1,721,509 research outputs found
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Get PDFThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
Variations on the Author
Get PDF“Variations on the Author” discusses two of Eduardo Coutinho’s recent films (Um Dia na Vida, from 2010, and Últimas Conversas, posthumously released in 2015) and their contribution to the general question of documentary authorship. The director’s filmography is characterized by a consistent yet self-effacing form of authorial self-inscription: Coutinho often features as an interviewer that rather than express opinions propels discourses; an interviewer that is good at listening. This mode of self-inscription characterizes him as an author who is not expressive but who is nonetheless markedly present on the screen. In Um Dia na Vida, however, Coutinho is completely absent form the image, while Últimas Conversas, on the contrary, includes a confessional prologue that moves the director from the margins to the center of his films. This article examines the ways in which these works stand out in the filmography of a director who offers new insights into the notion of cinematic authorship
Appropriate Similarity Measures for Author Cocitation Analysis
Get PDFWe provide a number of new insights into the methodological discussion about author cocitation analysis. We first argue that the use of the Pearson correlation for measuring the similarity between authors’ cocitation profiles is not very satisfactory. We then discuss what kind of similarity measures may be used as an alternative to the Pearson correlation. We consider three similarity measures in particular. One is the well-known cosine. The other two similarity measures have not been used before in the bibliometric literature. Finally, we show by means of an example that our findings have a high practical relevance.information science;Pearson correlation;cosine;similarity measure;author cocitation analysis
Jämförelse mellan gradient AK/A-kvot och beräknad AK/A-kvot mellan tre forimätningsmetoder
No full textBakgrund: Vergenser är ögonrörelser där ögonen rör sig i olika riktningar i relation till varandra. Sambandet mellan konvergens och ackommodation kallas AK/A-kvot. Det kan tas fram med beräknad eller gradientmetod. Den beräknade metoden baseras på avstånds- och närforier. Gradientmetod baseras enbart på närfori och förändring av ackommodativt stimuli. Forimätningsmetoder som kan användas för att ta fram AK/A-kvoten är bland annat von Graefe, Modifierad Thorington och Maddox Rod. Syfte: Jämföra skillnaden i AK/A-kvot mellan gradient och beräknad metod för tre forimätningsmetoder: von Graefe, Modifierad Thorington och Maddox Rod. Metod: Inklusionskriterierna i denna kvantitativa studie var personer mellan 18-35 år, monokulärt visus på minst 1,0, att ha samsyn samt ingen närvaro av tropi. Totalt 30 personer ingick i studien och var mellan åldrarna 21-29 år. Undersökning med samsynstest, covertest och framtagning av bästa refraktion gjordes. Därefter mättes forier på avstånd och nära håll upp för varje person med von Graefe, Modifierad Thorington och Maddox Rod i randomiserad ordning. En mätning för varje metod gjordes, mellan varje mätning fick testpersonerna 10 minuter paus. Alla undersökningar gjordes av samma undersökare. Resultat: Friedman’s tvåvägsanalys gav (2(5) = 105.9, p<0.001). Skillnaden mellan medelvärdet för gradient- och beräknat AK/A med von Graefe blev 2.0∆ i prismadioptrier, med Modifierad Thorington 3.4∆ i prismadioptrier och med Maddox Rod 2.2∆ i prismadioptrier. Alla forimätningsmetoder visade signifikant skillnad mellan gradient AK/A och beräknat AK/A (p<0.001). Det var signifikant skillnad mellan von Graefe- och Modifierad Thorington gradient AK/A-kvot (p<0.05), Modifierad Thorington- och Maddox Rod beräknad AK/A-kvot (p<0.05) samt Maddox Rod- och von Graefe gradient AK/A-kvot (p<0.05) Slutsats: Skillnaden mellan gradient och beräknad AK/A-kvot var ej samma för de tre forimätningsmetoderna. Background: Vergences are different directions the eyes can move in relation to each other. The relationship between convergence and accommodation is called the AC/A ratio. The ratio can be produced with either a calculated method or with the gradient method. The calculated method is based on the distance and near phorias. The gradient method is only based on the near phorias and the change in the accommodative stimulus. The methods that can be used for measuring the AC/A ratio are for example von Graefe, Modified Thorington and Maddox Rod. Purpose: Compare the difference in AC/A ratio between gradient and calculated method for three phoria measuring methods: von Graefe, Modified Thorington and Maddox Rod. Method: The inclusion criterias in this quantitative study were people between 18-35 years of age, monocular visual acuity of at least 1,0, functioning binocular vision and absence of tropia. A total of 30 people participated in this study and were between the ages of 21-29 years. Examination including test of binocular vision, covertest and best refraction were made. Thereafter phorias at distance and near were measured for each person with von Graefe, Modified Thorington and Maddox Rod in a randomized order. One measurement for each method was taken, between each measurement there was a 10 minute break. All examinations were made by the same examiner. Results: A Friedman two way analysis gave (2(5) = 105.9, p<0.001). The difference in averaged value between gradient and calculated AC/A with von Graefe was 2.0∆ in prism diopters, with Modified Thorington 3.4∆ in prism diopters and with Maddox Rod 2.2∆ in prism diopters. All phoria measurements showed significant difference between gradient AC/A and calculated AC/A (p<0.001). There was a significant difference between von Graefe- and Modified Thorington calculated AC/A ratio (p<0.05), Modified Thorington- and Maddox Rod calculated AC/A ratio (p<0.05) and Maddox Rod- and von Graefe gradient AC/A ratio (p<0.05) Conclusion: The difference between the gradient and calculated AC/A is not the same for the three methods used for measuring phorias.
