Search (62 results, page 1 of 4)

  • × theme_ss:"Internet"
  • × theme_ss:"Informetrie"
  1. Zhang, Y.: ¬The impact of Internet-based electronic resources on formal scholarly communication in the area of library and information science : a citation analysis (1998) 0.02
    0.02355449 = product of:
      0.10094782 = sum of:
        0.0118387835 = product of:
          0.023677567 = sum of:
            0.023677567 = weight(_text_:bibliothekswesen in 2808) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.023677567 = score(doc=2808,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.09615103 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.021569785 = queryNorm
                0.24625391 = fieldWeight in 2808, 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=2808)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
        0.024179846 = weight(_text_:informationswissenschaft in 2808) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.024179846 = score(doc=2808,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.09716552 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021569785 = queryNorm
            0.24885213 = fieldWeight in 2808, 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=2808)
        0.023677567 = weight(_text_:bibliothekswesen in 2808) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023677567 = score(doc=2808,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.09615103 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021569785 = queryNorm
            0.24625391 = fieldWeight in 2808, 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=2808)
        0.023677567 = weight(_text_:bibliothekswesen in 2808) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023677567 = score(doc=2808,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.09615103 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021569785 = queryNorm
            0.24625391 = fieldWeight in 2808, 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=2808)
        0.005833246 = weight(_text_:in in 2808) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.005833246 = score(doc=2808,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.029340398 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021569785 = queryNorm
            0.19881277 = fieldWeight in 2808, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2808)
        0.0014085418 = weight(_text_:s in 2808) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0014085418 = score(doc=2808,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021569785 = queryNorm
            0.060061958 = fieldWeight in 2808, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2808)
        0.010332272 = product of:
          0.020664545 = sum of:
            0.020664545 = weight(_text_:22 in 2808) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.020664545 = score(doc=2808,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.07553371 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.021569785 = queryNorm
                0.27358043 = fieldWeight in 2808, 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=2808)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.23333333 = coord(7/30)
    
    Abstract
    Internet based electronic resources are growing dramatically but there have been no empirical studies evaluating the impact of e-sources, as a whole, on formal scholarly communication. reports results of an investigation into how much e-sources have been used in formal scholarly communication, using a case study in the area of Library and Information Science (LIS) during the period 1994 to 1996. 4 citation based indicators were used in the study of the impact measurement. Concludes that, compared with the impact of print sources, the impact of e-sources on formal scholarly communication in LIS is small, as measured by e-sources cited, and does not increase significantly by year even though there is observable growth of these impact across the years. It is found that periodical format is related to the rate of citing e-sources, articles are more likely to cite e-sources than are print priodical articles. However, once authors cite electronic resource, there is no significant difference in the number of references per article by periodical format or by year. Suggests that, at this stage, citing e-sources may depend on authors rather than the periodical format in which authors choose to publish
    Date
    30. 1.1999 17:22:22
    Field
    Bibliothekswesen
    Informationswissenschaft
    Source
    Journal of information science. 24(1998) no.4, S.241-254
  2. Vaughan, L.; Shaw , D.: Bibliographic and Web citations : what Is the difference? (2003) 0.02
    0.022701718 = product of:
      0.09729308 = sum of:
        0.0118387835 = product of:
          0.023677567 = sum of:
            0.023677567 = weight(_text_:bibliothekswesen in 5176) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.023677567 = score(doc=5176,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.09615103 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.021569785 = queryNorm
                0.24625391 = fieldWeight in 5176, 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=5176)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
        0.024179846 = weight(_text_:informationswissenschaft in 5176) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.024179846 = score(doc=5176,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.09716552 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021569785 = queryNorm
            0.24885213 = fieldWeight in 5176, 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=5176)
        0.023677567 = weight(_text_:bibliothekswesen in 5176) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023677567 = score(doc=5176,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.09615103 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021569785 = queryNorm
            0.24625391 = fieldWeight in 5176, 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=5176)
        0.023677567 = weight(_text_:bibliothekswesen in 5176) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023677567 = score(doc=5176,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.09615103 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021569785 = queryNorm
            0.24625391 = fieldWeight in 5176, 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=5176)
        0.006236001 = weight(_text_:in in 5176) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.006236001 = score(doc=5176,freq=16.0), product of:
            0.029340398 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021569785 = queryNorm
            0.21253976 = fieldWeight in 5176, product of:
              4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
                16.0 = termFreq=16.0
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5176)
        0.006274772 = product of:
          0.018824315 = sum of:
            0.018824315 = weight(_text_:l in 5176) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.018824315 = score(doc=5176,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.0857324 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.021569785 = queryNorm
                0.2195706 = fieldWeight in 5176, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5176)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
        0.0014085418 = weight(_text_:s in 5176) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0014085418 = score(doc=5176,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021569785 = queryNorm
            0.060061958 = fieldWeight in 5176, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5176)
      0.23333333 = coord(7/30)
    
