1,720,991 research outputs found
Reflections on the 2024 ESJP review process: Andreas
No full text‘For me, formulating a paper is always personal and sending it in for review always entails a sense of vulnerability. In a sense, I consider it to “expose” myself. Particularly in relation to the work I’ve been doing lately, where I find it important for our field to also engage in a form of self-criticism and investigate what we take for granted or assume when doing feminist/progressive work, it has happened that I have gotten harsh critiques in reviews, that I have not always found fair in relation to the argumentation put forward in the paper submitted, but rather protective in relation to certain positions in the field. This is certainly not to suggest that I have not also received very constructive and highly deserved critique, but the traditional double-blind process provides little room to explain oneself, little room for dialogue and lots of room for being “suspicious” about each other as author/reviewer. I therefore highly appreciated the more “developmental” or dialogical reviewing process set up through the conference/for this special issue. I found it provided space to be more personal and even vulnerable in responding to the reviews, and that the process ultimately allowed for a more direct and “honest” dialogue, because the need to protect certain positions was toned down in favor of trying to understand each other’s arguments. So, for me and for this paper, this review process had strong merits, and I really appreciated the feedback I got, which made feel that I wanted to better my paper and clarify my argumentation rather than defend myself after feeling hurt.’
(communication by email on 2025-04-28
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
Variations on the Author
Full text link“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
Full text linkWe 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
Gender, sexuality, technology: Instrumentality and passion in higher technology education
No full textBetween instrumentality and passion: The gendering of student subjectivities at two engineering programs at a Swedish university of technology
No full textTechnodesire as heterodesire: Exploring Nerd Sexuality and Corporeality in Higher Technology Education
No full textDispelling the Myths Behind First-author Citation Counts
Full text linkWe 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
How is STEM education gendered? On the possibilities and limits of feminist critiques of STEM education
No full text- …
