Information and Library Science

Permanent link for this communityhttps://hdl.handle.net/2022/15555

Browse

Browsing Information and Library Science by Subject "bibliometrics"

Filter results by typing the first few letters
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Discovering author impact: A PageRank perspective
    (Information Processing and Management, 2011-01) Ding, Ying; Yan, Erjia
    This article provides an alternative perspective for measuring author impact by applying PageRank algorithm to a coauthorship network. A weighted PageRank algorithm considering citation and coauthorship network topology is proposed. We test this algorithm under different damping factors by evaluating author impact in the informetrics research community. In addition, we also compare this weighted PageRank with the h-index, citation, and program committee (PC) membership of the International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics (ISSI) conferences. Findings show that this weighted PageRank algorithm provides reliable results in measuring author impact.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    The Perception of Library and Information Science Journals by LIS Education Deans and ARL Library Directors: A Replication of the Kohl-Davis Study
    (Association of College & Research Libraries, 2005-07) Nisonger, Thomas E.; Davis, Charles H.
    Analyzing the collective opinion of presumed experts, often termed a per- ception study, is a frequently used approach for rating journals or evaluating education programs. Replicating the 1985 Kohl–Davis study, seventy-one library and information science (LIS) journals are ranked according to their mean rating on a 1 to 5 ordinal scale by deans of ALA-accredited educa- tion programs and by the directors of ARL libraries (surveyed during the summer of 2003). Comparison of the results with the 1985 study found considerable continuity in journal perceptions over the past two decades, but more so by directors than deans. A weak to moderate correlation was found between deans’ ratings and Journal Citation Reports citation scores, whereas the correlations between directors’ perceptions and citation data were weak to nonexistent. The findings confirm a hierarchy of prestige among LIS journals, but the hierarchical order differs somewhat between deans and directors.