    Abstract
    Vaughn, and Shaw look at the relationship between traditional citation and Web citation (not hyperlinks but rather textual mentions of published papers). Using English language research journals in ISI's 2000 Journal Citation Report - Information and Library Science category - 1209 full length papers published in 1997 in 46 journals were identified. Each was searched in Social Science Citation Index and on the Web using Google phrase search by entering the title in quotation marks, and followed for distinction where necessary with sub-titles, author's names, and journal title words. After removing obvious false drops, the number of web sites was recorded for comparison with the SSCI counts. A second sample from 1992 was also collected for examination. There were a total of 16,371 web citations to the selected papers. The top and bottom ranked four journals were then examined and every third citation to every third paper was selected and classified as to source type, domain, and country of origin. Web counts are much higher than ISI citation counts. Of the 46 journals from 1997, 26 demonstrated a significant correlation between Web and traditional citation counts, and 11 of the 15 in the 1992 sample also showed significant correlation. Journal impact factor in 1998 and 1999 correlated significantly with average Web citations per journal in the 1997 data, but at a low level. Thirty percent of web citations come from other papers posted on the web, and 30percent from listings of web based bibliographic services, while twelve percent come from class reading lists. High web citation journals often have web accessible tables of content.
    Field
    Bibliothekswesen
    Informationswissenschaft
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and technology. 54(2003) no.14, S.1313-1324
  3. Maharana, B.; Nayak, K.; Sahu, N.K.: Scholarly use of web resources in LIS research : a citation analysis (2006) 0.02
    0.018350873 = product of:
      0.09175436 = sum of:
        0.0118387835 = product of:
          0.023677567 = sum of:
            0.023677567 = weight(_text_:bibliothekswesen in 53) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.023677567 = score(doc=53,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.09615103 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.021569785 = queryNorm
                0.24625391 = fieldWeight in 53, 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=53)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
        0.024179846 = weight(_text_:informationswissenschaft in 53) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.024179846 = score(doc=53,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.09716552 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021569785 = queryNorm
            0.24885213 = fieldWeight in 53, 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=53)
        0.023677567 = weight(_text_:bibliothekswesen in 53) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023677567 = score(doc=53,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.09615103 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021569785 = queryNorm
            0.24625391 = fieldWeight in 53, 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=53)
        0.023677567 = weight(_text_:bibliothekswesen in 53) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023677567 = score(doc=53,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.09615103 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.457672 = idf(docFreq=1392, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021569785 = queryNorm
            0.24625391 = fieldWeight in 53, 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=53)
        0.006972062 = weight(_text_:in in 53) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.006972062 = score(doc=53,freq=20.0), product of:
            0.029340398 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021569785 = queryNorm
            0.2376267 = fieldWeight in 53, product of:
              4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
                20.0 = termFreq=20.0
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=53)
        0.0014085418 = weight(_text_:s in 53) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0014085418 = score(doc=53,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021569785 = queryNorm
            0.060061958 = fieldWeight in 53, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=53)
      0.2 = coord(6/30)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose - The essential purpose of this paper is to measure the amount of web resources used for scholarly contributions in the area of library and information science (LIS) in India. It further aims to make an analysis of the nature and type of web resources and studies the various standards for web citations. Design/methodology/approach - In this study, the result of analysis of 292 web citations spread over 95 scholarly papers published in the proceedings of the National Conference of the Society for Information Science, India (SIS-2005) has been reported. All the 292 web citations were scanned and data relating to types of web domains, file formats, styles of citations, etc., were collected through a structured check list. The data thus obtained were systematically analyzed, figurative representations were made and appropriate interpretations were drawn. Findings - The study revealed that 292 (34.88 per cent) out of 837 were web citations, proving a significant correlation between the use of Internet resources and research productivity of LIS professionals in India. The highest number of web citations (35.6 per cent) was from .edu/.ac type domains. Most of the web resources (46.9 per cent) cited in the study were hypertext markup language (HTML) files. Originality/value - The paper is the result of an original analysis of web citations undertaken in order to study the dependence of LIS professionals in India on web sources for their scholarly contributions. This carries research value for web content providers, authors and researchers in LIS.
    Field
    Bibliothekswesen
    Informationswissenschaft
    Source
    Library review. 55(2006) no.9, S.598-607
  4. Thelwall, M.; Ruschenburg, T.: Grundlagen und Forschungsfelder der Webometrie (2006) 0.02
    0.018012479 = product of:
      0.090062395 = sum of:
        0.01622127 = weight(_text_:und in 77) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01622127 = score(doc=77,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.04780656 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021569785 = queryNorm
            0.33931053 = fieldWeight in 77, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=77)
        0.038687754 = weight(_text_:informationswissenschaft in 77) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.038687754 = score(doc=77,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.09716552 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021569785 = queryNorm
            0.3981634 = fieldWeight in 77, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.504705 = idf(docFreq=1328, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=77)
        0.004988801 = weight(_text_:in in 77) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.004988801 = score(doc=77,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.029340398 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021569785 = queryNorm
            0.17003182 = fieldWeight in 77, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=77)
        0.01622127 = weight(_text_:und in 77) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01622127 = score(doc=77,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.04780656 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021569785 = queryNorm
            0.33931053 = fieldWeight in 77, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=77)
        0.002253667 = weight(_text_:s in 77) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.002253667 = score(doc=77,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021569785 = queryNorm
            0.09609913 = fieldWeight in 77, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=77)
        0.011689632 = product of:
          0.023379264 = sum of:
            0.023379264 = weight(_text_:22 in 77) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.023379264 = score(doc=77,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.07553371 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.021569785 = queryNorm
                0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 77, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=77)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.2 = coord(6/30)
    
