product of:
      0.014488265 = sum of:
        0.014488265 = weight(_text_:international in 620) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.014488265 = score(doc=620,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.078619614 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.33588 = idf(docFreq=4276, maxDocs=44218)
              0.023567878 = queryNorm
            0.18428308 = fieldWeight in 620, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.33588 = idf(docFreq=4276, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=620)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.17391305 = coord(4/23)
    Abstract
    The Institute for Scientific Information's (ISI, now Thomson Scientific, Philadelphia, PA) citation databases have been used for decades as a starting point and often as the only tools for locating citations and/or conducting citation analyses. The ISI databases (or Web of Science [WoS]), however, may no longer be sufficient because new databases and tools that allow citation searching are now available. Using citations to the work of 25 library and information science (LIS) faculty members as a case study, the authors examine the effects of using Scopus and Google Scholar (GS) on the citation counts and rankings of scholars as measured by WoS. Overall, more than 10,000 citing and purportedly citing documents were examined. Results show that Scopus significantly alters the relative ranking of those scholars that appear in the middle of the rankings and that GS stands out in its coverage of conference proceedings as well as international, non-English language journals. The use of Scopus and GS, in addition to WoS, helps reveal a more accurate and comprehensive picture of the scholarly impact of authors. The WoS data took about 100 hours of collecting and processing time, Scopus consumed 200 hours, and GS a grueling 3,000 hours.
    Field
    Bibliothekswesen
    Informationswissenschaft
  10. ¬Die deutsche Zeitschrift für Dokumentation, Informationswissenschaft und Informationspraxis von 1950 bis 2011 : eine vorläufige Bilanz in vier Abschnitten (2012) 0.01 
    0.012595124 = product of:
  0.07242196 = sum of:
    0.013292931 = weight(_text_:und in 402) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013292931 = score(doc=402,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.052235067 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.023567878 = queryNorm
        0.2544829 = fieldWeight in 402, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=402)
    0.04483575 = weight(_text_:informationswissenschaft in 402) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04483575 = score(doc=402,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.10616633 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.023567878 = queryNorm
        0.42231607 = fieldWeight in 402, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=402)
    0.0047139092 = product of:
      0.0094278185 = sum of:
        0.0094278185 = weight(_text_:1 in 402) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0094278185 = score(doc=402,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.057894554 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
              0.023567878 = queryNorm
            0.16284466 = fieldWeight in 402, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=402)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.009579366 = product of:
      0.019158732 = sum of:
        0.019158732 = weight(_text_:22 in 402) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.019158732 = score(doc=402,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08253069 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.023567878 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 402, 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=402)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.17391305 = coord(4/23)
    Date
    22. 7.2012 19:35:26
    Field
    Informationswissenschaft
    Footnote
    Besteht aus 4 Teilen: Teil 1: Eden, D., A. Arndt, A. Hoffer, T. Raschke u. P. Schön: Die Nachrichten für Dokumentation in den Jahren 1950 bis 1962 (S.159-163). Teil 2: Brose, M., E. durst, D. Nitzsche, D. Veckenstedt u. R. Wein: Statistische Untersuchung der Fachzeitschrift "Nachrichten für Dokumentation" (NfD) 1963-1975 (S.164-170). Teil 3: Bösel, J., G. Ebert, P. Garz,, M. Iwanow u. B. Russ: Methoden und Ergebnisse einer statistischen Auswertung der Fachzeitschrift "Nachrichten für Dokumentation" (NfD) 1976 bis 1988 (S.171-174). Teil 4: Engelage, H., S. Jansen, R. Mertins, K. Redel u. S. Ring: Statistische Untersuchung der Fachzeitschrift "Nachrichten für Dokumentation" (NfD) / "Information. Wissenschaft & Praxis" (IWP) 1989-2011 (S.164-170).
