1,720,971 research outputs found
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
No full textThe 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
No full text“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
No full textWe 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
Dispelling the Myths Behind First-author Citation Counts
No full textWe 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
Motifs conduisant les femmes à accepter ou à refuser la réalisation d'une mammographie
No full textThis research aimed to define the motives to accept or refuse to perform a mammogram and to explore whether these are influenced by age, number of children, personality, intolerance to uncertainty, worry, anxiety and the mammogram’s frequency.Three studies are performed. In the first, 16 participants took part in interviews. Thematic content and lexical analyzes were carried out. In the second study, 168 participants answered two questionnaires listing the motives to accepting or refusing to perform a mammogram. In the third study, 126 participants - in addition to having completed these two questionnaires - responded to the EII, QIPS, GAD-7 and BHI-24. Principal component analyzes (PCA), confirmatory analyzes, correlation analyzes, Student's T tests and regression analyzes were performed.Seven facilitator motivational factors have been highlighted: “Interest of early diagnosis”, “Quality of care”, “Habituation”, “Collectivist perspective”, “Follow doctor's advice”, “Cancer(s) in entourage”, “Hypochondriacs beliefs”. Six motivational barrier factors have been also revealed : “Absence of cancer in entourage”, “Apprehension”, “Physical and moral pain”, “Spatiotemporal difficulties”, “Lack of information”, “Aspiration for freedom”. The factors “Lack of information” and “Physical and mental pain” were negatively related to mammogram’s frequency. Intolerance of uncertainty, worry, anxiety and personality traits had not any significant relationship with this same variable. The age and the “Habituation” factor had a positive predictive effect on the mammogram’s frequency, while the “Spatiotemporal difficulties” factor had a negative predictive effect.This research learns us how mass screening shouldn’t lose sight of the individual and his singularities.Cette recherche visait à définir les motifs à accepter ou refuser la réalisation d’une mammographie et à explorer les potentiels effets de l’âge, du nombre d’enfant, de la personnalité, de l’intolérance à l’incertitude, l’inquiétude, l’anxiété sur la fréquence des mammographies.Trois études ont été réalisées. Dans la première, 16 participantes ont pris part à des entretiens. Des analyses de contenu et des analyses lexicales ont été menées. Dans la seconde étude, 168 participantes ont répondu à deux questionnaires inventoriant les motifs à accepter ou à refuser la réalisation d’une mammographie. Dans la troisième étude, 126 participantes ont – en plus de ces deux questionnaires – répondu à l’EII, le QIPS, le GAD-7 et le BHI-24. Des analyses en composantes principales (ACP), des analyses confirmatoires, des analyses de corrélations, des tests T de Student et des analyses de régressions ont été effectuées.Sept facteurs motivationnels facilitateurs ont été mis en lumière : "Intérêt du diagnostic précoce", "Qualité de la prise en charge", "Habituation", "Perspective collectiviste", "Suivre l’avis du médecin", "Cancer(s) dans l’entourage", "Croyances hypocondriaques". Six facteurs motivationnels barrières ont également été révélés : "Absence de cancer dans l’entourage", "Angoisses", "Douleur physique et morale", "Difficultés spatio-temporelles", "Manque d’informations", "Aspiration à la liberté". Les facteurs "Manque d’informations" et "Douleur physique et morale" étaient liés négativement à la fréquence de réalisation des mammographies. L’intolérance à l’incertitude, l’inquiétude, l’anxiété et les traits de personnalité n’entretenaient aucune relation significative avec cette même variable. L’âge et le facteur "Habituation" avaient un effet prédicteur positif sur la fréquence mammographique tandis que le facteur "Difficultés spatio-temporelles" avait un effet prédictif négatif.Cette recherche nous apprend en quoi le dépistage de masse ne doit pas perdre de vue l’individu et ses singularités
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
Motives leading women to accept or refuse a mammography
No full textCette recherche visait à définir les motifs à accepter ou refuser la réalisation d’une mammographie et à explorer les potentiels effets de l’âge, du nombre d’enfant, de la personnalité, de l’intolérance à l’incertitude, l’inquiétude, l’anxiété sur la fréquence des mammographies.Trois études ont été réalisées. Dans la première, 16 participantes ont pris part à des entretiens. Des analyses de contenu et des analyses lexicales ont été menées. Dans la seconde étude, 168 participantes ont répondu à deux questionnaires inventoriant les motifs à accepter ou à refuser la réalisation d’une mammographie. Dans la troisième étude, 126 participantes ont – en plus de ces deux questionnaires – répondu à l’EII, le QIPS, le GAD-7 et le BHI-24. Des analyses en composantes principales (ACP), des analyses confirmatoires, des analyses de corrélations, des tests T de Student et des analyses de régressions ont été effectuées.Sept facteurs motivationnels facilitateurs ont été mis en lumière : "Intérêt du diagnostic précoce", "Qualité de la prise en charge", "Habituation", "Perspective collectiviste", "Suivre l’avis du médecin", "Cancer(s) dans l’entourage", "Croyances hypocondriaques". Six facteurs motivationnels barrières ont également été révélés : "Absence de cancer dans l’entourage", "Angoisses", "Douleur physique et morale", "Difficultés spatio-temporelles", "Manque d’informations", "Aspiration à la liberté". Les facteurs "Manque d’informations" et "Douleur physique et morale" étaient liés négativement à la fréquence de réalisation des mammographies. L’intolérance à l’incertitude, l’inquiétude, l’anxiété et les traits de