    Abstract
    Die Webometrie ist ein Teilbereich der Informationswissenschaft der zur Zeit auf die Analyse von Linkstrukturen konzentriert ist. Er ist stark von der Zitationsanalyse geprägt, wie der empirische Schwerpunkt auf der Wissenschaftsanalyse zeigt. In diesem Beitrag diskutieren wir die Nutzung linkbasierter Maße in einem breiten informetrischen Kontext und bewerten verschiedene Verfahren, auch im Hinblick auf ihr generelles Potentialfür die Sozialwissenschaften. Dabei wird auch ein allgemeiner Rahmenfür Linkanalysen mit den erforderlichen Arbeitsschritten vorgestellt. Abschließend werden vielversprechende zukünftige Anwendungsfelder der Webometrie benannt, unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Analyse von Blogs.
    Date
    4.12.2006 12:12:22
    Source
    Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 57(2006) H.8, S.401-406
  5. Hassler, M.: Web analytics : Metriken auswerten, Besucherverhalten verstehen, Website optimieren ; [Metriken analysieren und interpretieren ; Besucherverhalten verstehen und auswerten ; Website-Ziele definieren, Webauftritt optimieren und den Erfolg steigern] (2009) 0.02
    0.0152652785 = product of:
      0.09159167 = sum of:
        0.044165462 = weight(_text_:buch in 3586) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.044165462 = score(doc=3586,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.10028592 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.64937 = idf(docFreq=1149, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021569785 = queryNorm
            0.44039544 = fieldWeight in 3586, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              4.64937 = idf(docFreq=1149, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3586)
        0.021290416 = weight(_text_:und in 3586) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021290416 = score(doc=3586,freq=54.0), product of:
            0.04780656 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021569785 = queryNorm
            0.44534507 = fieldWeight in 3586, product of:
              7.3484693 = tf(freq=54.0), with freq of:
                54.0 = termFreq=54.0
              2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3586)
        0.0034509946 = weight(_text_:in in 3586) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0034509946 = score(doc=3586,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.029340398 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021569785 = queryNorm
            0.11761922 = fieldWeight in 3586, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3586)
        0.021290416 = weight(_text_:und in 3586) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021290416 = score(doc=3586,freq=54.0), product of:
            0.04780656 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021569785 = queryNorm
            0.44534507 = fieldWeight in 3586, product of:
              7.3484693 = tf(freq=54.0), with freq of:
                54.0 = termFreq=54.0
              2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3586)
        0.0013943854 = weight(_text_:s in 3586) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0013943854 = score(doc=3586,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021569785 = queryNorm
            0.059458308 = fieldWeight in 3586, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3586)
      0.16666667 = coord(5/30)
    
    Abstract
    Web Analytics bezeichnet die Sammlung, Analyse und Auswertung von Daten der Website-Nutzung mit dem Ziel, diese Informationen zum besseren Verständnis des Besucherverhaltens sowie zur Optimierung der Website zu nutzen. Je nach Ziel der eigenen Website - z.B. die Vermittlung eines Markenwerts oder die Vermehrung von Kontaktanfragen, Bestellungen oder Newsletter-Abonnements - können Sie anhand von Web Analytics herausfinden, wo sich Schwachstellen Ihrer Website befinden und wie Sie Ihre eigenen Ziele durch entsprechende Optimierungen besser erreichen. Dabei ist Web Analytics nicht nur für Website-Betreiber und IT-Abteilungen interessant, sondern wird insbesondere auch mehr und mehr für Marketing und Management nutzbar. Mit diesem Buch lernen Sie, wie Sie die Nutzung Ihrer Website analysieren. Sie können z. B. untersuchen, welche Traffic-Quelle am meisten Umsatz bringt oder welche Bereiche der Website besonders häufig genutzt werden und vieles mehr. Auf diese Weise werden Sie Ihre Besucher, ihr Verhalten und ihre Motivation besser kennen lernen, Ihre Website darauf abstimmen und somit Ihren Erfolg steigern können. Um aus Web Analytics einen wirklichen Mehrwert ziehen zu können, benötigen Sie fundiertes Wissen. Marco Hassler gibt Ihnen in seinem Buch einen umfassenden Einblick in Web Analytics. Er zeigt Ihnen detailliert, wie das Verhalten der Besucher analysiert wird und welche Metriken Sie wann sinnvoll anwenden können. Im letzten Teil des Buches zeigt Ihnen der Autor, wie Sie Ihre Auswertungsergebnisse dafür nutzen, über Conversion-Messungen die Website auf ihre Ziele hin zu optimieren. Ziel dieses Buches ist es, konkrete Web-Analytics-Kenntnisse zu vermitteln und wertvolle praxisorientierte Tipps zu geben. Dazu schlägt das Buch die Brücke zu tangierenden Themenbereichen wie Usability, User-Centered-Design, Online Branding, Online-Marketing oder Suchmaschinenoptimierung. Marco Hassler gibt Ihnen klare Hinweise und Anleitungen, wie Sie Ihre Ziele erreichen.
    BK
    85.20 / Betriebliche Information und Kommunikation
    Classification
    85.20 / Betriebliche Information und Kommunikation
    Footnote
    Rez. in Mitt. VÖB 63(2010) H.1/2, S.147-148 (M. Buzinkay): "Webseiten-Gestaltung und Webseiten-Analyse gehen Hand in Hand. Leider wird das Letztere selten wenn überhaupt berücksichtigt. Zu Unrecht, denn die Analyse der eigenen Maßnahmen ist zur Korrektur und Optimierung entscheidend. Auch wenn die Einsicht greift, dass die Analyse von Webseiten wichtig wäre, ist es oft ein weiter Weg zur Realisierung. Warum? Analyse heißt kontinuierlicher Aufwand, und viele sind nicht bereit beziehungsweise haben nicht die zeitlichen Ressourcen dazu. Ist man einmal zu der Überzeugung gelangt, dass man seine Web-Aktivitäten dennoch optimieren, wenn nicht schon mal gelegentlich hinterfragen sollte, dann lohnt es sich, Marco Hasslers "Web Analytics" in die Hand zu nehmen. Es ist definitiv kein Buch für einen einzigen Lese-Abend, sondern ein Band, mit welchem gearbeitet werden muss. D.h. auch hier: Web-Analyse bedeutet Arbeit und intensive Auseinandersetzung (ein Umstand, den viele nicht verstehen und akzeptieren wollen). Das Buch ist sehr dicht und bleibt trotzdem übersichtlich. Die Gliederung der Themen - von den Grundlagen der Datensammlung, über die Definition von Metriken, hin zur Optimierung von Seiten und schließlich bis zur Arbeit mit Web Analyse Werkzeugen - liefert einen roten Faden, der schön von einem Thema auf das nächste aufbaut. Dadurch fällt es auch leicht, ein eigenes Projekt begleitend zur Buchlektüre Schritt für Schritt aufzubauen. Zahlreiche Screenshots und Illustrationen erleichtern zudem das Verstehen der Zusammenhänge und Erklärungen im Text. Das Buch überzeugt aber auch durch seine Tiefe (bis auf das Kapitel, wo es um die Zusammenstellung von Personas geht) und den angenehm zu lesenden Schreibstil. Von mir kommt eine dringende Empfehlung an alle, die sich mit Online Marketing im Allgemeinen, mit Erfolgskontrolle von Websites und Web-Aktivitäten im Speziellen auseindersetzen."
    Pages
    426 S
  6. Stuart, D.: Web metrics for library and information professionals (2014) 0.01
    0.009078029 = product of:
      0.05446817 = sum of:
        0.038398087 = weight(_text_:allgemeines in 2274) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.038398087 = score(doc=2274,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.12306474 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.705423 = idf(docFreq=399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021569785 = 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)
        0.005794517 = weight(_text_:und in 2274) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.005794517 = score(doc=2274,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.04780656 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021569785 = 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)
        0.0030866629 = weight(_text_:in in 2274) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0030866629 = score(doc=2274,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.029340398 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021569785 = queryNorm
            0.10520181 = fieldWeight in 2274, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=2274)
        0.005794517 = weight(_text_:und in 2274) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.005794517 = score(doc=2274,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.04780656 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021569785 = 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)
        0.0013943854 = weight(_text_:s in 2274) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0013943854 = score(doc=2274,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021569785 = queryNorm
            0.059458308 = fieldWeight in 2274, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=2274)
      0.16666667 = coord(5/30)
    
