-
Herb, U.; Beucke, D.: ¬Die Zukunft der Impact-Messung : Social Media, Nutzung und Zitate im World Wide Web (2013)
0.12
0.11825859 = product of:
0.5912929 = sum of:
0.11825858 = weight(_text_:2f in 2188) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.11825858 = score(doc=2188,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15781333 = queryWeight, product of:
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.018614428 = queryNorm
0.7493574 = fieldWeight in 2188, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2188)
0.11825858 = weight(_text_:2f in 2188) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.11825858 = score(doc=2188,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15781333 = queryWeight, product of:
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.018614428 = queryNorm
0.7493574 = fieldWeight in 2188, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2188)
0.11825858 = weight(_text_:2f in 2188) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.11825858 = score(doc=2188,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15781333 = queryWeight, product of:
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.018614428 = queryNorm
0.7493574 = fieldWeight in 2188, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2188)
0.11825858 = weight(_text_:2f in 2188) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.11825858 = score(doc=2188,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15781333 = queryWeight, product of:
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.018614428 = queryNorm
0.7493574 = fieldWeight in 2188, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2188)
0.11825858 = weight(_text_:2f in 2188) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.11825858 = score(doc=2188,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15781333 = queryWeight, product of:
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.018614428 = queryNorm
0.7493574 = fieldWeight in 2188, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2188)
0.2 = coord(5/25)
- Content
- Vgl. unter: https://www.leibniz-science20.de%2Fforschung%2Fprojekte%2Faltmetrics-in-verschiedenen-wissenschaftsdisziplinen%2F&ei=2jTgVaaXGcK4Udj1qdgB&usg=AFQjCNFOPdONj4RKBDf9YDJOLuz3lkGYlg&sig2=5YI3KWIGxBmk5_kv0P_8iQ.
-
Mommoh, O.M.: Subject analysis of post-graduate theses in library, archival and information science at Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria (1995/96)
0.01
0.0052471035 = product of:
0.065588795 = sum of:
0.055500805 = weight(_text_:post in 673) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.055500805 = score(doc=673,freq=2.0), product of:
0.10811277 = queryWeight, product of:
5.808009 = idf(docFreq=360, maxDocs=44218)
0.018614428 = queryNorm
0.5133603 = fieldWeight in 673, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.808009 = idf(docFreq=360, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=673)
0.010087992 = product of:
0.020175984 = sum of:
0.020175984 = weight(_text_:22 in 673) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.020175984 = score(doc=673,freq=2.0), product of:
0.065184556 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.018614428 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 673, 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=673)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.08 = coord(2/25)
- Source
- Library focus. 13/14(1995/96), S.22-25
-
Mayr, P.: Bradfordizing als Re-Ranking-Ansatz in Literaturinformationssystemen (2011)
0.00
0.0045910506 = product of:
0.05738813 = sum of:
0.049753457 = weight(_text_:wirtschaftswissenschaften in 4292) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.049753457 = score(doc=4292,freq=2.0), product of:
0.118197516 = queryWeight, product of:
6.3497796 = idf(docFreq=209, maxDocs=44218)
0.018614428 = queryNorm
0.4209349 = fieldWeight in 4292, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
6.3497796 = idf(docFreq=209, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4292)
0.0076346733 = product of:
0.015269347 = sum of:
0.015269347 = weight(_text_:29 in 4292) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.015269347 = score(doc=4292,freq=2.0), product of:
0.06547974 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.018614428 = queryNorm
0.23319192 = fieldWeight in 4292, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4292)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.08 = coord(2/25)
- Abstract
- In diesem Artikel wird ein Re-Ranking-Ansatz für Suchsysteme vorgestellt, der die Recherche nach wissenschaftlicher Literatur messbar verbessern kann. Das nichttextorientierte Rankingverfahren Bradfordizing wird eingeführt und anschließend im empirischen Teil des Artikels bzgl. der Effektivität für typische fachbezogene Recherche-Topics evaluiert. Dem Bradford Law of Scattering (BLS), auf dem Bradfordizing basiert, liegt zugrunde, dass sich die Literatur zu einem beliebigen Fachgebiet bzw. -thema in Zonen unterschiedlicher Dokumentenkonzentration verteilt. Dem Kernbereich mit hoher Konzentration der Literatur folgen Bereiche mit mittlerer und geringer Konzentration. Bradfordizing sortiert bzw. rankt eine Dokumentmenge damit nach den sogenannten Kernzeitschriften. Der Retrievaltest mit 164 intellektuell bewerteten Fragestellungen in Fachdatenbanken aus den Bereichen Sozial- und Politikwissenschaften, Wirtschaftswissenschaften, Psychologie und Medizin zeigt, dass die Dokumente der Kernzeitschriften signifikant häufiger relevant bewertet werden als Dokumente der zweiten Dokumentzone bzw. den Peripherie-Zeitschriften. Die Implementierung von Bradfordizing und weiteren Re-Rankingverfahren liefert unmittelbare Mehrwerte für den Nutzer.
