1,720,969 research outputs found
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
The 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
“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
We 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
Adapting Human Rights
Governmental leaders, scholars, and activists have advocated for human rights to food, water, education, health care, and energy. Such rights, also called positive rights, place an affirmative duty upon the state to provide a minimum quantity and quality of these goods and services to all citizens. But food, education, water, and health care are so different–in how they are produced, consumed, and financed–that the implementation of a positive right must be adapted to the distinctive characteristics of the good or service it guarantees. The primary aims of this adaptive implementation are transparency, enforceability and sustainability in the provision of positive rights. Only by adapting a positive right to its policy environment can such a right function as a viable means of protecting disadvantaged members of society. This article uses the example of positive rights to public utilities, such as water and energy, to illustrate adaptive implementation of positive rights. In doing so, this article explains why and how a positive right must be adapted to the unique policy environment of a given public utility
Reconciling Energy and Food Security Law
This article argues that making water security a more predominant policy aim can help reconcile and integrate energy security and food security. Water security is the condition of a nation and its citizens having reasonable physical and economic access to sufficient and sustainable water, combined with acceptable levels of water-related risks (e.g., drought, flood, and water-related plagues)
Recommended from our members
Quantifying \u3cem\u3eWinters\u3c/em\u3e Rights
All reservations of federal land, including Native American reservations and national forests, have water rights. These rights are referred to as “Winters rights” after the seminal U.S. Supreme Court case. That case recognized such rights’ existence, but it did not quantify the amount of water of those rights. Federal courts have applied various approaches to quantifying Winters rights. Recent decisions in Arizona state courts have taken new and different approaches to quantification of both tribal and non-tribal Winters rights. These state court decisions have important implications for federal water rights throughout the United States. This Article examines these new approaches to quantifying Winters rights, evaluates them for their impact on equitable and sustainable water policy, and proposes reforms to better adapt the adjudication of Winters rights to responding to water variability caused by climate change
Recommended from our members
Overcoming Constitutional Obstacles to the Resolution of General Stream Adjudications
The adjudication of water rights in the Gila River basin in Arizona is arguably the most complex piece of litigation in the history of the United States. The adjudication is over forty years old. Today, there are over 38,000 parties with nearly 100,000 claims. At stake in the case is the sustainability and productivity of a river basin that includes critical habitat and endangered species, scarce water supplies for desert communities, farms, and industries, and sacred resources for indigenous peoples. While there are many obstacles preventing an expeditious resolution of the Gila River general stream adjudication, some of the most significant obstacles are presented by the United States Constitution and the Constitution of the State of Arizona. This Article describes the Gila River Adjudication, discusses the potential constitutional obstacles to its resolution, and proposes reforms that could serve to overcome or mitigate those constitutional obstacles.This material published in Arizona Journal of Environmental Law & Policy is made available by the James E. Rogers College of Law, the Daniel F. Cracchiolo Law Library, and the University of Arizona Libraries. If you have questions, please contact the AJELP Editorial Board at https://ajelp.com/contact-us
Quantifying \u3cem\u3eWinters\u3c/em\u3e Rights
All reservations of federal land, including Native American reservations and national forests, have water rights. These rights are referred to as “Winters rights” after the seminal U.S. Supreme Court case. That case recognized such rights’ existence, but it did not quantify the amount of water of those rights. Federal courts have applied various approaches to quantifying Winters rights. Recent decisions in Arizona state courts have taken new and different approaches to quantification of both tribal and non-tribal Winters rights. These state court decisions have important implications for federal water rights throughout the United States. This Article examines these new approaches to quantifying Winters rights, evaluates them for their impact on equitable and sustainable water policy, and proposes reforms to better adapt the adjudication of Winters rights to responding to water variability caused by climate change
Dispelling the Myths Behind First-author Citation Counts
We 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
- …