    Abstract
    This is a practical guide to using web metrics to measure impact and demonstrate value. The web provides an opportunity to collect a host of different metrics, from those associated with social media accounts and websites to more traditional research outputs. This book is a clear guide for library and information professionals as to what web metrics are available and how to assess and use them to make informed decisions and demonstrate value. As individuals and organizations increasingly use the web in addition to traditional publishing avenues and formats, this book provides the tools to unlock web metrics and evaluate the impact of this content. The key topics covered include: bibliometrics, webometrics and web metrics; data collection tools; evaluating impact on the web; evaluating social media impact; investigating relationships between actors; exploring traditional publications in a new environment; web metrics and the web of data; the future of web metrics and the library and information professional. The book will provide a practical introduction to web metrics for a wide range of library and information professionals, from the bibliometrician wanting to demonstrate the wider impact of a researcher's work than can be demonstrated through traditional citations databases, to the reference librarian wanting to measure how successfully they are engaging with their users on Twitter. It will be a valuable tool for anyone who wants to not only understand the impact of content, but demonstrate this impact to others within the organization and beyond.
    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.
    Footnote
    Rez. in: JASIST 66(2015) no.11, S.2392-2395 (Enrique Orduña-Malea)
    Pages
    VII, 199 S
  7. Böhm, P.; Rittberger, M.: Einsatz von Webanalyse in überregionalen Informationsinfrastruktureinrichtungen (2016) 0.01
    0.006027229 = product of:
      0.045204215 = sum of:
        0.020072797 = weight(_text_:und in 3239) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020072797 = score(doc=3239,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.04780656 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021569785 = queryNorm
            0.41987535 = fieldWeight in 3239, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3239)
        0.0030866629 = weight(_text_:in in 3239) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0030866629 = score(doc=3239,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.029340398 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021569785 = queryNorm
            0.10520181 = fieldWeight in 3239, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3239)
        0.020072797 = weight(_text_:und in 3239) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020072797 = score(doc=3239,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.04780656 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021569785 = queryNorm
            0.41987535 = fieldWeight in 3239, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3239)
        0.0019719584 = weight(_text_:s in 3239) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0019719584 = score(doc=3239,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021569785 = queryNorm
            0.08408674 = fieldWeight in 3239, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3239)
      0.13333334 = coord(4/30)
    
    Abstract
    Um die Nutzung ihrer Informationsdienste und -angebote beurteilen zu können, setzen Informationsinfrastruktureinrichtungen der Leibniz-Gemeinschaft die Webanalyse ein. Sieben Leibniz-Informationsinfrastruktureinrichtungen wurden mit einem Online-Fragebogen und einem teilstandardisierten Interview zur Nutzung der Webanalyse befragt. Es werden die verwendeten Methoden, Werkzeuge und Metriken sowie die verfügbaren Ressourcen als auch die Zukunftsperspektive der Webanalyse an den Einrichtungen beschrieben. Insgesamt wird der Stellenwert der Webanalyse an den Instituten als hoch angesehen. Die bisher wenig ausgeprägte Standardisierung und die fehlende Einheitlichkeit der Metriken und Erhebungsmethoden erschweren einen möglichen Vergleich von Nutzungsdaten allerdings erheblich.
    Source
    Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 67(2016) H.4, S.241-251
  8. Pernik, V.; Schlögl, C.: Möglichkeiten und Grenzen von Web Structure Mining am Beispiel von informationswissenschaftlichen Hochschulinstituten im deutschsprachigen Raum (2006) 0.01
    0.005960518 = product of:
      0.044703882 = sum of:
        0.018730707 = weight(_text_:und in 78) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.018730707 = score(doc=78,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.04780656 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021569785 = queryNorm
            0.39180204 = fieldWeight in 78, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=78)
        0.004988801 = weight(_text_:in in 78) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.004988801 = score(doc=78,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.029340398 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021569785 = queryNorm
            0.17003182 = fieldWeight in 78, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=78)
        0.018730707 = weight(_text_:und in 78) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.018730707 = score(doc=78,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.04780656 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021569785 = queryNorm
            0.39180204 = fieldWeight in 78, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=78)
        0.002253667 = weight(_text_:s in 78) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.002253667 = score(doc=78,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021569785 = queryNorm
            0.09609913 = fieldWeight in 78, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=78)
      0.13333334 = coord(4/30)
    