- Date
- 9. 2.2011 17:47:29
-
Mingers, J.; Macri, F.; Petrovici, D.: Using the h-index to measure the quality of journals in the field of business and management (2012)
0.00
0.0045910506 = product of:
0.05738813 = sum of:
0.049753457 = weight(_text_:wirtschaftswissenschaften in 2741) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.049753457 = score(doc=2741,freq=2.0), product of:
0.118197516 = queryWeight, product of:
6.3497796 = idf(docFreq=209, maxDocs=44218)
0.018614428 = queryNorm
0.4209349 = fieldWeight in 2741, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
6.3497796 = idf(docFreq=209, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2741)
0.0076346733 = product of:
0.015269347 = sum of:
0.015269347 = weight(_text_:29 in 2741) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.015269347 = score(doc=2741,freq=2.0), product of:
0.06547974 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.018614428 = queryNorm
0.23319192 = fieldWeight in 2741, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2741)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.08 = coord(2/25)
- Date
- 29. 1.2016 19:00:16
- Field
- Wirtschaftswissenschaften
-
Mingers, J.; Burrell, Q.L.: Modeling citation behavior in Management Science journals (2006)
0.00
0.0045855558 = product of:
0.05731945 = sum of:
0.049753457 = weight(_text_:wirtschaftswissenschaften in 994) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.049753457 = score(doc=994,freq=2.0), product of:
0.118197516 = queryWeight, product of:
6.3497796 = idf(docFreq=209, maxDocs=44218)
0.018614428 = queryNorm
0.4209349 = fieldWeight in 994, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
6.3497796 = idf(docFreq=209, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=994)
0.007565994 = product of:
0.015131988 = sum of:
0.015131988 = weight(_text_:22 in 994) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.015131988 = score(doc=994,freq=2.0), product of:
0.065184556 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.018614428 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 994, 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=994)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.08 = coord(2/25)
- Date
- 26.12.2007 19:22:05
- Field
- Wirtschaftswissenschaften
-
Gantman, E.R.; Dabós, M.P.: Research output and impact of the fields of management, economics, and sociology in Spain and France : an analysis using Google Scholar and Scopus (2018)
0.00
0.0038258755 = product of:
0.047823444 = sum of:
0.041461214 = weight(_text_:wirtschaftswissenschaften in 4454) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.041461214 = score(doc=4454,freq=2.0), product of:
0.118197516 = queryWeight, product of:
6.3497796 = idf(docFreq=209, maxDocs=44218)
0.018614428 = queryNorm
0.35077906 = fieldWeight in 4454, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
6.3497796 = idf(docFreq=209, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4454)
0.006362228 = product of:
0.012724456 = sum of:
0.012724456 = weight(_text_:29 in 4454) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.012724456 = score(doc=4454,freq=2.0), product of:
0.06547974 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.018614428 = queryNorm
0.19432661 = fieldWeight in 4454, 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=4454)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.08 = coord(2/25)
- Date
- 29. 7.2018 14:49:50
- Field
- Wirtschaftswissenschaften
-
Huang, M.-H.; Wu, L.-L.; Wu, Y.-C.: ¬A study of research collaboration in the pre-web and post-web stages : a coauthorship analysis of the information systems discipline (2015)
0.00
0.0033987164 = product of:
0.08496791 = sum of:
0.08496791 = weight(_text_:post in 1729) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08496791 = score(doc=1729,freq=12.0), product of:
0.10811277 = queryWeight, product of:
5.808009 = idf(docFreq=360, maxDocs=44218)
0.018614428 = queryNorm
