Search (147 results, page 1 of 8)

0.08134553 = product of:
  0.3253821 = sum of:
    0.3253821 = weight(_text_:june in 5140) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.3253821 = score(doc=5140,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.409416 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.994357 = idf(docFreq=300, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06830023 = queryNorm
        0.79474694 = fieldWeight in 5140, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.994357 = idf(docFreq=300, maxDocs=44421)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=5140)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Issue devoted to the proceedings of the Workshop 'Bibliometric Standards' held in River Forest, Illinois, 11 June 1995

0.06778794 = product of:
  0.27115175 = sum of:
    0.27115175 = weight(_text_:june in 2037) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.27115175 = score(doc=2037,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.409416 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.994357 = idf(docFreq=300, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06830023 = queryNorm
        0.66228914 = fieldWeight in 2037, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.994357 = idf(docFreq=300, maxDocs=44421)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2037)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Footnote

Issue devoted to the proceedings of the 6th conference of the International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics, Jerusalem, 16-19 June 1997

0.06778794 = product of:
  0.27115175 = sum of:
    0.27115175 = weight(_text_:june in 2038) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.27115175 = score(doc=2038,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.409416 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.994357 = idf(docFreq=300, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06830023 = queryNorm
        0.66228914 = fieldWeight in 2038, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.994357 = idf(docFreq=300, maxDocs=44421)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2038)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Footnote

Issue devoted to the proceedings of the 6th conference of the International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics, Jerusalem, 16-19 June 1997

0.067106634 = product of:
  0.26842654 = sum of:
    0.26842654 = weight(_text_:june in 3886) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.26842654 = score(doc=3886,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.409416 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.994357 = idf(docFreq=300, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06830023 = queryNorm
        0.6556328 = fieldWeight in 3886, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.994357 = idf(docFreq=300, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3886)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

The present paper analyzes the changes that occurred to a set of Web pages related to "informetrics" over a period of 5 years between June 1998 and June 2003. Four times during this time span, in 1998,1999, 2002, and 2003, we monitored previously located pages and searched for new ones related to the topic. Thus, we were able to study the growth of the topic, white analyzing the rates of change and disappearance. The results indicate that modification, disappearance, and resurfacing cannot be ignored when studying the structure and development of the Web.

0.05423035 = product of:
  0.2169214 = sum of:
    0.2169214 = weight(_text_:june in 2023) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.2169214 = score(doc=2023,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.409416 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.994357 = idf(docFreq=300, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06830023 = queryNorm
        0.5298313 = fieldWeight in 2023, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.994357 = idf(docFreq=300, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2023)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Footnote

Paper presented at the 6th conference of the International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics, Jerusalem, 16-19 June 1997

0.05423035 = product of:
  0.2169214 = sum of:
    0.2169214 = weight(_text_:june in 2036) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.2169214 = score(doc=2036,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.409416 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.994357 = idf(docFreq=300, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06830023 = queryNorm
        0.5298313 = fieldWeight in 2036, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.994357 = idf(docFreq=300, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2036)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Footnote

Extends the keynote address delivered at the 6th conference of the International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics, Jerusalem, 16-19 June 1997

0.05423035 = product of:
  0.2169214 = sum of:
    0.2169214 = weight(_text_:june in 2039) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.2169214 = score(doc=2039,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.409416 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.994357 = idf(docFreq=300, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06830023 = queryNorm
        0.5298313 = fieldWeight in 2039, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.994357 = idf(docFreq=300, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2039)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Footnote

Paper presented at the 6th conference of the International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics, Jerusalem, 16-19 June 1997

0.05423035 = product of:
  0.2169214 = sum of:
    0.2169214 = weight(_text_:june in 2040) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.2169214 = score(doc=2040,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.409416 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.994357 = idf(docFreq=300, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06830023 = queryNorm
        0.5298313 = fieldWeight in 2040, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.994357 = idf(docFreq=300, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2040)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Footnote

Paper presented at the 6th conference of the International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics, Jerusalem, 16-19 June 1997