Jämförelse mellan gradient AK/A-kvot och beräknad AK/A-kvot mellan tre forimätningsmetoder
No full textBakgrund: Vergenser är ögonrörelser där ögonen rör sig i olika riktningar i relation till varandra. Sambandet mellan konvergens och ackommodation kallas AK/A-kvot. Det kan tas fram med beräknad eller gradientmetod. Den beräknade metoden baseras på avstånds- och närforier. Gradientmetod baseras enbart på närfori och förändring av ackommodativt stimuli. Forimätningsmetoder som kan användas för att ta fram AK/A-kvoten är bland annat von Graefe, Modifierad Thorington och Maddox Rod. Syfte: Jämföra skillnaden i AK/A-kvot mellan gradient och beräknad metod för tre forimätningsmetoder: von Graefe, Modifierad Thorington och Maddox Rod. Metod: Inklusionskriterierna i denna kvantitativa studie var personer mellan 18-35 år, monokulärt visus på minst 1,0, att ha samsyn samt ingen närvaro av tropi. Totalt 30 personer ingick i studien och var mellan åldrarna 21-29 år. Undersökning med samsynstest, covertest och framtagning av bästa refraktion gjordes. Därefter mättes forier på avstånd och nära håll upp för varje person med von Graefe, Modifierad Thorington och Maddox Rod i randomiserad ordning. En mätning för varje metod gjordes, mellan varje mätning fick testpersonerna 10 minuter paus. Alla undersökningar gjordes av samma undersökare. Resultat: Friedman’s tvåvägsanalys gav (2(5) = 105.9, p<0.001). Skillnaden mellan medelvärdet för gradient- och beräknat AK/A med von Graefe blev 2.0∆ i prismadioptrier, med Modifierad Thorington 3.4∆ i prismadioptrier och med Maddox Rod 2.2∆ i prismadioptrier. Alla forimätningsmetoder visade signifikant skillnad mellan gradient AK/A och beräknat AK/A (p<0.001). Det var signifikant skillnad mellan von Graefe- och Modifierad Thorington gradient AK/A-kvot (p<0.05), Modifierad Thorington- och Maddox Rod beräknad AK/A-kvot (p<0.05) samt Maddox Rod- och von Graefe gradient AK/A-kvot (p<0.05) Slutsats: Skillnaden mellan gradient och beräknad AK/A-kvot var ej samma för de tre forimätningsmetoderna. Background: Vergences are different directions the eyes can move in relation to each other. The relationship between convergence and accommodation is called the AC/A ratio. The ratio can be produced with either a calculated method or with the gradient method. The calculated method is based on the distance and near phorias. The gradient method is only based on the near phorias and the change in the accommodative stimulus. The methods that can be used for measuring the AC/A ratio are for example von Graefe, Modified Thorington and Maddox Rod. Purpose: Compare the difference in AC/A ratio between gradient and calculated method for three phoria measuring methods: von Graefe, Modified Thorington and Maddox Rod. Method: The inclusion criterias in this quantitative study were people between 18-35 years of age, monocular visual acuity of at least 1,0, functioning binocular vision and absence of tropia. A total of 30 people participated in this study and were between the ages of 21-29 years. Examination including test of binocular vision, covertest and best refraction were made. Thereafter phorias at distance and near were measured for each person with von Graefe, Modified Thorington and Maddox Rod in a randomized order. One measurement for each method was taken, between each measurement there was a 10 minute break. All examinations were made by the same examiner. Results: A Friedman two way analysis gave (2(5) = 105.9, p<0.001). The difference in averaged value between gradient and calculated AC/A with von Graefe was 2.0∆ in prism diopters, with Modified Thorington 3.4∆ in prism diopters and with Maddox Rod 2.2∆ in prism diopters. All phoria measurements showed significant difference between gradient AC/A and calculated AC/A (p<0.001). There was a significant difference between von Graefe- and Modified Thorington calculated AC/A ratio (p<0.05), Modified Thorington- and Maddox Rod calculated AC/A ratio (p<0.05) and Maddox Rod- and von Graefe gradient AC/A ratio (p<0.05) Conclusion: The difference between the gradient and calculated AC/A is not the same for the three methods used for measuring phorias.