    Source
    Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 63(2012) H.3, S.157-182
  11. Oberhauser, O.: Fachspezifische Suche nach elektronischen Zeitschriften : Ein webliographischer Streifzug am Beispiel der Informationswissenschaft (2003) 0.01 
    0.01232724 = product of:
  0.07088163 = sum of:
    0.019186692 = weight(_text_:und in 1480) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019186692 = score(doc=1480,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.052235067 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.023567878 = queryNorm
        0.3673144 = fieldWeight in 1480, product of:
          4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
            18.0 = termFreq=18.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1480)
    0.037363127 = weight(_text_:informationswissenschaft in 1480) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.037363127 = score(doc=1480,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.10616633 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.023567878 = queryNorm
        0.35193008 = fieldWeight in 1480, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1480)
    0.010403548 = weight(_text_:im in 1480) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010403548 = score(doc=1480,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.066621356 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.8267863 = idf(docFreq=7115, maxDocs=44218)
          0.023567878 = queryNorm
        0.15615936 = fieldWeight in 1480, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.8267863 = idf(docFreq=7115, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1480)
    0.0039282576 = product of:
      0.007856515 = sum of:
        0.007856515 = weight(_text_:1 in 1480) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.007856515 = score(doc=1480,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.057894554 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
              0.023567878 = queryNorm
            0.13570388 = fieldWeight in 1480, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1480)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.17391305 = coord(4/23)
    Abstract
    Ziel dieses Beitrags ist es, am Beispiel unserer eigenen Disziplin Möglichkeiten zur Recherche nach elektronischen Zeitschriften (EJournals) vorzustellen und zu bewerten. Vorweg drei definitorische Festlegungen: EJournals meint hier via WWW verfügbare Zeitschriften (gleichgültig ob parallel zu einer gedruckten Ausgabe oder ausschliesslich elektronisch, ob zur Gänze oder nur teilweise online). Informationswissenschaft (IW) steht hier für den gesamten Bereich der Bibliotheks-, Informations- und Dokumentationswissenschaft und -praxis (ohne Archiv- und Museumswesen). Webliographisch bedeutet, dass sich die Betrachtung auf Informationssammlungen und Nachweise im WWW beschränkt. Bei den (frei verfügbaren) Webliographien zu EJournals handelt es sich in der Regel um Datenbanken, Verzeichnisse und Linksammlungen. Es mag vielleicht überraschen, dass für das gewählte Fachgebiet eine nahezu unüberschaubare Zahl solcher Nachweise existiert. Zwar scheint dies noch nicht zur Herausbildung von "Webliographien der Webliographien" geführt zu haben, die auf Nachweise von ausschliesslich informationswissenschaftlichen EJournals spezialisiert wären, doch in den diversen fachspezifischen Linksammlungen und Verzeichnissen werden die Sekundärpublikationen, meist in die Auflistung der Primärpublikationen gemischt, durchaus verzeichnet. Fachübergreifend existieren Kompilationen von Verzeichnissen elektronischer Zeitschriften sehr wohl. Als deutsches Beispiel kann der Abschnitt "Elektronische Zeitschriften" der Düsseldorfer Virtuellen Bibliothek angeführt werden, wo Ressourcen und Verzeichnisse/ Datenbanken elektronischer Zeitschriften vorgestellt werden; ein internationales Beispiel ist die auf dem Server der University of Vermont gewartete umfangreiche Zusammenstellung Serials in Cyberspace.
