1,720,957 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
Creative Measures: (AUT)omating creativity assessment
No full textMeasuring Creativity
There exist several batteries of tests for scoring people’s creative capabilities (Barbot et al., 2019). Many rely on assessing the quantity and quality of creative potential using self-report methodology, but others are trying to tap into the creative capabilities more directly. Divergent thinking task is the umbrella term for the kinds of tests that try to operationalize creativity through the use of specific tasks like asking open-ended cues and asking participants to come up with creative responses.
One of the more widely adopted tasks is the Alternative Use Task (AUT), which has participants come up with alternative use cases for common items, such as “Book” or “Brick” within a set time period (often 2-3 minutes; (M et al., 2013)). AUT has shown promise as a proxy for a person’s general capacity for creative abilities as it has shown persistent evidence with moderate to large correlations to real-world creative achievements in both the arts and sciences (R. E. Beaty et al., 2018; Jauk et al., 2014; Plucker, 1999).
The AUT responses are usually scored in 2-4 dimensions. Fluency (the total amount of responses), originality (How novel, clever and creative the response was; e.g. a ‘pen’ used as ‘wand’), flexibility (how many topics does the answers belong to, such as “weapon”, “container” etc.) and elaboration (How elaborate are the descriptions of the answers).
Dimensions
Fluency can be portrayed as the generative creative ability, but as a precise proxy for creativity it has mixed precision. The inter-item (E.g. ‘Book’ & ‘Brick’) fluency scores often wary wildly with correlations around .3 and .4 in one study to (Barbot, 2018) and .5 and .7 in another (Forthmann et al., 2017), but a recent study has suggested the semantic features of the cue items as the possible culprit (R. Beaty et al., 2019), which in part motivates this investigation. Can we quantify what semantic properties will render higher creative fluency?
One obvious limitation of fluency is that it does not tap into the quality of ideas. To have an index for quality (as in ideas that are qualitatively different from prior responses as well as as common/non-creative uses) the parameters ‘originality’ and ‘flexibility’ come in use.
The standard for scoring these is the subjective scoring method that leverages the Consensual Assessment Technique (CAT) (T. M. Amabile, 1983; Silvia, 2008).
When used on divergent thinking tasks, a smaller band of raters (Between 2-10 based on available literature; Buelin-Biesecker & Denson, 2014; Donzallaz et al., 2021) are quickly briefed on the rating criteria before scoring all the cue items with a 5-point likert scale (ranging from 1 = not at all creative to 5 = very creative)(Benedek et al., 2013, p. 200; Silvia, 2008). Originality shows a high correlation with creative achievements in life (Forthmann et al., 2017), but the intercoder reliability amongst raters is often low.
The good news is that resolving disagreements is a feature of CAT, as raters are often invited to meet and discuss their ratings. The bad news is that due to the extensive time-consumption and labor-costs this step is often not used, warranting a possible new objective standard?
Flexibility is normally scored in terms of number of shifts of category of use (Guilford et al., 2021; How to Score Flexibility in AUT of Divergent Thinking?, n.d.), which the CAT-raters will code by grouping participants' answers by similarity (e.g. using a cartoon to “pour milk” & “pour juice”), and finding an average across all responses (Silvia, 2011). Alike the originality score, flexibility can be criticised for being less objective than warranted.
Elaboration is the last dimension of the AUT. It describes: “the richness of detail in the ideas one produces.” (Baer, 2016, p. 1). It is meant as a proxy for well developed ideas, counting multiple word ideas as greater than single-word responses.
The problems and the opportunities
The main opportunities that this study will seek to pursue is remedying the present problems with the AUT; Labor-Cost and subjectivity/Inter-coder unreliability.
And to explore the AUT cues semantic characteristics to get a better idea as to why some cues often have much lower fluency inter-correlations (Between cues). As problematised in (Barbot, 2018), most studies use the same cue words, but most of the commonly used ones were just chosen at random as arbitrary common objects. We will motivate the use of cues in this study Based in the Small World of Words (See Section: Semantic features of Cue words).
Automating the AUT scoring
To attempt solving the problems that come from subjectivity, as well as labor costs, several new procedures have been tried to score the AUT dimensions automatically (R. E. Beaty & Johnson, 2021; Dumas et al., 2020; Zedelius et al., 2019).