0.047933314 = product of:
  0.19173326 = sum of:
    0.19173326 = weight(_text_:june in 339) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.19173326 = score(doc=339,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.409416 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.994357 = idf(docFreq=300, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06830023 = queryNorm
        0.46830916 = fieldWeight in 339, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.994357 = idf(docFreq=300, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=339)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

The article presents the early findings of an exploratory deep log analysis of journal usage on OhioLINK, conducted as part of the MaxData project, funded by the U.S. Institute of Museum and Library Services. OhioLINK, the original Big Deal, provides a single digital platform of nearly 6,000 full-text journals for more than 600,000 people; for the purposes of the analysis, the raw logs were obtained from OhioLINK for the period June 2004 to December 2004. During this period approximately 1,215,000 items were viewed on campus in October 2004 and 1,894,000 items viewed off campus between June and December 2004. This article provides an analysis of the age of material that users consulted. From a methodological point of view OhioLINK offered an attractive platform to conduct age of publication usage studies because it is one of the oldest e-journal libraries and thus offered a relatively long archive and stable platform to conduct the studies. The project sought to determine whether the subject, the search approach adopted, and the type of journal item viewed (contents page, abstract, full-text article, etc.) was a factor in regard to the age of articles used.

0.047933314 = product of:
  0.19173326 = sum of:
    0.19173326 = weight(_text_:june in 4231) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.19173326 = score(doc=4231,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.409416 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.994357 = idf(docFreq=300, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06830023 = queryNorm
        0.46830916 = fieldWeight in 4231, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.994357 = idf(docFreq=300, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4231)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

As a follow-up to the highly cited authors list published by Thomson Reuters in June 2014, we analyzed the top 1% most frequently cited papers published between 2002 and 2012 included in the Web of Science (WoS) subject category "Information Science & Library Science." In all, 798 authors contributed to 305 top 1% publications; these authors were employed at 275 institutions. The authors at Harvard University contributed the largest number of papers, when the addresses are whole-number counted. However, Leiden University leads the ranking if fractional counting is used. Twenty-three of the 798 authors were also listed as most highly cited authors by Thomson Reuters in June 2014 (http://highlycited.com/). Twelve of these 23 authors were involved in publishing 4 or more of the 305 papers under study. Analysis of coauthorship relations among the 798 highly cited scientists shows that coauthorships are based on common interests in a specific topic. Three topics were important between 2002 and 2012: (a) collection and exploitation of information in clinical practices; (b) use of the Internet in public communication and commerce; and (c) scientometrics.

0.047933314 = product of:
  0.19173326 = sum of:
    0.19173326 = weight(_text_:june in 4863) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.19173326 = score(doc=4863,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.409416 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.994357 = idf(docFreq=300, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06830023 = queryNorm
        0.46830916 = fieldWeight in 4863, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.994357 = idf(docFreq=300, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4863)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Content

Beitrag bei: NASKO 2017: Visualizing Knowledge Organization: Bringing Focus to Abstract Realities. The sixth North American Symposium on Knowledge Organization (NASKO 2017), June 15-16, 2017, in Champaign, IL, USA.

Source

http://www.iskocus.org/NASKO2017papers/NASKO2017_paper_14.pdf [NASKO 2017, June 15-16, 2017, Champaign, IL, USA]

0.047451556 = product of:
  0.18980622 = sum of:
    0.18980622 = weight(_text_:june in 2022) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.18980622 = score(doc=2022,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.409416 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.994357 = idf(docFreq=300, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06830023 = queryNorm
        0.46360236 = fieldWeight in 2022, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.994357 = idf(docFreq=300, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2022)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Footnote

Paper presented at the 6th conference of the International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics, Jerusalem, 16-19 June 1997

0.047451556 = product of:
  0.18980622 = sum of:
    0.18980622 = weight(_text_:june in 2035) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.18980622 = score(doc=2035,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.409416 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.994357 = idf(docFreq=300, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06830023 = queryNorm
        0.46360236 = fieldWeight in 2035, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.994357 = idf(docFreq=300, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2035)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Footnote

Paper presented at the 6th conference of the International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics, Jerusalem, 16-19 June 1997