    Source
    Mitteilungen der Vereinigung Österreichischer Bibliothekarinnen und Bibliothekare. 56(2003) H.1, S.35-41
  12. Bauer, J.; Leydesdorff, L.; Bornmann, L.: Highly cited papers in Library and Information Science (LIS) : authors, institutions, and network structures (2016) 0.01 
    0.012309823 = product of:
  0.070781484 = sum of:
    0.012935456 = product of:
      0.025870912 = sum of:
        0.025870912 = weight(_text_:bibliothekswesen in 3231) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.025870912 = score(doc=3231,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10505787 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
              0.023567878 = queryNorm
            0.24625391 = fieldWeight in 3231, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3231)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.026419718 = weight(_text_:informationswissenschaft in 3231) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026419718 = score(doc=3231,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.10616633 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.023567878 = queryNorm
        0.24885213 = fieldWeight in 3231, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3231)
    0.025870912 = weight(_text_:bibliothekswesen in 3231) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.025870912 = score(doc=3231,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.10505787 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
          0.023567878 = queryNorm
        0.24625391 = fieldWeight in 3231, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3231)
    0.0055553955 = product of:
      0.011110791 = sum of:
        0.011110791 = weight(_text_:1 in 3231) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011110791 = score(doc=3231,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.057894554 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
              0.023567878 = queryNorm
            0.19191428 = fieldWeight in 3231, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3231)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.17391305 = coord(4/23)
    Abstract
    As a follow-up to the highly cited authors list published by Thomson Reuters in June 2014, we analyzed the top 1% most frequently cited papers published between 2002 and 2012 included in the Web of Science (WoS) subject category "Information Science & Library Science." In all, 798 authors contributed to 305 top 1% publications; these authors were employed at 275 institutions. The authors at Harvard University contributed the largest number of papers, when the addresses are whole-number counted. However, Leiden University leads the ranking if fractional counting is used. Twenty-three of the 798 authors were also listed as most highly cited authors by Thomson Reuters in June 2014 (http://highlycited.com/). Twelve of these 23 authors were involved in publishing 4 or more of the 305 papers under study. Analysis of coauthorship relations among the 798 highly cited scientists shows that coauthorships are based on common interests in a specific topic. Three topics were important between 2002 and 2012: (a) collection and exploitation of information in clinical practices; (b) use of the Internet in public communication and commerce; and (c) scientometrics.
    Field
    Bibliothekswesen
    Informationswissenschaft
  13. Schlögl, C.; List, R,: Vergleiche von Zitaten, Downloads und Lesehäufigkeiten : am Beispiel von zwei Volkswirtschaftslehre-Zeitschriften (2018) 0.01 
    0.012036021 = product of:
  0.06920712 = sum of:
    0.020305287 = weight(_text_:und in 4236) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020305287 = score(doc=4236,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.052235067 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.023567878 = queryNorm
        0.38872904 = fieldWeight in 4236, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4236)
    0.031703662 = weight(_text_:informationswissenschaft in 4236) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.031703662 = score(doc=4236,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.10616633 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.023567878 = queryNorm
        0.29862255 = fieldWeight in 4236, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4236)
    0.012484257 = weight(_text_:im in 4236) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012484257 = score(doc=4236,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.066621356 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.8267863 = idf(docFreq=7115, maxDocs=44218)
          0.023567878 = queryNorm
        0.18739122 = fieldWeight in 4236, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.8267863 = idf(docFreq=7115, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4236)
    0.0047139092 = product of:
      0.0094278185 = sum of:
        0.0094278185 = weight(_text_:1 in 4236) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0094278185 = score(doc=4236,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.057894554 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
              0.023567878 = queryNorm
            0.16284466 = fieldWeight in 4236, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4236)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.17391305 = coord(4/23)
    Abstract
    Im vorliegenden Beitrag untersuchen wir die Beziehung zwischen Zitaten, Downloads und sog. Lesehäufigkeiten des sozialen Literaturverwaltungssystems "Mendeley" anhand der beiden Volkswirtschaftslehre-Zeitschriften "Journal of Environ­mental Economics and Management" und "Journal of Financial Economics". Trotz Ähnlichkeiten bei den Häufig­keitsverteilungen, konnten wir großteils nur mittlere (Rang)Korrelationen zwischen den drei Zeitschriftenindikatoren berechnen. In den drei Top-10 Rankings kam es zur Überschneidung von nur drei Publikationen. Deutliche Unterschiede gibt es bei den Alters- und Nutzerstrukturen. Während der Großteil der Mendeley-Nutzer Studierende sind, ist der Anteil der Professoren relativ gering. Durch die Mendeley-Profile kann ermittelt werden, aus welchen Disziplinen die Leser einer Zeitschrift kommen. Dies lässt vor allem bei interdisziplinären Zeitschriften wie "Journal of Financial Economics" interessante Rückschlüsse zu. Ähnlich wie bei Zitaten, gibt es auch bei Downloads und Lesehäufigkeiten disziplinspezifische Unterschiede.
