排序方式： 共有39条查询结果，搜索用时 15 毫秒
1.
Zuckerman: Scientist Extraordinary by Bernard Donovan BioScientifica, Bristol, 2005, 555pp. ISBN 1‐901978249 £24.95 Negotiating licences for digital resources by Fiona Durrant Facet Publishing, 2006, ISBN 1 85604 586 2 Metadata for Information Management and Retrieval By David Haynes Facet Publishing, 2004, ISBN 1 85604 4890 相似文献
2.
This article explores the evolution of the role of academic journal articles submitted to the UK's Research Assessment Exercise (RAE). By reviewing their role, it is possible to see how the changes from quantitative to qualitative assessment (and the resulting problems surrounding the definition of ‘quality’ journals) has impacted both on the journals selected by academics for publishing their research and the assessment of them. Although only one part of RAE submissions, the listing of published research outputs provides the primary evidence for research quality to most RAE panels, and is a significant driver of the final grade awarded, and thus the funding received by submitting institutions. The RAE, being a peer‐reviewed assessment exercise, mirrors in some ways the peer‐review process immured within scholarly publication. The developing role of journal publications as a vehicle for academic research output is examined via the chronology of the RAE, before assessing the current situation in which published journal output formed almost 70% of all output assessed by RAE panels in the latest exercise. The impact of this increased importance of academic journals in the assessment process is considered not only for academics but also for the wider community, i.e. publishers and libraries. 相似文献
3.
Charles Oppenheim Huw Alexander Charles Oppenheim Cliff Morgan 《Learned Publishing》2007,20(2):156-158
Open Access: Key Strategic, Technical and Economic Aspects Edited by Neil Jacobs Chandos Publishing, 2006. 250 pp. ISBN 1‐84334‐203‐0, £39.95, pbk ISBN 1‐84334‐204‐9, £57.00, hbk Selling Rights, 5th edn Lynette Owen Routledge, 2006. 384 pp. ISBN 978‐0‐415‐36280‐1, £75.00 hbk ISBN 978‐0‐415‐38652‐4, £29.95 pbk Bound by Law? Tales from the Public Domain by Keith Aoki, James Boyle and Jennifer Jenkins Duke Law School Center for the Study of the Public Domain, 2006. 76 pp. ISBN 0‐974‐15531‐4, $5.95, pbk. Freely available online at http://www.law.duke.edu/cspd Digital Preservation Marilyn Deegan Simon Tanner Facet Publishing, 2006, Digital Futures Series. 288 pp. ISBN 978‐1‐85604‐485‐1, £39.95, hbk. 相似文献
4.
5.
This article is an edited and condensed version of the report of a study carried out under the auspices of the Joint Information Systems Committee (JISC) and the Publishers Association (PA). It develops the conclusions of an earlier analysis (Bide, Oppenheim & Ramsden, 1997) and builds upon discussions between representatives of JISC and the PA held in the summer of 1997. The full report is available on the UKOLN server at www.ukoln.ac.uk/services/elib/papers/pa/charging/ 相似文献
6.
7.
Charles Oppenheim 《Learned Publishing》2001,14(3):205-212
In February 2001, the Directive on ‘the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society’ was approved by the European Parliament and therefore takes effect. This article highlights the changes introduced by the European Parliament in the Directive and comments on the implications of the change. 相似文献
8.
9.
Jiang Li Mark Sanderson Peter Willett Michael Norris Charles Oppenheim 《Journal of Informetrics》2010,4(4):554-563
This paper studies the correlations between peer review and citation indicators when evaluating research quality in library and information science (LIS). Forty-two LIS experts provided judgments on a 5-point scale of the quality of research published by 101 scholars; the median rankings resulting from these judgments were then correlated with h-, g- and H-index values computed using three different sources of citation data: Web of Science (WoS), Scopus and Google Scholar (GS). The two variants of the basic h-index correlated more strongly with peer judgment than did the h-index itself; citation data from Scopus was more strongly correlated with the expert judgments than was data from GS, which in turn was more strongly correlated than data from WoS; correlations from a carefully cleaned version of GS data were little different from those obtained using swiftly gathered GS data; the indices from the citation databases resulted in broadly similar rankings of the LIS academics; GS disadvantaged researchers in bibliometrics compared to the other two citation database while WoS disadvantaged researchers in the more technical aspects of information retrieval; and experts from the UK and other European countries rated UK academics with higher scores than did experts from the USA. 相似文献
10.
Assumptions underlying the use of university examinations 总被引：1，自引：0，他引：1