Search (4 results, page 1 of 1)

0.015779749 = product of:
  0.063118994 = sum of:
    0.063118994 = weight(_text_:headings in 3707) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.063118994 = score(doc=3707,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2943326 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.8524013 = idf(docFreq=942, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0606571 = queryNorm
        0.21444786 = fieldWeight in 3707, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.8524013 = idf(docFreq=942, maxDocs=44421)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3707)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

The Journal Impact Factor (JIF) published by Thomson Reuters is often used to evaluate the significance and performance of scientific journals. Besides methodological problems with the JIF, the critical issue is whether a single measure is sufficient for characterizing the impact of journals, particularly the impact of multidisciplinary and wide-scope journals that publish articles in a broad range of research fields. Taking Angewandte Chemie International Edition and the Journal of the American Chemical Society as examples, we examined the two journals' publication and impact profiles across the sections of Chemical Abstracts and compared the results with the JIF. The analysis was based primarily on Communications published in Angewandte Chemie International Edition and the Journal of the American Chemical Society during 2001 to 2005. The findings show that the information available in the Science Citation Index is a rather unreliable indication of the document type and is therefore inappropriate for comparative analysis. The findings further suggest that the composition of the journal in terms of contribution types, the length of the citation window, and the thematic focus of the journal in terms of the sections of Chemical Abstracts has a significant influence on the overall journal citation impact. Therefore, a single measure of journal citation impact such as the JIF is insufficient for characterizing the significance and performance of wide-scope journals. For the comparison of journals, more sophisticated methods such as publication and impact profiles across subject headings of bibliographic databases (e.g., the sections of Chemical Abstracts) are valuable.

0.011419862 = product of:
  0.045679446 = sum of:
    0.045679446 = weight(_text_:und in 6589) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.045679446 = score(doc=6589,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.13453132 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.217899 = idf(docFreq=13141, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0606571 = queryNorm
        0.33954507 = fieldWeight in 6589, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.217899 = idf(docFreq=13141, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6589)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Die Innovationsschübe der Computertechnik sind bedingt durch die Entwicklung von Halbleiterkomponenten mit immer höherer Rechengeschwindigkeit und Datenspeichern mit immer höherer Speicherkapazität. Die Steigerung der Speicherdichte auf mehrere Millionen Bytes pro Quadratzentimeter bei digitalen optischen Speichern ist allerdings mit einer deutlichen Abnahme der Haltbarkeit im Vergleich zu konventionellen Speichemedien wie Papier und Mikrofilm verbunden. Was sind die genauen Gründe, und wie steht es mit der Brauchbarkeit als Archivierungsmedium?

0.00659326 = product of:
  0.02637304 = sum of:
    0.02637304 = weight(_text_:und in 5104) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02637304 = score(doc=5104,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13453132 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.217899 = idf(docFreq=13141, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0606571 = queryNorm
        0.19603643 = fieldWeight in 5104, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.217899 = idf(docFreq=13141, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5104)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Ein überfordertes Gutachter-System, knapper fließende Forschungsgelder sowie die starke Faszination von Ranglisten bewirken zunehmend den Einsatz bibliometrischer Methoden zur Messung von Forschungsqualität. Grundlage der meisten Bewertungen ist der Science Citation Index, der nun auch in der Version als Online-Datenbank für umfangreiche Analysen genutzt werden kann. Erweiterungen der Retrievalsprache beim Host STN International ermöglichen statistische Analysen, die bisher nur dem SCI-Hersteller und wenigen Spezialisten vorbehalten waren. Voraussetzung für eine sinnvolle Anwendung sind vor allem die Wahl geeigneter Selektionskriterien sowie die sorgfältige Interpretation der Ergebnisse im Rahmen der Grenzen dieser Methoden

0.00659326 = product of:
  0.02637304 = sum of:
    0.02637304 = weight(_text_:und in 2078) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02637304 = score(doc=2078,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13453132 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.217899 = idf(docFreq=13141, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0606571 = queryNorm
        0.19603643 = fieldWeight in 2078, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.217899 = idf(docFreq=13141, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2078)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Beiträge zum XVIII. Fortbildungsseminar für Bibliotheksleiter/innen der Max-Planck-Institute und Arbeitsgruppen, 2.-5. Mai 1995 in Garching. Red.: H.C. Kuhn