    Footnote
    Teil eines Themenheftes: Themenheft: Düsseldorfer und Grazer Informationswissenschaft / Gastherausgeber: Wolfgang G. Stock, Christian Schlögl.
    Source
    Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 69(2018) H.1, S.121-128
  14. Sugimoto, C.R.; Li, D.; Russell, T.G.; Finlay, S.C.; Ding, Y.: ¬The shifting sands of disciplinary development : analyzing North American Library and Information Science dissertations using latent Dirichlet allocation (2011) 0.01 
    0.012026843 = product of:
  0.069154344 = sum of:
    0.012935456 = product of:
      0.025870912 = sum of:
        0.025870912 = weight(_text_:bibliothekswesen in 4143) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.025870912 = score(doc=4143,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10505787 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
              0.023567878 = queryNorm
            0.24625391 = fieldWeight in 4143, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4143)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.026419718 = weight(_text_:informationswissenschaft in 4143) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026419718 = score(doc=4143,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.10616633 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.023567878 = queryNorm
        0.24885213 = fieldWeight in 4143, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4143)
    0.025870912 = weight(_text_:bibliothekswesen in 4143) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.025870912 = score(doc=4143,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.10505787 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
          0.023567878 = queryNorm
        0.24625391 = fieldWeight in 4143, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4143)
    0.0039282576 = product of:
      0.007856515 = sum of:
        0.007856515 = weight(_text_:1 in 4143) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.007856515 = score(doc=4143,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.057894554 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
              0.023567878 = queryNorm
            0.13570388 = fieldWeight in 4143, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4143)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.17391305 = coord(4/23)
    Field
    Bibliothekswesen
    Informationswissenschaft
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 62(2011) no.1, S.185-204
  15. Järvelin, K.; Vakkari, P.: LIS research across 50 years: content analysis of journal articles : offering an information-centric conception of memes (2022) 0.01 
    0.012026843 = product of:
  0.069154344 = sum of:
    0.012935456 = product of:
      0.025870912 = sum of:
        0.025870912 = weight(_text_:bibliothekswesen in 949) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.025870912 = score(doc=949,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10505787 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
              0.023567878 = queryNorm
            0.24625391 = fieldWeight in 949, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=949)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.026419718 = weight(_text_:informationswissenschaft in 949) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026419718 = score(doc=949,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.10616633 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.023567878 = queryNorm
        0.24885213 = fieldWeight in 949, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=949)
    0.025870912 = weight(_text_:bibliothekswesen in 949) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.025870912 = score(doc=949,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.10505787 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
          0.023567878 = queryNorm
        0.24625391 = fieldWeight in 949, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=949)
    0.0039282576 = product of:
      0.007856515 = sum of:
        0.007856515 = weight(_text_:1 in 949) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.007856515 = score(doc=949,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.057894554 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
              0.023567878 = queryNorm
            0.13570388 = fieldWeight in 949, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=949)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.17391305 = coord(4/23)
    Abstract
    Purpose This paper analyses the research in Library and Information Science (LIS) and reports on (1) the status of LIS research in 2015 and (2) on the evolution of LIS research longitudinally from 1965 to 2015. Design/methodology/approach The study employs a quantitative intellectual content analysis of articles published in 30+ scholarly LIS journals, following the design by Tuomaala et al. (2014). In the content analysis, we classify articles along eight dimensions covering topical content and methodology. Findings The topical findings indicate that the earlier strong LIS emphasis on L&I services has declined notably, while scientific and professional communication has become the most popular topic. Information storage and retrieval has given up its earlier strong position towards the end of the years analyzed. Individuals are increasingly the units of observation. End-user's and developer's viewpoints have strengthened at the cost of intermediaries' viewpoint. LIS research is methodologically increasingly scattered since survey, scientometric methods, experiment, case studies and qualitative studies have all gained in popularity. Consequently, LIS may have become more versatile in the analysis of its research objects during the years analyzed. Originality/value Among quantitative intellectual content analyses of LIS research, the study is unique in its scope: length of analysis period (50 years), width (8 dimensions covering topical content and methodology) and depth (the annual batch of 30+ scholarly journals).