0.7859193 = fieldWeight in 1729, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
5.808009 = idf(docFreq=360, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1729)
0.04 = coord(1/25)
- Abstract
- To explore the possible facilitative role of the Internet in the process of research collaboration, this study endeavored to systematically compare the phenomenon of co-authorship and the impacts of co-authorship between pre-web and post-web stages in the field of information systems. Three hypotheses were proposed in this study. First, research collaboration increases in the post-web stage relative to the pre-web stage. Second, research collaboration is positively related to research impact, operationally defined as the number of citations. Lastly, the positive relationship between research collaboration and research impact is stronger in the post-web stage than that in the pre-web stage. Articles published in the field of information systems in both time periods were collected to test the hypotheses. The empirical results strongly support H1 and H2, showing that co-authorship increases in the post-web stage, and positively correlates with citations received by information systems articles. The positive effects of interdisciplinary collaborations and collaborations among multiple authors are enhanced in the post-web stage, but such enhancement is not found for international collaboration. H3 is partially supported.
-
Egghe, L.; Rousseau, R.: Introduction to informetrics : quantitative methods in library, documentation and information science (1990)
0.00
0.003363531 = product of:
0.04204414 = sum of:
0.008907119 = product of:
0.017814238 = sum of:
0.017814238 = weight(_text_:29 in 1515) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.017814238 = score(doc=1515,freq=2.0), product of:
0.06547974 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.018614428 = queryNorm
0.27205724 = fieldWeight in 1515, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1515)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.03313702 = product of:
0.06627404 = sum of:
0.06627404 = weight(_text_:allgemeines in 1515) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06627404 = score(doc=1515,freq=4.0), product of:
0.10620318 = queryWeight, product of:
5.705423 = idf(docFreq=399, maxDocs=44218)
0.018614428 = queryNorm
0.62403065 = fieldWeight in 1515, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
5.705423 = idf(docFreq=399, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1515)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.08 = coord(2/25)
- Classification
- AN 70400 Allgemeines / Buch- und Bibliothekswesen, Informationswissenschaft / Bibliothekswesen / Bibliotheksverwaltung / Bibliotheksanalyse, -statistik
- Date
- 29. 2.2008 19:02:46
- RVK
- AN 70400 Allgemeines / Buch- und Bibliothekswesen, Informationswissenschaft / Bibliothekswesen / Bibliotheksverwaltung / Bibliotheksanalyse, -statistik
-
Stuart, D.: Web metrics for library and information professionals (2014)
0.00
0.0032680088 = product of:
0.04085011 = sum of:
0.024281602 = weight(_text_:post in 2274) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.024281602 = score(doc=2274,freq=2.0), product of:
0.10811277 = queryWeight, product of:
5.808009 = idf(docFreq=360, maxDocs=44218)
0.018614428 = queryNorm
0.22459514 = fieldWeight in 2274, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.808009 = idf(docFreq=360, maxDocs=44218)
0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=2274)
0.01656851 = product of:
0.03313702 = sum of:
0.03313702 = weight(_text_:allgemeines in 2274) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03313702 = score(doc=2274,freq=4.0), product of:
0.10620318 = queryWeight, product of:
5.705423 = idf(docFreq=399, maxDocs=44218)
0.018614428 = 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)
0.08 = coord(2/25)
- 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.