0.047451556 = product of:
  0.18980622 = sum of:
    0.18980622 = weight(_text_:june in 2162) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.18980622 = score(doc=2162,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.409416 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.994357 = idf(docFreq=300, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06830023 = queryNorm
        0.46360236 = fieldWeight in 2162, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.994357 = idf(docFreq=300, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2162)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Footnote

Paper presented at the 6th conference of the International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics, Jerusalem, 16-19 June 1997

0.040672764 = product of:
  0.16269106 = sum of:
    0.16269106 = weight(_text_:june in 5587) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.16269106 = score(doc=5587,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.409416 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.994357 = idf(docFreq=300, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06830023 = queryNorm
        0.39737347 = fieldWeight in 5587, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.994357 = idf(docFreq=300, maxDocs=44421)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5587)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

This article addresses the question of whether the Web can serve as an information source for research. Specifically, it analyzes by way of content analysis the Web pages retrieved by the major search engines on a particular date (June 7, 1998), as a result of the query 'informetrics OR informetric'. In 807 out of the 942 retrieved pages, the search terms were mentioned in the context of information science. Over 70% of the pages contained only indirect information on the topic, in the form of hypertext links and bibliographical references without annotation. The bibliographical references extracted from the Web pages were analyzed, and lists of most productive authors, most cited authors, works, and sources were compiled. The list of reference obtained from the Web was also compared to data retrieved from commercial databases. For most cases, the list of references extracted from the Web outperformed the commercial, bibliographic databases. The results of these comparisons indicate that valuable, freely available data is hidden in the Web waiting to be extracted from the millions of Web pages

0.034514476 = product of:
  0.1380579 = sum of:
    0.1380579 = weight(_text_:heading in 1329) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.1380579 = score(doc=1329,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.41314662 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06830023 = queryNorm
        0.334162 = fieldWeight in 1329, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1329)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Based on articles published in 1990-2004 in 21 library and information science (LIS) journals, a set of cocitation analyses was performed to study changes in research fronts over the last 15 years, where LIS is at now, and to discuss where it is heading. To study research fronts, here defined as current and influential cocited articles, a citations among documents methodology was applied; and to study changes, the analyses were time-sliced into three 5-year periods. The results show a stable structure of two distinct research fields: informetrics and information seeking and retrieval (ISR). However, experimental retrieval research and user oriented research have merged into one ISR field; and IR and informetrics also show signs of coming closer together, sharing research interests and methodologies, making informetrics research more visible in mainstream LIS research. Furthermore, the focus on the Internet, both in ISR research and in informetrics-where webometrics quickly has become a dominating research area-is an important change. The future is discussed in terms of LIS dependency on technology, how integration of research areas as well as technical systems can be expected to continue to characterize LIS research, and how webometrics will continue to develop and find applications.

0.034514476 = product of:
  0.1380579 = sum of:
    0.1380579 = weight(_text_:heading in 1294) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.1380579 = score(doc=1294,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.41314662 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06830023 = queryNorm
        0.334162 = fieldWeight in 1294, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1294)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Purpose - This study aims to explore the journal bibliometric characteristics of the Journal of Documentation (JOD) and the subject relationship with other disciplines by citation analysis. Design/methodology/approach - The citation data were drawn from references of each article of JOD during 1998 and 2008. Ulrich's Periodicals Directory, Library of Congress Subject Heading, retrieved from the WorldCat and LISA database were used to identify the main class, subclass and subject of cited journals and books. Findings - The results of this study revealed that journal articles are the most cited document, followed by books and book chapters, electronic resources, and conference proceedings, respectively. The three main classes of cited journals in JOD papers are library science, science, and social sciences. The three subclasses of non-LIS journals that were highly cited in JOD papers are Science, "Mathematics. Computer science", and "Industries. Land use. Labor". The three highly cited subjects of library and information science journals encompass searching, information work, and online information retrieval. The most cited main class of books in JOD papers is library and information science, followed by social sciences, science, "Philosophy. Psychology. Religion." The three highly cited subclasses of books in JOD papers are "Books (General). Writing. Paleography. Book industries and trade. Libraries. Bibliography," "Philology and linguistics," and Science, and the most cited subject of books is information storage and retrieval systems. Originality/value - Results for the present research found that information science, as represented by JOD, is a developing discipline with an expanding literature relating to multiple subject areas.