    Field
    Bibliothekswesen
    Informationswissenschaft
  16. Ball, R.: Wissenschaftsindikatoren im Zeitalter digitaler Wissenschaft (2007) 0.01 
    0.01202117 = product of:
  0.069121726 = sum of:
    0.026369587 = weight(_text_:und in 875) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026369587 = score(doc=875,freq=34.0), product of:
        0.052235067 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.023567878 = queryNorm
        0.50482535 = fieldWeight in 875, product of:
          5.8309517 = tf(freq=34.0), with freq of:
            34.0 = termFreq=34.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=875)
    0.027525201 = weight(_text_:im in 875) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.027525201 = score(doc=875,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.066621356 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.8267863 = idf(docFreq=7115, maxDocs=44218)
          0.023567878 = queryNorm
        0.41315883 = fieldWeight in 875, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          2.8267863 = idf(docFreq=7115, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=875)
    0.0072441325 = product of:
      0.014488265 = sum of:
        0.014488265 = weight(_text_:international in 875) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.014488265 = score(doc=875,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.078619614 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.33588 = idf(docFreq=4276, maxDocs=44218)
              0.023567878 = queryNorm
            0.18428308 = fieldWeight in 875, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.33588 = idf(docFreq=4276, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=875)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.007982805 = product of:
      0.01596561 = sum of:
        0.01596561 = weight(_text_:22 in 875) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01596561 = score(doc=875,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08253069 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.023567878 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 875, 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=875)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.17391305 = coord(4/23)
    Abstract
    Die Bereitstellung und Nutzung digitaler Bibliotheken entwickelt sich allmählich zum Standard der Literatur und Informationsversorgung in Wissenschaft und Forschung. Ganzen Disziplinen genügt oftmals die verfügbare digitale Information, Printmedien werden besonders im STM-Segment zu einem Nischenprodukt. Digitale Texte können beliebig eingebaut, kopiert und nachgenutzt werden, die Verlinkung zwischen Metadaten und Volltexten bringt weitere Nutzungsvorteile. Dabei sind die Angebote von Digital Libraries Bestandteil eines ganzheitlichen digitalen Ansatzes, wonach die elektronische Informations- und Literaturversorgung integraler Bestandteil von E-Science (Enhanced Science) oder Cyberinfrastructure darstellt. Hierbei verschmelzen dann Produktion, Diskussion, Distribution und Rezeption der wissenschaftlichen Inhalte auf einer einzigen digitalen Plattform. Damit sind dann nicht nur die Literatur- und Informationsversorgung (Digital Libraries), sondern auch die Wissenschaft selbst digital geworden. Diese dramatische Veränderung in der Wissenschaftskommunikation hat direkte Auswirkungen auf die Messung der Wissenschaftskommunikation, also auf die Evaluation von wissenschaftlichem Output. Bisherige Systeme der Wissenschaftsvermessung basieren hauptsächlich auf bibliometrischen Analysen, d.h. der Quantifizierung des Outputs und dessen Rezeption (Zitierhäufigkeit). Basis dafür sind insbesondere im STM-Bereich die international anerkannten Datenbanken des ISI (Thomson Scientific) insbesondere der Science Citation Index, SCI) oder vielleicht zukünftig das Konkurrenzprodukt SCOPUS des Wissenschaftskonzerns Reed Elsevier. Die Digitalisierung der Wissenschaft in ihrem kompletten Lebenszyklus, die zunehmende Nutzung und Akzeptanz von Dokumentenrepositorien, Institutsservern und anderen elektronischen Publikationsformen im Rahmen von E-Science erfordern und ermöglichen zugleich den Nachweis von Output und Rezeption durch neue bibliometrische Formen, etwa der Webometrie (Webmetrics). Im vorliegenden Paper haben wir hierzu Analysen durchgeführt und stellen eine Abschätzung vor, wie sich der Anteil von webometrisch erfassbarer und zugänglicher wissenschaftlicher Literatur im Vergleich zu Literatur, die mit den Standardsystemen nachgewiesen werden kann im Laufe der letzten Jahre verändert hat. Dabei haben wir unterschiedliche Disziplinen und Länder berücksichtigt. Zudem wird ein Vergleich der webometrischen Nachweisqualität so unterschiedlicher Systeme wie SCI, SCOPUS und Google Scholar vorgestellt.
