1,722,893 research outputs found
Flies and Polio -- 1939-1943 -- Correspondence, Polio -- letter, 1942-01-27
No full textLetter from Hall, David G. to Sabin, Albert B. dated 1942-01-27.Sabin Collection Fair Use Policy</a
Flies and Polio -- 1939-1943 -- Correspondence, Polio -- letter, 1942-01-10
No full textLetter from Hall, David G. to Sabin, Albert B. dated 1942-01-10.Sabin Collection Fair Use Policy</a
Flies and Polio -- 1939-1943 -- Correspondence, Polio -- letter, 1942-12-01
No full textLetter from Hall, David G. to Sabin, Albert B. dated 1942-12-01.Sabin Collection Fair Use Policy</a
Flies and Polio -- 1939-1943 -- Correspondence, Polio -- letter, 1942-02-20
No full textLetter from Hall, David G. to Sabin, Albert B. dated 1942-02-20.Sabin Collection Fair Use Policy</a
The notions of text and discourse in Cultural Studies: Stuart Hall, David Morley and John Fiske.
No full textA partir do enfoque dos Estudos Culturais e, mais especificamente, das propostas de Stuart Hall, David Morley e John Fiske discutem-se conceitos básicos nas análises discursivas e textuais, sobretudo as categorias de “texto” e de “discurso midiático”. Considering the Cultural Studies approach and, more specifically, the works of Stuart Hall, David Morley and John Fiske, we debate the basic concepts for performing discursive and textual analysis. We especially observe the notions of “text” and “media discourse”
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Full text linkThe 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
- …
