1,720,958 research outputs found
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
Dispelling 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
The correction of pattern errors in golf swing: direct instruction feedback vs amplification of error feedback.
No full textAim: The aim of this study was to test the efficacy of an alternative teaching strategy called Method of Amplification of Error (MAE) and to compare the relative effectiveness of MAE to the traditional direct instruction method (DI) and to a no-feedback control condition (C). MAE is based on the assumption that subjects can learn to correct their movements through their mistakes (1). The rationale for the MAE is that giving a subject the opportunity to experience directly his/her own main error will trigger an autonomous searching strategy (2) that will in turn help him/her to improve performance.
Methods: 15 golfers were assigned to one of three groups: DI feedback, MAE feedback and C without feedback, based on their handicap (H), (2 professional, 2 medium H and 1 high H for each group). During the training session each athlete performed 20 swings [7 swings pre- training (T0), 6 swings feedback training and 7 swings post-training (T1)]. After a week the athletes performed retention test (T2). Participants used their own driver and wore appropriate golf shoes. The feedback focused on the “main” error diagnosed as the incorrect position of the participant’s centre of mass projection (weight transfer). Kinematic outcomes were recorded with a motion analysis system (VICON 1.5.1, 8 cameras, 500Hz), a dedicated software (VICON Workstation 5.2) was also used for digitalization and reconstruction of the marker positions. Nonparametric statistical analysis was performed using SPSS version 16.; the Mann-Whitney test was conducted to assess significant differences between groups at three levels: T0, T1 and T2. Statistical significance was set at P≤0.05.
Results: At baseline (T0) kinematic outcomes were similar between groups (P>0.05). At T1 and T2 MAE showed a greater improvement (p<0.05) than DI and C for club speed (T 1: 4.23%; -1.05%; 0.85%, T2: 5.11%; -1.02%; -0.28%, respectively), as well as for ball speed. In fact, MAE showed higher percentage change values than DI and C at T1 and T2 (4.21%; -5.33%; 1.8%; 8.27%, 0.72%; 1.6%, respectively). The same pattern was found for the duration of the swing phases: MAE showed a significantly decreased of tempo at T1 and T2 from the take away to the late backswing and from the early downswing to the ball contact (p<0.05).
Discussion: Results showed that MAE rapidly improves motor performance in comparison with DI. The amplified error, besides providing the learner with new intrinsic feedback, stimulates the functions of perceptive categorization and the conceptual and symbolic elaboration of the received information, therefore improving his/her error detection capability.
References
1 Milanese C et al. (2008). “Amplification of error”: a rapidly effective method for motor performance improvement. The Sport Psychol, 22, 164-174.
2. Newell KM et al. (1989). Search strategies and the acquisition of coordination. In Wallace (Ed), Perspectives on coordination 86-122
AMPLIFICATION OF ERROR: A LEARNING STRATEGY TO IMPROVE MOTOR SKILLS
No full textIntroductionThe correction of technique errors in motor skills represents one of the major issues in motor control and motor learning literature. A good technique is an essential prerequisite in performance improvement and injury reduction. The aim of this study is to test the efficacy of an alternative teaching strategy called Method of Amplification of Error (MAE) and to compare the relative effectiveness of MAE to the traditional direct instruction (DI) and to a no-feedback control condition (C). MAE assumes that amplifying the subject’s “main” error in a given motor skill would allow him to better understand what is not-to-be-done, thereby correcting motor errors.MethodsTwelve golfers were assigned to one of three groups: DI feedback, MAE feedback and C without feedback, based on their handicap (H), (1 professional, 2 medium H and 1 high H for each group). During the training session each athlete performed 20 swings [7 swings pre- training (T0), 6 swings feedback training and 7 swings post-training (T1)]. After a week the athletes performed retention test (T2). Participants used their own driver and wore appropriate golf shoes. The feedback focused on the “main” error diagnosed as the incorrect position of the participant’s centre of mass projection. Kinematic outcomes were recorded with a motion analysis system (VICON 1.5.1, 8 cameras, 500Hz), a dedicated software (VICON Workstation 5.2) was also used for digitalization and reconstruction of the marker positions. Nonparametric statistical analysis was performed using SPSS version 16.; the Mann-Whitney test was conducted to assess significant differences between groups at three levels: T0, T1 and T2. Statistical significance was set at P≤0.05.ResultsAt baseline (T0) kinematic outcomes were similar between groups (P>0.05). At T1 and T2 MAE showed a greater improvement (p<0.05) than DI and C for club speed (T 1: 4.83%; -2.35%; 0.55%, T2: 6.19%; -1.4%; -0.26%, respectively), as well as for ball speed. In fact, MAE showed higher percentage change values than DI and C at T1 and T2 (4.11%; -6.33%; 1.6%; 9.87%, 0.94%; 1.9%, respectively). The same pattern was found for the duration of the swing phases: MAE showed a significantly decreased of tempo at T1 and T2 from the take away to the late backswing and from the early downswing to the ball contact (p<0.05).DiscussionIn this study the effect of amplification of error strategy in golfers with different ability levels was evaluated. The present findings suggest that MAE is an effective strategy for correcting the pattern of motion in a short time. Further research is necessary to evaluatethe persistence of MAE feedback effects over time and their impact on the learning of other sport tasks
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
Author-wise bibliometric analysis based on entropy.
No full textAuthor-wise bibliometric analysis based on entropy.</p
- …