    Date
    23.12.2007 19:22:21
  17. Mahapatra, G.: Indian library and information science journals : a bibliometric analysis of the rate of citations and their characteristics (1993) 0.01 
    0.01191085 = product of:
  0.09131652 = sum of:
    0.018109638 = product of:
      0.036219276 = sum of:
        0.036219276 = weight(_text_:bibliothekswesen in 112) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.036219276 = score(doc=112,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10505787 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
              0.023567878 = queryNorm
            0.34475547 = fieldWeight in 112, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=112)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.036987606 = weight(_text_:informationswissenschaft in 112) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.036987606 = score(doc=112,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.10616633 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.023567878 = queryNorm
        0.348393 = fieldWeight in 112, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=112)
    0.036219276 = weight(_text_:bibliothekswesen in 112) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.036219276 = score(doc=112,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.10505787 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
          0.023567878 = queryNorm
        0.34475547 = fieldWeight in 112, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=112)
  0.13043478 = coord(3/23)
    Field
    Bibliothekswesen
    Informationswissenschaft
  18. Naumann, U.: Irrläufer einer missverstandenen Szientometrie (2006) 0.01 
    0.01171581 = product of:
  0.06736591 = sum of:
    0.013292931 = weight(_text_:und in 23) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013292931 = score(doc=23,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.052235067 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.023567878 = queryNorm
        0.2544829 = fieldWeight in 23, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=23)
    0.031703662 = weight(_text_:informationswissenschaft in 23) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.031703662 = score(doc=23,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.10616633 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.023567878 = queryNorm
        0.29862255 = fieldWeight in 23, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=23)
    0.017655406 = weight(_text_:im in 23) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017655406 = score(doc=23,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.066621356 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.8267863 = idf(docFreq=7115, maxDocs=44218)
          0.023567878 = queryNorm
        0.26501122 = fieldWeight in 23, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.8267863 = idf(docFreq=7115, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=23)
    0.0047139092 = product of:
      0.0094278185 = sum of:
        0.0094278185 = weight(_text_:1 in 23) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0094278185 = score(doc=23,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.057894554 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
              0.023567878 = queryNorm
            0.16284466 = fieldWeight in 23, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=23)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.17391305 = coord(4/23)
    Abstract
    Die Szientometrie untersucht quantitative Dimensionen der wissenschaftlichen Entwicklung. Ihre Methoden und Ergebnisse werden auch zur Evaluation des wissenschaftlichen Outputs herangezogen. Ohne ein grundsätzliches Verständnis über die begrenzte Aussagefähigkeit massenstatistischer Datenerhebungen besteht die Gefahr der Fehlinterpretation, da sich , Wissenschaftlichkeit' nicht allein mit diesem Instrumentarium messen lässt. Im vorliegenden Beitrag wird darauf Bezug genommen, indem die Versuche geschildert werden, anhand der Publikationsziffern zwischen Universitäten und innerhalb von Universitäten Rangfolgen mit finanziellen Auswirkungen zu bilden. Ein zweites Thema ist die Kritik an der vermuteten Qualität von peer reviewed-Zeitschriften, die bei der quantitativen Messung eine Vorzugsstellung genießen. Ein drittes Thema ist die kritische Betrachtung des für Zeitschriften ermittelten impact factor als untaugliches Instrument der qualitativen Positionierung von Forschungsleistungen.
