1,720,962 research outputs found
WxEM Wave 1
No full textThis report describes the results of a regularly distributed survey of nationwide Emergency Managers as part of The Extreme Weather and Emergency Management Survey (WxEM) series. This project aims to send surveys to Emergency Managers across the United States three to four times a year, although that frequency may change based on Emergency Manager and research needs. The Extreme Weather and Emergency Management Survey, Wave 1 (WxEM Wave 1) was designed and administered by the Institute for Public Policy Research and Analysis (IPPRA) at the University of Oklahoma. It is the first survey in the series (Stormer et al. 2023 and Wanless et al. 2023). WxEM Wave 1 opened on August 4, 2022, using an online questionnaire that as of this writing has been completed by 720 Emergency Management personnel that were contacted from an IPPRA built database of Emergency Managers from across the country (see Stormer et al. 2023 for more information on the database). WxEM Wave 1 was designed to recruit participants for the WxEM project. This survey gathers demographic information on enrollees, including location, jurisdiction type, and experience. This report presents an overview of the methodology of the survey data collection, and a reproduction of the survey instrument with frequencies for the questions that elicited numeric responses. Because this survey acts as an enrollment tool, it will remain open, and results may vary as participants are added and removed. Future reference reports will update the number of participants as the project continues
WxEM Wave 2
No full textThis report describes the results of a regularly distributed survey of nationwide Emergency Managers as part of The Extreme Weather and Emergency Management Survey (WxEM) series. This project aims to send surveys to Emergency Managers across the United States three to four times a year, although that frequency may change based on Emergency Manager and research needs. The Extreme Weather and Emergency Management Survey, Wave 2 (WxEM Wave 2) was designed and administered by the Institute for Public Policy Research and Analysis (IPPRA) at the University of Oklahoma. It is the second survey in the series (see Stormer et al. 2023 and Wanless et al. 2023 for information on WxEM). WxEM Wave 2 opened on November 7, 2022, using an online questionnaire that as of this writing has been completed by 444 Emergency Management personnel that were recruited from an IPPRA built database of Emergency Managers from across the country (see Stormer et al. 2023 and Wanless et al. 2023b for more info on recruitment). WxEM Wave 2 follows WxEM Wave 1, which was designed to recruit and gather demographic information on participants. WxEM Wave 2 focuses on how Emergency Managers use severe weather forecast information. Wave 2 measured what forecast information (location, severity, impacts, etc.) is most important to Emergency Managers and how those priorities change in time. Additionally, Wave 2 measured Emergency Manager perception on National Weather Service severe weather products and tested different kinds of messaging and visualizations of the Storm Prediction Center convective outlook forecasts. This report presents an overview of the methodology of the survey data collection, and a reproduction of the survey instrument with frequencies for the questions that elicited numeric responses
WxEM Wave 3
No full textThis report describes the results of a regularly distributed survey of nationwide Emergency Managers as part of The Extreme Weather and Emergency Management Survey (WxEM) series. This project aims to send surveys to Emergency Managers across the United States three to four times a year, although that frequency may change based on Emergency Manager and research needs. The Extreme Weather and Emergency Management Survey, Wave 3 (WxEM Wave 3) was designed by the Institute for Public Policy Research and Analysis (IPPRA) at the University of Oklahoma and collaborators from Texas Tech University. It was administered by IPPRA. It is the third survey in the series (see Stormer et al. 2023 and Wanless et al. 2023 for information on WxEM Wave 1 and Wave 2). WxEM Wave 3 opened on June 1, 2023, using an online questionnaire that as of this writing has been completed by 322 Emergency Management personnel that were recruited from an IPPRA built database of Emergency Managers from across the country (see Stormer et al. 2023 and Wanless et al. 2023b for more info on recruitment). WxEM Wave 3 follows WxEM Wave 1, which was designed to recruit and gather demographic information on participants and WxEM Wave 2, which focuses on how Emergency Managers use severe weather forecast information. Wave 3 focuses on hazardous weather events that happen in the same place at the same time, called compound hazards. Wave 3 measured Emergency Manager perception of and experience with compound hazards and how such events are communicated and planned for. Additionally, Wave 3 addressed Emergency Manager perception of vulnerability and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on Emergency Management. This report presents an overview of the methodology of the survey data collection, and a reproduction of the survey instrument with frequencies for the questions that elicited numeric responses.
The University of Oklahoma provided funding for all data collection. NOAA’s Weather Program Office provided funding for survey design and data analysis
WxEm Wave 4
No full textThis report describes the results of a regularly distributed survey of nationwide Emergency Managers as part of The Extreme Weather and Emergency Management Survey (WxEM) series. This project aims to send surveys to Emergency Managers across the United States three to four times a year, although that frequency may change based on Emergency Manager and research needs. The Extreme Weather and Emergency Management Survey, Wave 4 (WxEM Wave 4) was designed by the Institute for Public Policy Research and Analysis (IPPRA) at the University of Oklahoma and collaborators from Eastern Carolina University and Texas Tech University. It was administered by IPPRA. It is the fourth survey in the series. WxEM Wave 4 opened on December 4, 2023, using an online questionnaire and has been completed by 313 Emergency Management personnel that were recruited from an IPPRA built database of Emergency Managers from across the country (see Wanless et al. 2023d for more info on recruitment). WxEM Wave 4 follows WxEM Wave 1, which was designed to recruit and gather demographic information on participants (Wanless et al. 2023b), WxEM Wave 2, which focused on how Emergency Managers use severe weather forecast information (Wanless et al. 2023c), and WxEM Wave 3 (Wanless et al. 2024b) with its focus on hazardous weather events that happen in the same place at the same time, called compound hazards. Wave 4 measured Emergency Manager communication and collaboration with various partner agencies and organizations. Wave 4 investigated which partners Emergency Managers work with during the preparedness, response, and recovery phases of a hazardous weather event. This report presents an overview of the methodology of the survey data collection, and a reproduction of the survey instrument with frequencies for the questions that elicited numeric responses
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Get PDFThe 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
Get PDF“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
Get PDFWe 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
Get PDFWe 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
- …