personnalité n’entretenaient aucune relation significative avec cette même variable. L’âge et le facteur "Habituation" avaient un effet prédicteur positif sur la fréquence mammographique tandis que le facteur "Difficultés spatio-temporelles" avait un effet prédictif négatif.Cette recherche nous apprend en quoi le dépistage de masse ne doit pas perdre de vue l’individu et ses singularités.This research aimed to define the motives to accept or refuse to perform a mammogram and to explore whether these are influenced by age, number of children, personality, intolerance to uncertainty, worry, anxiety and the mammogram’s frequency.Three studies are performed. In the first, 16 participants took part in interviews. Thematic content and lexical analyzes were carried out. In the second study, 168 participants answered two questionnaires listing the motives to accepting or refusing to perform a mammogram. In the third study, 126 participants - in addition to having completed these two questionnaires - responded to the EII, QIPS, GAD-7 and BHI-24. Principal component analyzes (PCA), confirmatory analyzes, correlation analyzes, Student's T tests and regression analyzes were performed.Seven facilitator motivational factors have been highlighted: “Interest of early diagnosis”, “Quality of care”, “Habituation”, “Collectivist perspective”, “Follow doctor's advice”, “Cancer(s) in entourage”, “Hypochondriacs beliefs”. Six motivational barrier factors have been also revealed : “Absence of cancer in entourage”, “Apprehension”, “Physical and moral pain”, “Spatiotemporal difficulties”, “Lack of information”, “Aspiration for freedom”. The factors “Lack of information” and “Physical and mental pain” were negatively related to mammogram’s frequency. Intolerance of uncertainty, worry, anxiety and personality traits had not any significant relationship with this same variable. The age and the “Habituation” factor had a positive predictive effect on the mammogram’s frequency, while the “Spatiotemporal difficulties” factor had a negative predictive effect.This research learns us how mass screening shouldn’t lose sight of the individual and his singularities
Motifs conduisant les femmes à accepter ou à refuser la réalisation d'une mammographie
No full textThis research aimed to define the motives to accept or refuse to perform a mammogram and to explore whether these are influenced by age, number of children, personality, intolerance to uncertainty, worry, anxiety and the mammogram’s frequency.Three studies are performed. In the first, 16 participants took part in interviews. Thematic content and lexical analyzes were carried out. In the second study, 168 participants answered two questionnaires listing the motives to accepting or refusing to perform a mammogram. In the third study, 126 participants - in addition to having completed these two questionnaires - responded to the EII, QIPS, GAD-7 and BHI-24. Principal component analyzes (PCA), confirmatory analyzes, correlation analyzes, Student's T tests and regression analyzes were performed.Seven facilitator motivational factors have been highlighted: “Interest of early diagnosis”, “Quality of care”, “Habituation”, “Collectivist perspective”, “Follow doctor's advice”, “Cancer(s) in entourage”, “Hypochondriacs beliefs”. Six motivational barrier factors have been also revealed : “Absence of cancer in entourage”, “Apprehension”, “Physical and moral pain”, “Spatiotemporal difficulties”, “Lack of information”, “Aspiration for freedom”. The factors “Lack of information” and “Physical and mental pain” were negatively related to mammogram’s frequency. Intolerance of uncertainty, worry, anxiety and personality traits had not any significant relationship with this same variable. The age and the “Habituation” factor had a positive predictive effect on the mammogram’s frequency, while the “Spatiotemporal difficulties” factor had a negative predictive effect.This research learns us how mass screening shouldn’t lose sight of the individual and his singularities.Cette recherche visait à définir les motifs à accepter ou refuser la réalisation d’une mammographie et à explorer les potentiels effets de l’âge, du nombre d’enfant, de la personnalité, de l’intolérance à l’incertitude, l’inquiétude, l’anxiété sur la fréquence des mammographies.Trois études ont été réalisées. Dans la première, 16 participantes ont pris part à des entretiens. Des analyses de contenu et des analyses lexicales ont été menées. Dans la seconde étude, 168 participantes ont répondu à deux questionnaires inventoriant les motifs à accepter ou à refuser la réalisation d’une mammographie. Dans la troisième étude, 126 participantes ont – en plus de ces deux questionnaires – répondu à l’EII, le QIPS, le GAD-7 et le BHI-24. Des analyses en composantes principales (ACP), des analyses confirmatoires, des analyses de corrélations, des tests T de Student et des analyses de régressions ont été effectuées.Sept facteurs motivationnels facilitateurs ont été mis en lumière : "Intérêt du diagnostic précoce", "Qualité de la prise en charge", "Habituation", "Perspective collectiviste", "Suivre l’avis du médecin", "Cancer(s) dans l’entourage", "Croyances hypocondriaques". Six facteurs motivationnels barrières ont également été révélés : "Absence de cancer dans l’entourage", "Angoisses", "Douleur physique et morale", "Difficultés spatio-temporelles", "Manque d’informations", "Aspiration à la liberté". Les facteurs "Manque d’informations" et "Douleur physique et morale" étaient liés négativement à la fréquence de réalisation des mammographies. L’intolérance à l’incertitude, l’inquiétude, l’anxiété et les traits de personnalité n’entretenaient aucune relation significative avec cette même variable. L’âge et le facteur "Habituation" avaient un effet prédicteur positif sur la fréquence mammographique tandis que le facteur "Difficultés spatio-temporelles" avait un effet prédictif négatif.Cette recherche nous apprend en quoi le dépistage de masse ne doit pas perdre de vue l’individu et ses singularités
- …