-
Bookstein, A.: Informetric distributions : I. Unified overview (1990)
0.00
0.002837458 = product of:
0.035468224 = sum of:
0.017814238 = product of:
0.035628475 = sum of:
0.035628475 = weight(_text_:29 in 6902) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.035628475 = score(doc=6902,freq=2.0), product of:
0.06547974 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.018614428 = queryNorm
0.5441145 = fieldWeight in 6902, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6902)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.017653987 = product of:
0.035307974 = sum of:
0.035307974 = weight(_text_:22 in 6902) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.035307974 = score(doc=6902,freq=2.0), product of:
0.065184556 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.018614428 = queryNorm
0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 6902, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6902)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.08 = coord(2/25)
- Date
- 22. 7.2006 18:55:29
-
Tsay, M.: ¬The impact of the concept of post industrial society and information society : a citation analysis study (1995)
0.00
0.0027750402 = product of:
0.06937601 = sum of:
0.06937601 = weight(_text_:post in 3299) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06937601 = score(doc=3299,freq=2.0), product of:
0.10811277 = queryWeight, product of:
5.808009 = idf(docFreq=360, maxDocs=44218)
0.018614428 = queryNorm
0.6417004 = fieldWeight in 3299, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.808009 = idf(docFreq=360, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3299)
0.04 = coord(1/25)
-
Harzing, A.-W.; Wal, R. van der: ¬A Google Scholar h-index for journals : an alternative metric to measure journal impact in economics and business (2009)
0.00
0.0026535178 = product of:
0.06633794 = sum of:
0.06633794 = weight(_text_:wirtschaftswissenschaften in 2630) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06633794 = score(doc=2630,freq=2.0), product of:
0.118197516 = queryWeight, product of:
6.3497796 = idf(docFreq=209, maxDocs=44218)
0.018614428 = queryNorm
0.5612465 = fieldWeight in 2630, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
6.3497796 = idf(docFreq=209, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2630)
0.04 = coord(1/25)
- Field
- Wirtschaftswissenschaften
-
Tol, R.S.J.: ¬The Matthew effect defined and tested for the 100 most prolific economists (2009)
0.00
0.0026535178 = product of:
0.06633794 = sum of:
0.06633794 = weight(_text_:wirtschaftswissenschaften in 2732) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06633794 = score(doc=2732,freq=2.0), product of:
0.118197516 = queryWeight, product of:
6.3497796 = idf(docFreq=209, maxDocs=44218)
0.018614428 = queryNorm
0.5612465 = fieldWeight in 2732, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
6.3497796 = idf(docFreq=209, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2732)
0.04 = coord(1/25)
- Field
- Wirtschaftswissenschaften
-
Sieben Fragen zu Bibliometrie : Antworten von Ilka Agricola, Friedrich Götze, Martin Grötschel, Klaus Hulek, Peter Michor, Gabriele Nebe, Hans Jürgen Prömel, Jens Vygen, Gerhard Woeginger (2017)
0.00
0.0020151285 = product of:
0.050378215 = sum of:
0.050378215 = weight(_text_:einzelne in 4216) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.050378215 = score(doc=4216,freq=4.0), product of:
0.1095598 = queryWeight, product of:
5.885746 = idf(docFreq=333, maxDocs=44218)
0.018614428 = queryNorm
0.4598239 = fieldWeight in 4216, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
5.885746 = idf(docFreq=333, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4216)
0.04 = coord(1/25)
- Abstract
- Wissenschaftliche Institutionen und einzelne WissenschaftlerInnen werden zunehmend nach bibliometrischen Daten beurteilt. Jeder Mathematiker hat Vorbehalte gegenüber dieser Praxis. Über diese beiden Dinge waren sich alle TeilnemerInnen und Wortmeldungen des Panels zur Bibliometrie auf der DMV-Jahrestagung in Salzburg einig. Für einzelne WissenschaftlerInnen hat die IMU bereits 2014 (tinyurl.com/ycd7wvh7) die Vorbehalte gegenüber rein bibliometrischen Beurteilungen klar formuliert. Universitätsleitungen, Politik und andere bis hin zur öffentlichen Diskussion verlassen sich aber teilweise aif diese Art der Bewertung. Konkret kann das so aussehen: Zur Beurteilung von Departements zählt eine Universität Publikationen und gewichtet sie nach ihrer Güte. Die Güte entnimmt man einer Einteilung von Fachzeitschriften etwa in A, B und C. Liegt eine solche Einteilung nicht vor, sind alle Journale des Faches mit 1 gewichtet, d.h. 'junk'. Die Diskrepanz zwischen unserer Einschätzung und der allgemeinen Wirkmächtigkeit von Biblimetrie wirft für die DMV als Fachgegsellschaft die Frage auf, wie sie Einfluss nehmen kann und soll. Die 'Mitteilungen' versuchen an dieser Stelle zunächst, ein möglichst breites Meinungsbild zu sammeln. Wir haben sieben Fragen an eine Reihe von Kolleginnen und Kollegen gestellt, die am Panel teilgenmmen haben oder aus anderen Gründen mit dem Thema besfasst sind.