Jämförelse mellan gradient AK/A-kvot och beräknad AK/A-kvot mellan tre forimätningsmetoder
No full textBakgrund: Vergenser är ögonrörelser där ögonen rör sig i olika riktningar i relation till varandra. Sambandet mellan konvergens och ackommodation kallas AK/A-kvot. Det kan tas fram med beräknad eller gradientmetod. Den beräknade metoden baseras på avstånds- och närforier. Gradientmetod baseras enbart på närfori och förändring av ackommodativt stimuli. Forimätningsmetoder som kan användas för att ta fram AK/A-kvoten är bland annat von Graefe, Modifierad Thorington och Maddox Rod. Syfte: Jämföra skillnaden i AK/A-kvot mellan gradient och beräknad metod för tre forimätningsmetoder: von Graefe, Modifierad Thorington och Maddox Rod. Metod: Inklusionskriterierna i denna kvantitativa studie var personer mellan 18-35 år, monokulärt visus på minst 1,0, att ha samsyn samt ingen närvaro av tropi. Totalt 30 personer ingick i studien och var mellan åldrarna 21-29 år. Undersökning med samsynstest, covertest och framtagning av bästa refraktion gjordes. Därefter mättes forier på avstånd och nära håll upp för varje person med von Graefe, Modifierad Thorington och Maddox Rod i randomiserad ordning. En mätning för varje metod gjordes, mellan varje mätning fick testpersonerna 10 minuter paus. Alla undersökningar gjordes av samma undersökare. Resultat: Friedman’s tvåvägsanalys gav (2(5) = 105.9, p<0.001). Skillnaden mellan medelvärdet för gradient- och beräknat AK/A med von Graefe blev 2.0∆ i prismadioptrier, med Modifierad Thorington 3.4∆ i prismadioptrier och med Maddox Rod 2.2∆ i prismadioptrier. Alla forimätningsmetoder visade signifikant skillnad mellan gradient AK/A och beräknat AK/A (p<0.001). Det var signifikant skillnad mellan von Graefe- och Modifierad Thorington gradient AK/A-kvot (p<0.05), Modifierad Thorington- och Maddox Rod beräknad AK/A-kvot (p<0.05) samt Maddox Rod- och von Graefe gradient AK/A-kvot (p<0.05) Slutsats: Skillnaden mellan gradient och beräknad AK/A-kvot var ej samma för de tre forimätningsmetoderna. Background: Vergences are different directions the eyes can move in relation to each other. The relationship between convergence and accommodation is called the AC/A ratio. The ratio can be produced with either a calculated method or with the gradient method. The calculated method is based on the distance and near phorias. The gradient method is only based on the near phorias and the change in the accommodative stimulus. The methods that can be used for measuring the AC/A ratio are for example von Graefe, Modified Thorington and Maddox Rod. Purpose: Compare the difference in AC/A ratio between gradient and calculated method for three phoria measuring methods: von Graefe, Modified Thorington and Maddox Rod. Method: The inclusion criterias in this quantitative study were people between 18-35 years of age, monocular visual acuity of at least 1,0, functioning binocular vision and absence of tropia. A total of 30 people participated in this study and were between the ages of 21-29 years. Examination including test of binocular vision, covertest and best refraction were made. Thereafter phorias at distance and near were measured for each person with von Graefe, Modified Thorington and Maddox Rod in a randomized order. One measurement for each method was taken, between each measurement there was a 10 minute break. All examinations were made by the same examiner. Results: A Friedman two way analysis gave (2(5) = 105.9, p<0.001). The difference in averaged value between gradient and calculated AC/A with von Graefe was 2.0∆ in prism diopters, with Modified Thorington 3.4∆ in prism diopters and with Maddox Rod 2.2∆ in prism diopters. All phoria measurements showed significant difference between gradient AC/A and calculated AC/A (p<0.001). There was a significant difference between von Graefe- and Modified Thorington calculated AC/A ratio (p<0.05), Modified Thorington- and Maddox Rod calculated AC/A ratio (p<0.05) and Maddox Rod- and von Graefe gradient AC/A ratio (p<0.05) Conclusion: The difference between the gradient and calculated AC/A is not the same for the three methods used for measuring phorias.
Dispelling the Myths Behind First-author Citation Counts
Get PDFWe conducted a full-scale evaluative citation analysis study of scholars in the XML research field to explore just how different from each other author rankings resulting from different citation counting methods actually are, and to demonstrate the capability of emerging data and tools on the Web in supporting more realistic citation counting methods. Our results contest some common arguments for the continued
use of first-author citation counts in the evaluation of scholars, such as high correlations between author rankings by first-author citation counts and other citation
counting methods, and high costs of using more realistic citation counting methods that are not well-supported by the ISI databases. It is argued that increasingly available digital full text research papers make it possible for citation analysis studies to go beyond what the ISI databases have directly supported and to employ more
sophisticated methods
koamabayili/VECTRON-author-checklist: VECTRON author checklist
No full textWe have done our best to complete the author checklist relating to the use of animals in the hut study. Note that the objective for the hut study was to evaluate the IRS treatment applications for residual efficacy against Anopheles mosquitoes, including the local An. coluzzii mosquito population. Cows were only used to attract mosquitoes into the huts and no tests were carried out directly on the cows. The author checklist is intended for use with studies where experiments are carried out on animals, which is why we have had such difficulty in completing this for the hut study, as many of the questions do not relate to how the cows were used
- …