0.03389397 = product of:
  0.13557588 = sum of:
    0.13557588 = weight(_text_:june in 1157) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.13557588 = score(doc=1157,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.409416 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.994357 = idf(docFreq=300, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06830023 = queryNorm
        0.33114457 = fieldWeight in 1157, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.994357 = idf(docFreq=300, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1157)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Context: nature, impact and role. 5th International Conference an Conceptions of Library and Information Sciences, CoLIS 2005 Glasgow, UK, June 2005. Ed. by F. Crestani u. I. Ruthven

0.03389397 = product of:
  0.13557588 = sum of:
    0.13557588 = weight(_text_:june in 610) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.13557588 = score(doc=610,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.409416 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.994357 = idf(docFreq=300, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06830023 = queryNorm
        0.33114457 = fieldWeight in 610, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.994357 = idf(docFreq=300, maxDocs=44421)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=610)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Social media data provide increasing opportunities for the automated analysis of large sets of textual documents. So far, automated tools have been developed either to account for the social networks among participants in the debates, or to analyze the content of these debates. Less attention has been paid to mapping co-occurrences of actors (participants) and topics (content) in online debates that can be considered as socio-semantic networks. We propose a new, automated approach that uses the whole matrix of co-addressed topics and actors for understanding and visualizing online debates. We show the advantages of the new approach with the analysis of two data sets: first, a large set of English-language Twitter messages at the Rio?+?20 meeting, in June 2012 (72,077 tweets), and second, a smaller data set of Dutch-language Twitter messages on bird flu related to poultry farming in 2015-2017 (2,139 tweets). We discuss the theoretical, methodological, and substantive implications of our approach, also for the analysis of other social media data.

0.024160134 = product of:
  0.096640535 = sum of:
    0.096640535 = weight(_text_:heading in 3597) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.096640535 = score(doc=3597,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.41314662 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.06830023 = queryNorm
        0.2339134 = fieldWeight in 3597, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.0489783 = idf(docFreq=284, maxDocs=44421)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3597)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to analyse the author self-citation behavior in the field of Library and Information Science. Various factors governing the author self-citation behavior have also been studied. Design/methodology/approach The 2012 edition of Social Science Citation Index was consulted for the selection of LIS journals. Under the subject heading "Information Science and Library Science" there were 84 journals and out of these 12 journals were selected for the study based on systematic sampling. The study was confined to original research and review articles that were published in select journals in the year 2009. The main reason to choose 2009 was to get at least five years (2009-2013) citation data from Web of Science Core Collection (excluding Book Citation Index) and SciELO Citation Index. A citation was treated as self-citation whenever one of the authors of citing and cited paper was common, i.e., the set of co-authors of the citing paper and that of the cited one are not disjoint. To minimize the risk of homonyms, spelling variances and misspelling in authors' names, the authors compared full author names in citing and cited articles. Findings A positive correlation between number of authors and total number of citations exists with no correlation between number of authors and number/share of self-citations, i.e., self-citations are not affected by the number of co-authors in a paper. Articles which are produced in collaboration attract more self-citations than articles produced by only one author. There is no statistically significant variation in citations counts (total and self-citations) in works that are result of different types of collaboration. A strong and statistically significant positive correlation exists between total citation count and frequency of self-citations. No relation could be ascertained between total citation count and proportion of self-citations. Authors tend to cite more of their recent works than the work of other authors. Total citation count and number of self-citations are positively correlated with the impact factor of source publication and correlation coefficient for total citations is much higher than that for self-citations. A negative correlation exhibits between impact factor and the share of self-citations. Of particular note is that the correlation in all the cases is of weak nature. Research limitations/implications The research provides an understanding of the author self-citations in the field of LIS. readers are encouraged to further the study by taking into account large sample, tracing citations also from Book Citation Index (WoS) and comparing results with other allied subjects so as to validate the robustness of the findings of this study. Originality/value Readers are encouraged to further the study by taking into account large sample, tracing citations also from Book Citation Index (WoS) and comparing results with other allied subjects so as to validate the robustness of the findings of this study.