    Abstract
    In diesem Beitrag wird eine webometrische Untersuchung vorgestellt, die informationswissenschaftliche Hochschulinstitute in den deutschsprachigen Ländern zum Gegenstand hatte. Ziel dieser Studie war es, einerseits die Linkbeziehungen zwischen den Hochschulinstituten zu analysieren. Andererseits sollten Ähnlichkeiten (zum Beispiel aufgrund von fachlichen, örtlichen oder institutionellen Gegebenheiten) identifiziert werden. Es werden nicht nur die Vorgehensweise bei derartigen Analysen und die daraus resultierenden Ergebnisse dargestellt. Insbesondere sollen Problembereiche und Einschränkungen, die mit der Analyse von Linkstrukturen im Web verbunden sind, thematisiert werden.
    Source
    Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 57(2006) H.8, S.407-414
  9. fwt: Webseiten liegen im Schnitt nur 19 Klicks auseinander (2001) 0.00
    0.0028973108 = product of:
      0.021729829 = sum of:
        0.0070240153 = weight(_text_:und in 5962) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0070240153 = score(doc=5962,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.04780656 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021569785 = queryNorm
            0.14692576 = fieldWeight in 5962, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5962)
        0.0052914224 = weight(_text_:in in 5962) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0052914224 = score(doc=5962,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.029340398 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021569785 = queryNorm
            0.18034597 = fieldWeight in 5962, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5962)
        0.0070240153 = weight(_text_:und in 5962) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0070240153 = score(doc=5962,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.04780656 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021569785 = queryNorm
            0.14692576 = fieldWeight in 5962, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5962)
        0.002390375 = weight(_text_:s in 5962) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.002390375 = score(doc=5962,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021569785 = queryNorm
            0.101928525 = fieldWeight in 5962, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5962)
      0.13333334 = coord(4/30)
    
    Abstract
    "Dokumente im World Wide Web liegen durchschnittlich 19 Mausklicks voneinander entfernt - angesichts von schätzungsweise mehr als einer Milliarde Seiten erstaunlich nahe. Albert-Lazlo Barabai vom Institut für Physik der University von Notre Dame (US-Staat Indiana) stellt seine Studie in der britischen Fachzeitschrift Physics World (Juli 2001, S. 33) vor. Der Statistiker konstruierte im Rechner zunächst Modelle von großen Computernetzwerken. Grundlage für diese Abbilder war die Analyse eines kleinen Teils der Verbindungen im Web, die der Wissenschaftler automatisch von einem Programm hatte prüfen lassen. Um seine Ergebnisse zu erklären, vergleicht Barabai das World Wide Web mit den Verbindungen internationaler Fluglinien. Dort gebe es zahlreiche Flughäfen, die meist nur mit anderen Flugplätzen in ihrer näheren Umgebung in Verbindung stünden. Diese kleineren Verteiler stehen ihrerseits mit einigen wenigen großen Airports wie Frankfurt, New York oder Hongkong in Verbindung. Ähnlich sei es im Netz, wo wenige große Server die Verteilung großer Datenmengen übernähmen und weite Entfernungen überbrückten. Damit seien die Online-Wege vergleichsweise kurz. Die Untersuchung spiegelt allerdings die Situation des Jahres 1999 wider. Seinerzeit gab es vermutlich 800 Millionen Knoten."
    Source
    Frankfurter Rundschau. Nr.157 vom 10.7.2001, S.27
  10. Tonta, Y.: Scholarly communication and the use of networked information sources (1996) 0.00
    0.0016373465 = product of:
      0.016373465 = sum of:
        0.005915991 = weight(_text_:in in 6389) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.005915991 = score(doc=6389,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.029340398 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021569785 = queryNorm
            0.20163295 = fieldWeight in 6389, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=6389)
        0.0016902501 = weight(_text_:s in 6389) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0016902501 = score(doc=6389,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021569785 = queryNorm
            0.072074346 = fieldWeight in 6389, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=6389)
        0.008767224 = product of:
          0.017534448 = sum of:
            0.017534448 = weight(_text_:22 in 6389) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.017534448 = score(doc=6389,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.07553371 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.021569785 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 6389, 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=6389)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.1 = coord(3/30)
    
    Abstract
    Examines the use of networked information sources in scholarly communication. Networked information sources are defined broadly to cover: documents and images stored on electronic network hosts; data files; newsgroups; listservs; online information services and electronic periodicals. Reports results of a survey to determine how heavily, if at all, networked information sources are cited in scholarly printed periodicals published in 1993 and 1994. 27 printed periodicals, representing a wide range of subjects and the most influential periodicals in their fields, were identified through the Science Citation Index and Social Science Citation Index Journal Citation Reports. 97 articles were selected for further review and references, footnotes and bibliographies were checked for references to networked information sources. Only 2 articles were found to contain such references. Concludes that, although networked information sources facilitate scholars' work to a great extent during the research process, scholars have yet to incorporate such sources in the bibliographies of their published articles
    Source
    IFLA journal. 22(1996) no.3, S.240-245
  11. Björneborn, L.; Ingwersen, P.: Toward a basic framework for Webometrics (2004) 0.00
    0.0016102897 = product of:
      0.016102897 = sum of:
        0.0053462577 = weight(_text_:in in 3088) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0053462577 = score(doc=3088,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.029340398 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021569785 = queryNorm
            0.1822149 = fieldWeight in 3088, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3088)
        0.008784681 = product of:
          0.026354041 = sum of:
            0.026354041 = weight(_text_:l in 3088) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.026354041 = score(doc=3088,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.0857324 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.021569785 = queryNorm
                0.30739886 = fieldWeight in 3088, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3088)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
        0.0019719584 = weight(_text_:s in 3088) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0019719584 = score(doc=3088,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021569785 = queryNorm
            0.08408674 = fieldWeight in 3088, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3088)
      0.1 = coord(3/30)
    