    Series
    Beiträge zur Bibliotheks- und Informationswissenschaft; 1
    Source
    Vom Wandel der Wissensorganisation im Informationszeitalter: Festschrift für Walther Umstätter zum 65. Geburtstag, hrsg. von P. Hauke u. K. Umlauf
  19. Parthey, H.: Strukturwandel der bibliometrischen Profile wissenschaftlicher Institutionen im 20. Jahrhundert (2006) 0.01 
    0.011353978 = product of:
  0.06528537 = sum of:
    0.02022455 = weight(_text_:und in 27) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02022455 = score(doc=27,freq=20.0), product of:
        0.052235067 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.023567878 = queryNorm
        0.3871834 = fieldWeight in 27, product of:
          4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
            20.0 = termFreq=20.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=27)
    0.026419718 = weight(_text_:informationswissenschaft in 27) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026419718 = score(doc=27,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.10616633 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.023567878 = queryNorm
        0.24885213 = fieldWeight in 27, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=27)
    0.014712838 = weight(_text_:im in 27) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014712838 = score(doc=27,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.066621356 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.8267863 = idf(docFreq=7115, maxDocs=44218)
          0.023567878 = queryNorm
        0.22084267 = fieldWeight in 27, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.8267863 = idf(docFreq=7115, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=27)
    0.0039282576 = product of:
      0.007856515 = sum of:
        0.007856515 = weight(_text_:1 in 27) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.007856515 = score(doc=27,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.057894554 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
              0.023567878 = queryNorm
            0.13570388 = fieldWeight in 27, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=27)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.17391305 = coord(4/23)
    Abstract
    Ein Wandel bibliometrischer Profile von Forschungsinstituten kann als besonderer Indikator für die Herausbildung neuartiger, insbesondere interdisziplinärer Forschungssituationen verstanden werden. Vergleichende Untersuchungen über bibliometrische Profile in der Wissenschaft gründen sich auf die Zählung von Publikationen, Autor- und Koautorschaft. Mit Publikationen bieten Forscher ihre Entwicklung von Problem und Methode, ihren Wissensgewinn dem wissenschaftlichen Meinungsstreit an. In diesem Zusammenhang können Zeitschriftenpublikationen an der Forschungsfront einer jeden Einzelwissenschaft - wegen des jeweiligen Standards bei der Abfassung von Zeitschriftenpublikationen - sowohl hinsichtlich ihrer Anzahl wie auch ihrer Koautorschaft und Zitationsrate verglichen werden. In unseren Untersuchungen gehen wir von folgender Definition aus: Bibliometrische Profile in der Wissenschaft sind Zusammenhänge zwischen der Anzahl von Publikationen, Zitation, Autor- und Koautorschaft, die durch funktionale Abhängigkeiten bestimmt sind. Entscheidendes Merkmal interdisziplinärer Forschungssituationen ist nach unserer Meinung nicht die Zusammensetzung der Gruppe nach Ausbildung und Kompetenz in verschiedenen Disziplinen, sondern das bei einzelnen Wissenschaftlern disziplinär fehlende Wissen zur Problembearbeitung und die daraus resultierende Suche nach Methodentransfer aus anderen Spezialgebieten und die danach gestaltete Koautorschaft. Der in den Untersuchungen benutzte Indikator für den Grad der Interdisziplinarität bringt zum Ausdruck, inwieweit die zur Bearbeitung eines Problems verwendeten Methoden in einem Wissensbereich begründet sind, der verschieden von dem Wissen ist, in dem das Problem formuliert wurde. Es ist anzunehmen, dass interdisziplinäre Arbeit durch die Zusammensetzung der Gruppe aus Vertretern verschiedener Disziplinen gefördert wird. Die Arbeit mit Methoden aus anderen Gebieten erzeugt sowohl Kooperationsbedürfnis als auch Kooperationsfähigkeit, und die Kooperation entwickelt Fähigkeiten und Interesse zur interdisziplinären Arbeit.