-
Mayr, P.: Information Retrieval-Mehrwertdienste für Digitale Bibliotheken: : Crosskonkordanzen und Bradfordizing (2010)
0.00
0.0019901383 = product of:
0.049753457 = sum of:
0.049753457 = weight(_text_:wirtschaftswissenschaften in 4910) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.049753457 = score(doc=4910,freq=2.0), product of:
0.118197516 = queryWeight, product of:
6.3497796 = idf(docFreq=209, maxDocs=44218)
0.018614428 = queryNorm
0.4209349 = fieldWeight in 4910, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
6.3497796 = idf(docFreq=209, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4910)
0.04 = coord(1/25)
- Abstract
- In dieser Arbeit werden zwei Mehrwertdienste für Suchsysteme vorgestellt, die typische Probleme bei der Recherche nach wissenschaftlicher Literatur behandeln können. Die beiden Mehrwertdienste semantische Heterogenitätsbehandlung am Beispiel Crosskonkordanzen und Re-Ranking auf Basis von Bradfordizing, die in unterschiedlichen Phasen der Suche zum Einsatz kommen, werden in diesem Buch ausführlich beschrieben und evaluiert. Für die Tests wurden Fragestellungen und Daten aus zwei Evaluationsprojekten (CLEF und KoMoHe) verwendet. Die intellektuell bewerteten Dokumente stammen aus insgesamt sieben Fachdatenbanken der Fächer Sozialwissenschaften, Politikwissenschaft, Wirtschaftswissenschaften, Psychologie und Medizin. Die Ergebnisse dieser Arbeit sind in das GESIS-Projekt IRM eingeflossen.
-
Schlögl, C.; List, R,: Vergleiche von Zitaten, Downloads und Lesehäufigkeiten : am Beispiel von zwei Volkswirtschaftslehre-Zeitschriften (2018)
0.00
0.0019901383 = product of:
0.049753457 = sum of:
0.049753457 = weight(_text_:wirtschaftswissenschaften in 4236) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.049753457 = score(doc=4236,freq=2.0), product of:
0.118197516 = queryWeight, product of:
6.3497796 = idf(docFreq=209, maxDocs=44218)
0.018614428 = queryNorm
0.4209349 = fieldWeight in 4236, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
6.3497796 = idf(docFreq=209, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4236)
0.04 = coord(1/25)
- Field
- Wirtschaftswissenschaften
-
Haustein, S.; Sugimoto, C.; Larivière, V.: Social media in scholarly communication : Guest editorial (2015)
0.00
0.0019676639 = product of:
0.024595799 = sum of:
0.020812802 = weight(_text_:post in 3809) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.020812802 = score(doc=3809,freq=2.0), product of:
0.10811277 = queryWeight, product of:
5.808009 = idf(docFreq=360, maxDocs=44218)
0.018614428 = queryNorm
0.19251013 = fieldWeight in 3809, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.808009 = idf(docFreq=360, maxDocs=44218)
0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=3809)
0.003782997 = product of:
0.007565994 = sum of:
0.007565994 = weight(_text_:22 in 3809) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.007565994 = score(doc=3809,freq=2.0), product of:
0.065184556 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.018614428 = queryNorm
0.116070345 = fieldWeight in 3809, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=3809)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.08 = coord(2/25)
- Abstract
- Furthermore, the rise of the web, and subsequently, the social web, has challenged the quasi-monopolistic status of the journal as the main form of scholarly communication and citation indices as the primary assessment mechanisms. Scientific communication is becoming more open, transparent, and diverse: publications are increasingly open access; manuscripts, presentations, code, and data are shared online; research ideas and results are discussed and criticized openly on blogs; and new peer review experiments, with open post publication assessment by anonymous or non-anonymous referees, are underway. The diversification of scholarly production and assessment, paired with the increasing speed of the communication process, leads to an increased information overload (Bawden and Robinson, 2008), demanding new filters. The concept of altmetrics, short for alternative (to citation) metrics, was created out of an attempt to provide a filter (Priem et al., 2010) and