    Abstract
    In this article, we define webometrics within the framework of informetric studies and bibliometrics, as belonging to library and information science, and as associated with cybermetrics as a generic subfield. We develop a consistent and detailed link typology and terminology and make explicit the distinction among different Web node levels when using the proposed conceptual framework. As a consequence, we propose a novel diagram notation to fully appreciate and investigate link structures between Web nodes in webometric analyses. We warn against taking the analogy between citation analyses and link analyses too far.
    Footnote
    Beitrag in einem Themenheft über Webometrics
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 55(2004) no.14, S.1216-1227
  12. Zhang, Y.; Jansen, B.J.; Spink, A.: Identification of factors predicting clickthrough in Web searching using neural network analysis (2009) 0.00
    0.0014199076 = product of:
      0.014199075 = sum of:
        0.003741601 = weight(_text_:in in 2742) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.003741601 = score(doc=2742,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.029340398 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021569785 = queryNorm
            0.12752387 = fieldWeight in 2742, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2742)
        0.0016902501 = weight(_text_:s in 2742) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0016902501 = score(doc=2742,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021569785 = queryNorm
            0.072074346 = fieldWeight in 2742, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2742)
        0.008767224 = product of:
          0.017534448 = sum of:
            0.017534448 = weight(_text_:22 in 2742) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.017534448 = score(doc=2742,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.07553371 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.021569785 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2742, 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=2742)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.1 = coord(3/30)
    
    Abstract
    In this research, we aim to identify factors that significantly affect the clickthrough of Web searchers. Our underlying goal is determine more efficient methods to optimize the clickthrough rate. We devise a clickthrough metric for measuring customer satisfaction of search engine results using the number of links visited, number of queries a user submits, and rank of clicked links. We use a neural network to detect the significant influence of searching characteristics on future user clickthrough. Our results show that high occurrences of query reformulation, lengthy searching duration, longer query length, and the higher ranking of prior clicked links correlate positively with future clickthrough. We provide recommendations for leveraging these findings for improving the performance of search engine retrieval and result ranking, along with implications for search engine marketing.
    Date
    22. 3.2009 17:49:11
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 60(2009) no.3, S.557-570
  13. Thelwall, M.; Vaughan, L.; Björneborn, L.: Webometrics (2004) 0.00
    0.0014101164 = product of:
      0.014101164 = sum of:
        0.0038187557 = weight(_text_:in in 4279) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0038187557 = score(doc=4279,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.029340398 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021569785 = queryNorm
            0.1301535 = fieldWeight in 4279, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4279)
        0.008873867 = product of:
          0.0266216 = sum of:
            0.0266216 = weight(_text_:l in 4279) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0266216 = score(doc=4279,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.0857324 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.021569785 = queryNorm
                0.31051973 = fieldWeight in 4279, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4279)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
        0.0014085418 = weight(_text_:s in 4279) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0014085418 = score(doc=4279,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021569785 = queryNorm
            0.060061958 = fieldWeight in 4279, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4279)
      0.1 = coord(3/30)
    
    Abstract
    Webometrics, the quantitative study of Web-related phenomena, emerged from the realization that methods originally designed for bibliometric analysis of scientific journal article citation patterns could be applied to the Web, with commercial search engines providing the raw data. Almind and Ingwersen (1997) defined the field and gave it its name. Other pioneers included Rodriguez Gairin (1997) and Aguillo (1998). Larson (1996) undertook exploratory link structure analysis, as did Rousseau (1997). Webometrics encompasses research from fields beyond information science such as communication studies, statistical physics, and computer science. In this review we concentrate on link analysis, but also cover other aspects of webometrics, including Web log fle analysis. One theme that runs through this chapter is the messiness of Web data and the need for data cleansing heuristics. The uncontrolled Web creates numerous problems in the interpretation of results, for instance, from the automatic creation or replication of links. The loose connection between top-level domain specifications (e.g., com, edu, and org) and their actual content is also a frustrating problem. For example, many .com sites contain noncommercial content, although com is ostensibly the main commercial top-level domain. Indeed, a skeptical researcher could claim that obstacles of this kind are so great that all Web analyses lack value. As will be seen, one response to this view, a view shared by critics of evaluative bibliometrics, is to demonstrate that Web data correlate significantly with some non-Web data in order to prove that the Web data are not wholly random. A practical response has been to develop increasingly sophisticated data cleansing techniques and multiple data analysis methods.
    Source
    Annual review of information science and technology. 39(2005), S.81-138
  14. Jepsen, E.T.; Seiden, P.; Ingwersen, P.; Björneborn, L.; Borlund, P.: Characteristics of scientific Web publications : preliminary data gathering and analysis (2004) 0.00
    0.0013919314 = product of:
      0.013919314 = sum of:
        0.006236001 = weight(_text_:in in 3091) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.006236001 = score(doc=3091,freq=16.0), product of:
            0.029340398 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021569785 = queryNorm
            0.21253976 = fieldWeight in 3091, product of:
              4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
                16.0 = termFreq=16.0
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3091)
        0.006274772 = product of:
          0.018824315 = sum of:
            0.018824315 = weight(_text_:l in 3091) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.018824315 = score(doc=3091,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.0857324 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.021569785 = queryNorm
                0.2195706 = fieldWeight in 3091, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3091)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
        0.0014085418 = weight(_text_:s in 3091) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0014085418 = score(doc=3091,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021569785 = queryNorm
            0.060061958 = fieldWeight in 3091, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3091)
      0.1 = coord(3/30)
    