Specifically the recent study (R. E. Beaty & Johnson, 2021) used several semantic models to predict ‘originality’ scores, with one coming out as the best. This was the multiplicative global vectors model “GloVe” (Pennington et al., 2014). This model leverages a semantic space built atop a Wikipedia Gigaword corpus from 2014, and was trained on a total of 6 billion tokens.
Semantic features of Cue words
Free-association data and corpus based methods offer systematically different ways of building semantic spaces. Both have previously been used to characterize creativity (Kenett et al., 2014, Beaty & Johnson 2020), although in somewhat different contexts. Accepting that creativity can be modelled as a search process in a semantic space, different choices of space can clearly lead to diverging predictions about the assessed creativity of a response. We sketch here some preliminary work on contrasting the properties of originality scores derived from these two spaces in the particular context of automated originality scoring for the alternative use task.
Bayesian modelling
This study is built in a hierarchical Bayesian framework. This offers a compromise between single-participant estimates and complete pooling (Nalborczyk Ladislas et al., 2019). Compared to maximum-likelihood estimation we pool outlying parameter estimates towards the mean, instead of letting them skew our results. The more exaggerated a value is, the more it is pooled towards the mean. This is very useful when the model framework in use has a high level of uncertainty, as can be seen in variation of intercoder reliability for CAT of AUT answers, which range from approximately 70% to 90% intercoder reliability (Donzallaz et al., 2021; Dumas et al., 2020).
Moreover, another reason for using the Bayesian framework is that unlike a frequentist framework, we are not just trying to reject the null, but instead building up a case for the alternative hypotheses. This is crucial as our models (See Section: Analysis Plan) are extensive and therefore have many individual hypotheses connected to it. We’re not just interested in disproving the null, but with building a case for our hypothese
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
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
Author Under Sail The Imagination of Jack London, 1893-1902
No full textIn Author Under Sail, Jay Williams offers the first complete literary biography of Jack London as a professional writer engaged in the labor of writing. It examines the authorial imagination in London's work, the use of imagination in both his fiction and nonfiction, and the ways he defined imagination in the creative process in his business dealings with his publishers, editors, and agents. In this first volume of a two-volume biography, Williams traverses the years 1893 to 1902, from London's "Story of a Typhoon" to The People of the Abyss. The Jack London who emerges in the pages of Author Under Sail is a writer whose partnership with publishers, most notably his productive alliance with George Brett of Macmillan, was one of the most formative in American literary history. London pioneered many author models during the heyday of realism and naturalism, blurring the boundaries of these popular genres by focusing on absorption and theatricality and the representation of the seen and unseen. London created an impassioned, sincere, and extremely personal realism unlike that of other American writers of the time. Author Under Sail is a literary tour de force that reveals the full range of London as writer, creative citizen, and entrepreneur at the same time it sheds light on the maverick side of machine-age literature.Intro -- Title Page -- Copyright Page -- Dedication -- Contents -- Acknowledgments -- Introduction -- 1. Spirit Truth -- 2. From Absorption to Theatricality and Back Again -- 3. "I Will Build a New Present" -- 4. Sons as Authors -- 5. Fathers as Publishers -- 6. The Daughter as Author -- 7. Lovers as Authors -- 8. At Sea with the Family -- 9. Yellow News, Yellow Stories -- 10. The Return Home -- Notes -- Bibliography -- Index -- About Jay WilliamsIn Author Under Sail, Jay Williams offers the first complete literary biography of Jack London as a professional writer engaged in the labor of writing. It examines the authorial imagination in London's work, the use of imagination in both his fiction and nonfiction, and the ways he defined imagination in the creative process in his business dealings with his publishers, editors, and agents. In this first volume of a two-volume biography, Williams traverses the years 1893 to 1902, from London's "Story of a Typhoon" to The People of the Abyss. The Jack London who emerges in the pages of Author Under Sail is a writer whose partnership with publishers, most notably his productive alliance with George Brett of Macmillan, was one of the most formative in American literary history. London pioneered many author models during the heyday of realism and naturalism, blurring the boundaries of these popular genres by focusing on absorption and theatricality and the representation of the seen and unseen. London created an impassioned, sincere, and extremely personal realism unlike that of other American writers of the time. Author Under Sail is a literary tour de force that reveals the full range of London as writer, creative citizen, and entrepreneur at the same time it sheds light on the maverick side of machine-age literature.Description based on publisher supplied metadata and other sources.Electronic reproduction. Ann Arbor, Michigan : ProQuest Ebook Central, YYYY. Available via World Wide Web. Access may be limited to ProQuest Ebook Central affiliated libraries
- …
