1,720,960 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
Weaseling out of Weingarten: Why Outsourcing Investigatory Examinations Does Not Obviate Representational Rights under the FSLMRS
No full textThe Federal Service Labor Management Relations Statute (hereinafter FSLMRS ) grants covered federal employees the right to union representation at investigatory examinations conducted by a representative of the agency. While the Supreme Court has defined the term agency representative broadly, some courts have permitted agencies to evade the FSLMRS by outsourcing examinations to third parties. This trend is contrary to Supreme Court precedent, the text of the FSLMRS, and the purposes of the statute, and it deprives federal employees of their representational rights. As such, it should be repudiated.
This article first describes the history of unionization and outlines the substantive provisions of the FSLMRS. It then documents judicial inconsistency in interpreting the phrase a representative of the agency, and shows that the broad definition promulgated by the Supreme Court comports with the text, legislative history, and underlying policies of the FSLMRS. This article concludes by proposing factors that courts should consider when determining whether examiners qualify as agency representatives, and it calls upon the judiciary to adopt these standards
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
You Catch More Flies With Honey: Reevaluating the Erroneous Premises of the Military Exception to Title VII
Full text linkDiscrimination is a problem in the military. Though Title VII of the Civil Rights Act prohibits employment discrimination in the “military departments,” courts have held that the statute does not apply to members of the military. The primary justification for this judge-made exception is that Title VII suits might have an adverse effect on military discipline. In their haste to condemn suits for military discrimination, however, courts tend to overlook the negative effects discrimination has on discipline, as well as the positive effects of diversity. This Note calls upon Congress to abrogate the military exception to Title VII; in the alternative, it argues that courts should reconsider the exception in light of discrimination’s true effects.
In addition to its eroded policy foundations, the judicial exception to Title VII contradicts the ordinary language of the statute. The term “military departments” naturally includes servicepersons, who are employees, and there is no compelling reason to depart from the statute’s ordinary meaning. The exception is also contrary to the statute’s broad remedial purpose and much of the legislative history surrounding Title VII. The rationales the circuit courts use to conclude that members of the military cannot bring Title VII claims are inconsistent and contradictory, and the exception has resulted in confusion when applied to quasi-military personnel. As such, the military exception to Title VII should be abandoned—left in the past along with other vestiges of discrimination
Questioning the Sacrosanct: How to Reduce Discrimination and Inefficiency in Veterans Preference Law
Full text linkWeaseling out of Weingarten: Why Outsourcing Investigatory Examinations Does Not Obviate Representational Rights under the FSLMRS
Full text linkThe Federal Service Labor Management Relations Statute (hereinafter FSLMRS ) grants covered federal employees the right to union representation at investigatory examinations conducted by a representative of the agency. While the Supreme Court has defined the term agency representative broadly, some courts have permitted agencies to evade the FSLMRS by outsourcing examinations to third parties. This trend is contrary to Supreme Court precedent, the text of the FSLMRS, and the purposes of the statute, and it deprives federal employees of their representational rights. As such, it should be repudiated.
This article first describes the history of unionization and outlines the substantive provisions of the FSLMRS. It then documents judicial inconsistency in interpreting the phrase a representative of the agency, and shows that the broad definition promulgated by the Supreme Court comports with the text, legislative history, and underlying policies of the FSLMRS. This article concludes by proposing factors that courts should consider when determining whether examiners qualify as agency representatives, and it calls upon the judiciary to adopt these standards
- …