    Abstract
    Because of the increasing presence of scientific publications an the Web, combined with the existing difficulties in easily verifying and retrieving these publications, research an techniques and methods for retrieval of scientific Web publications is called for. In this article, we report an the initial steps taken toward the construction of a test collection of scientific Web publications within the subject domain of plant biology. The steps reported are those of data gathering and data analysis aiming at identifying characteristics of scientific Web publications. The data used in this article were generated based an specifically selected domain topics that are searched for in three publicly accessible search engines (Google, AlITheWeb, and AItaVista). A sample of the retrieved hits was analyzed with regard to how various publication attributes correlated with the scientific quality of the content and whether this information could be employed to harvest, filter, and rank Web publications. The attributes analyzed were inlinks, outlinks, bibliographic references, file format, language, search engine overlap, structural position (according to site structure), and the occurrence of various types of metadata. As could be expected, the ranked output differs between the three search engines. Apparently, this is caused by differences in ranking algorithms rather than the databases themselves. In fact, because scientific Web content in this subject domain receives few inlinks, both AItaVista and AlITheWeb retrieved a higher degree of accessible scientific content than Google. Because of the search engine cutoffs of accessible URLs, the feasibility of using search engine output for Web content analysis is also discussed.
    Footnote
    Beitrag in einem Themenheft über Webometrics
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 55(2004) no.14, S.1239-1249
  15. Vaughan, L.; Shaw, D.: Web citation data for impact assessment : a comparison of four science disciplines (2005) 0.00
    0.0013919314 = product of:
      0.013919314 = sum of:
        0.006236001 = weight(_text_:in in 3880) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.006236001 = score(doc=3880,freq=16.0), product of:
            0.029340398 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021569785 = queryNorm
            0.21253976 = fieldWeight in 3880, product of:
              4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
                16.0 = termFreq=16.0
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3880)
        0.006274772 = product of:
          0.018824315 = sum of:
            0.018824315 = weight(_text_:l in 3880) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.018824315 = score(doc=3880,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.0857324 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.021569785 = queryNorm
                0.2195706 = fieldWeight in 3880, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3880)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
        0.0014085418 = weight(_text_:s in 3880) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0014085418 = score(doc=3880,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021569785 = queryNorm
            0.060061958 = fieldWeight in 3880, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3880)
      0.1 = coord(3/30)
    
    Abstract
    The number and type of Web citations to journal articles in four areas of science are examined: biology, genetics, medicine, and multidisciplinary sciences. For a sample of 5,972 articles published in 114 journals, the median Web citation counts per journal article range from 6.2 in medicine to 10.4 in genetics. About 30% of Web citations in each area indicate intellectual impact (citations from articles or class readings, in contrast to citations from bibliographic services or the author's or journal's home page). Journals receiving more Web citations also have higher percentages of citations indicating intellectual impact. There is significant correlation between the number of citations reported in the databases from the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI, now Thomson Scientific) and the number of citations retrieved using the Google search engine (Web citations). The correlation is much weaker for journals published outside the United Kingdom or United States and for multidisciplinary journals. Web citation numbers are higher than ISI citation counts, suggesting that Web searches might be conducted for an earlier or a more fine-grained assessment of an article's impact. The Web-evident impact of non-UK/USA publications might provide a balance to the geographic or cultural biases observed in ISI's data, although the stability of Web citation counts is debatable.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 56(2005) no.10, S.1075-1087
  16. Zhang, L.; Gou, Z.; Fang, Z.; Sivertsen, G.; Huang, Y.: Who tweets scientific publications? : a large-scale study of tweeting audiences in all areas of research (2023) 0.00
    0.0013919314 = product of:
      0.013919314 = sum of:
        0.006236001 = weight(_text_:in in 1189) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.006236001 = score(doc=1189,freq=16.0), product of:
            0.029340398 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021569785 = queryNorm
            0.21253976 = fieldWeight in 1189, product of:
              4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
                16.0 = termFreq=16.0
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1189)
        0.006274772 = product of:
          0.018824315 = sum of:
            0.018824315 = weight(_text_:l in 1189) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.018824315 = score(doc=1189,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.0857324 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.021569785 = queryNorm
                0.2195706 = fieldWeight in 1189, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1189)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
        0.0014085418 = weight(_text_:s in 1189) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0014085418 = score(doc=1189,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021569785 = queryNorm
            0.060061958 = fieldWeight in 1189, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1189)
      0.1 = coord(3/30)
    
    Abstract
    The purpose of this study is to investigate the validity of tweets about scientific publications as an indicator of societal impact by measuring the degree to which the publications are tweeted beyond academia. We introduce methods that allow for using a much larger and broader data set than in previous validation studies. It covers all areas of research and includes almost 40 million tweets by 2.5 million unique tweeters mentioning almost 4 million scientific publications. We find that, although half of the tweeters are external to academia, most of the tweets are from within academia, and most of the external tweets are responses to original tweets within academia. Only half of the tweeted publications are tweeted outside of academia. We conclude that, in general, the tweeting of scientific publications is not a valid indicator of the societal impact of research. However, publications that continue being tweeted after a few days represent recent scientific achievements that catch attention in society. These publications occur more often in the health sciences and in the social sciences and humanities.
    Content
    Beitrag in: JASIST special issue on 'Who tweets scientific publications? A large-scale study of tweeting audiences in all areas of research'. Vgl.: https://asistdl.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/asi.24830.
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 74(2023) no.13, S.1485-1497
  17. Vaughan, L.: Visualizing linguistic and cultural differences using Web co-link data (2006) 0.00
    0.0013802482 = product of:
      0.013802482 = sum of:
        0.0045825066 = weight(_text_:in in 184) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0045825066 = score(doc=184,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.029340398 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021569785 = queryNorm
            0.1561842 = fieldWeight in 184, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=184)
        0.007529726 = product of:
          0.022589177 = sum of:
            0.022589177 = weight(_text_:l in 184) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.022589177 = score(doc=184,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.0857324 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.021569785 = queryNorm
                0.26348472 = fieldWeight in 184, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=184)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
        0.0016902501 = weight(_text_:s in 184) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0016902501 = score(doc=184,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021569785 = queryNorm
            0.072074346 = fieldWeight in 184, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=184)
      0.1 = coord(3/30)
    