    Series
    Beiträge zur Bibliotheks- und Informationswissenschaft; 1
    Source
    Vom Wandel der Wissensorganisation im Informationszeitalter: Festschrift für Walther Umstätter zum 65. Geburtstag, hrsg. von P. Hauke u. K. Umlauf
  20. Schloegl, C.; Stock, W.G.: Impact and relevance of LIS journals : a scientometric analysis of international and German-language LIS journals - Citation analysis versus reader survey (2004) 0.01 
    0.010820633 = product of:
  0.062218636 = sum of:
    0.010348365 = product of:
      0.02069673 = sum of:
        0.02069673 = weight(_text_:bibliothekswesen in 5249) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02069673 = score(doc=5249,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10505787 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
              0.023567878 = queryNorm
            0.19700313 = fieldWeight in 5249, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5249)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.021135775 = weight(_text_:informationswissenschaft in 5249) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021135775 = score(doc=5249,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.10616633 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.023567878 = queryNorm
        0.1990817 = fieldWeight in 5249, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5249)
    0.02069673 = weight(_text_:bibliothekswesen in 5249) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02069673 = score(doc=5249,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.10505787 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
          0.023567878 = queryNorm
        0.19700313 = fieldWeight in 5249, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5249)
    0.010037765 = product of:
      0.02007553 = sum of:
        0.02007553 = weight(_text_:international in 5249) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02007553 = score(doc=5249,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.078619614 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.33588 = idf(docFreq=4276, maxDocs=44218)
              0.023567878 = queryNorm
            0.25535014 = fieldWeight in 5249, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.33588 = idf(docFreq=4276, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5249)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.17391305 = coord(4/23)
    Abstract
    The goal of the scientometric analysis presented in this article was to investigate international and regional (i.e., German-language) periodicals in the field of library and information science (LIS). This was done by means of a citation analysis and a reader survey. For the citation analysis, impact factor, citing half-life, number of references per article, and the rate of self-references of a periodical were used as indicators. In addition, the leading LIS periodicals were mapped. For the 40 international periodicals, data were collected from ISI's Social Sciences Citation Index Journal Citation Reports (JCR); the citations of the 10 German-language journals were counted manually (overall 1,494 source articles with 10,520 citations). Altogether, the empirical base of the citation analysis consisted of nearly 90,000 citations in 6,203 source articles that were published between 1997 and 2000. The expert survey investigated reading frequency, applicability of the journals to the job of the reader, publication frequency, and publication preference both for all respondents and for different groups among them (practitioners vs. scientists, librarians vs. documentalists vs. LIS scholars, public sector vs. information industry vs. other private company employees). The study was conducted in spring 2002. A total of 257 questionnaires were returned by information specialists from Germany, Austria, and Switzerland. Having both citation and readership data, we performed a comparative analysis of these two data sets. This enabled us to identify answers to questions like: Does reading behavior correlate with the journal impact factor? Do readers prefer journals with a short or a long half-life, or with a low or a high number of references? Is there any difference in this matter among librarians, documentalists, and LIS scholars?
    Field
    Bibliothekswesen
    Informationswissenschaft

Authors

Years

Languages

  • e 522
  • d 112
  • sp 2
  • ? 1
  • m 1
  • ro 1
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 601
  • m 18
  • s 17
  • el 16
  • r 3
  • x 2
  • b 1
  • More… Less…

Themes

Subjects

Classifications