to steer against the oversimplification of the measurement of scientific success solely on the basis of number of journal articles published and citations received, by considering a wider range of research outputs and metrics (Piwowar, 2013). Although the term altmetrics was introduced in a tweet in 2010 (Priem, 2010), the idea of capturing traces - "polymorphous mentioning" (Cronin et al., 1998, p. 1320) - of scholars and their documents on the web to measure "impact" of science in a broader manner than citations was introduced years before, largely in the context of webometrics (Almind and Ingwersen, 1997; Thelwall et al., 2005):
- Date
- 20. 1.2015 18:30:22
-
Joshi, A.N.; Maheshwarappa, B.S.: Studies in scientific productivity : a review of literature (1996)
0.00
0.0019425282 = product of:
0.048563205 = sum of:
0.048563205 = weight(_text_:post in 405) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.048563205 = score(doc=405,freq=2.0), product of:
0.10811277 = queryWeight, product of:
5.808009 = idf(docFreq=360, maxDocs=44218)
0.018614428 = queryNorm
0.4491903 = fieldWeight in 405, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.808009 = idf(docFreq=360, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=405)
0.04 = coord(1/25)
- Abstract
- Refers to the many changes in the research process in the post Second World War period, including the increased involvement of government and industry in establishing R&D laboratories, and by way of grant to universities. Discusses concepts, types, and problems in measuring scientific productivity, reviewing studies since 1926. Examines theoretical developments in relation to the frequency distribution of Lotka's Law of Scientific Productivity. The various studies are mainly non-comparable and inconclusive owing to substantial differences in the analytical methods applied. Poits out the need for methodological standardisation and coordination of research efforts in this area through empirical validation and generalisation of bibliometric models
-
Leydesdorff, L.: Dynamic and evolutionary updates of classificatory schemes in scientific journal structures (2002)
0.00
0.0019425282 = product of:
0.048563205 = sum of:
0.048563205 = weight(_text_:post in 1249) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.048563205 = score(doc=1249,freq=2.0), product of:
0.10811277 = queryWeight, product of:
5.808009 = idf(docFreq=360, maxDocs=44218)
0.018614428 = queryNorm
0.4491903 = fieldWeight in 1249, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.808009 = idf(docFreq=360, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1249)
0.04 = coord(1/25)
- Abstract
- Can the inclusion of new journals in the Science Citation Index be used for the indication of structural change in the database, and how can this change be compared with reorganizations of reiations among previously included journals? Change in the number of journals (n) is distinguished from change in the number of journal categories (m). Although the number of journals can be considered as a given at each moment in time, the number of journal categories is based an a reconstruction that is time-stamped ex post. The reflexive reconstruction is in need of an update when new information becomes available in a next year. Implications of this shift towards an evolutionary perspective are specified.
-
Abdelkareem, M.A.A.: In terms of publication index, what indicator is the best for researchers indexing, Google Scholar, Scopus, Clarivate or others? (2018)
0.00
0.0019425282 = product of:
0.048563205 = sum of:
0.048563205 = weight(_text_:post in 4548) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.048563205 = score(doc=4548,freq=2.0), product of:
0.10811277 = queryWeight, product of:
5.808009 = idf(docFreq=360, maxDocs=44218)
0.018614428 = queryNorm
0.4491903 = fieldWeight in 4548, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.808009 = idf(docFreq=360, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4548)
0.04 = coord(1/25)
- Source
- https://www.researchgate.net/post/In_terms_of_publication_index_what_indicator_is_the_best_for_researchers_indexing_Google_Scholar_Scopus_Clarivate_or_others