    Abstract
    The study examined Web co-links to Canadian university Web sites. Multidimensional scaling (MDS) was used to analyze and visualize co-link data as was done in co-citation analysis. Co-link data were collected in ways that would reflect three different views, the global view, the French Canada view, and the English Canada view. Mapping results of the three data sets accurately reflected the ways Canadians see the universities and clearly showed the linguistic and cultural differences within Canadian society. This shows that Web co-linking is not a random phenomenon and that co-link data contain useful information for Web data mining. It is proposed that the method developed in the study can be applied to other contexts such as analyzing relationships of different organizations or countries. This kind of research is promising because of the dynamics and the diversity of the Web.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 57(2006) no.9, S.1178-1193
  18. Goh, D.H.-L.; Ng, P.K.: Link decay in leading information science journals (2007) 0.00
    0.001150207 = product of:
      0.011502069 = sum of:
        0.0038187557 = weight(_text_:in in 1334) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0038187557 = score(doc=1334,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.029340398 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021569785 = queryNorm
            0.1301535 = fieldWeight in 1334, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1334)
        0.006274772 = product of:
          0.018824315 = sum of:
            0.018824315 = weight(_text_:l in 1334) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.018824315 = score(doc=1334,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.0857324 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.021569785 = queryNorm
                0.2195706 = fieldWeight in 1334, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1334)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
        0.0014085418 = weight(_text_:s in 1334) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0014085418 = score(doc=1334,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021569785 = queryNorm
            0.060061958 = fieldWeight in 1334, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1334)
      0.1 = coord(3/30)
    
    Abstract
    Web citations have become common in scholarly publications as the amount of online literature increases. Yet, such links are not persistent and many decay over time, causing accessibility problems for readers. The present study investigates the link decay phenomenon in three leading information science journals. Articles spanning a period of 7 years (1997-2003) were downloaded, and their links were extracted. From these, a measure of link decay, the half-life, was computed to be approximately 5 years, which compares favorably against other disciplines (1.4-4.8 years). The study also investigated types of link accessibility errors encountered as well as examined characteristics of links that may be associated with decay. It was found that approximately 31% of all citations were not accessible during the time of testing, and the majority of errors were due to missing content (HTTP Error Code 404). Citations from the edu domain were also found to have the highest failure rates of 36% when compared with other popular top-level domains. Results indicate that link decay is a problem that cannot be ignored, and implications for journal authors and readers are discussed.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 58(2007) no.1, S.15-24
  19. Vaughan, L.; Thelwall, M.: Scholarly use of the Web : what are the key inducers of links to journal Web sites? (2003) 0.00
    0.0010801314 = product of:
      0.010801313 = sum of:
        0.0031180005 = weight(_text_:in in 1236) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0031180005 = score(doc=1236,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.029340398 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021569785 = queryNorm
            0.10626988 = fieldWeight in 1236, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1236)
        0.006274772 = product of:
          0.018824315 = sum of:
            0.018824315 = weight(_text_:l in 1236) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.018824315 = score(doc=1236,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.0857324 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.021569785 = queryNorm
                0.2195706 = fieldWeight in 1236, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1236)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
        0.0014085418 = weight(_text_:s in 1236) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0014085418 = score(doc=1236,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021569785 = queryNorm
            0.060061958 = fieldWeight in 1236, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1236)
      0.1 = coord(3/30)
    
    Abstract
    Web links have been studied by information scientists for at least six years but it is only in the past two that clear evidence has emerged to show that counts of links to scholarly Web spaces (universities and departments) can correlate significantly with research measures, giving some credence to their use for the investigation of scholarly communication. This paper reports an a study to investigate the factors that influence the creation of links to journal Web sites. An empirical approach is used: collecting data and testing for significant patterns. The specific questions addressed are whether site age and site content are inducers of links to a journal's Web site as measured by the ratio of link counts to Journal Impact Factors, two variables previously discovered to be related. A new methodology for data collection is also introduced that uses the Internet Archive to obtain an earliest known creation date for Web sites. The results show that both site age and site content are significant factors for the disciplines studied: library and information science, and law. Comparisons between the two fields also show disciplinary differences in Web site characteristics. Scholars and publishers should be particularly aware that richer content an a journal's Web site tends to generate links and thus the traffic to the site.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and technology. 54(2003) no.1, S.29-38
  20. Thelwall, M.; Vaughan, L.: Webometrics : an introduction to the special issue (2004) 0.00
    8.195535E-4 = product of:
      0.0122933015 = sum of:
        0.010039635 = product of:
          0.030118903 = sum of:
            0.030118903 = weight(_text_:l in 2908) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.030118903 = score(doc=2908,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.0857324 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.021569785 = queryNorm
                0.35131297 = fieldWeight in 2908, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2908)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
        0.002253667 = weight(_text_:s in 2908) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.002253667 = score(doc=2908,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.023451481 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.021569785 = queryNorm
            0.09609913 = fieldWeight in 2908, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2908)
      0.06666667 = coord(2/30)
    
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 55(2004) no.14, S.1213-1215

Years

Languages

  • e 57
  • d 5

Types

  • a 60
  • m 2
  • More… Less…