Listing 1 - 5 of 5 |
Sort by
|
Choose an application
Research and development projects --- Research and development projects. --- research collaboration --- prototypes --- grand challenges --- Science --- Engineering sciences. Technology --- open consultation --- competitive solving --- intellectual resources
Choose an application
As is known, an objective assessment of scientific activity is one of the most difficult problems, in terms of the relationship within itself as well as with society. However, for many decades, the significance of scientists’ contribution to the development of the corresponding branch of science was assessed by the scientific community only by meaningful qualitative criteria, wherein the principle and mechanism of such an assessment was actually intuitive and defied quantitative description. That is why the urgent task was undertaken to create a system for evaluating scientific activity based on some objective indicators of the activity of a particular scientist; in search of such criteria, in the 1970s–1980s, the term “citation index” appeared. Although a close examination of this indicator revealed its limitations and in a number of cases even inadequacy in assessing scientific activity, it has nevertheless since the 1990s gained very wide popularity in the scientific community. This has contributed to the emergence of numerous works aimed at finding new and ideal indicators for assessing publication activity (so-called bibliometric indices). To date, several dozen such indices have been proposed, the most significant of which was the so-called Hirsch index or h-index. Nevertheless, despite the incredibly significant advances in this specific area of sociology, the above problem is still far from resolved. In this regard, the key task of this Special Issue is to familiarize its readers with the latest achievements both in the search for new, more advanced bibliometric indicators and in the improvement of existing ones.
Humanities --- Social interaction --- conference indicator --- conference impact factor --- conference accreditation --- bibliometric measure --- scientometrics --- scientometric indicators --- Russian professors --- sociological polls --- scientometric politics --- scientometric indexes --- scholarly publications --- scientific contribution of individual --- author-suggested weighted citation index --- bibliometric --- human capital --- universities --- trends --- higher education --- citation analysis --- emerging country --- Kazakhstan --- Lotka's law --- network analysis --- publication trend --- research productivity --- scientific activity --- technology assessment --- research collaboration --- patent analysis --- bibliometric indicators --- sustainable development goals --- systematic review --- meta-analysis --- academic surgery --- conference indicator --- conference impact factor --- conference accreditation --- bibliometric measure --- scientometrics --- scientometric indicators --- Russian professors --- sociological polls --- scientometric politics --- scientometric indexes --- scholarly publications --- scientific contribution of individual --- author-suggested weighted citation index --- bibliometric --- human capital --- universities --- trends --- higher education --- citation analysis --- emerging country --- Kazakhstan --- Lotka's law --- network analysis --- publication trend --- research productivity --- scientific activity --- technology assessment --- research collaboration --- patent analysis --- bibliometric indicators --- sustainable development goals --- systematic review --- meta-analysis --- academic surgery
Choose an application
As is known, an objective assessment of scientific activity is one of the most difficult problems, in terms of the relationship within itself as well as with society. However, for many decades, the significance of scientists’ contribution to the development of the corresponding branch of science was assessed by the scientific community only by meaningful qualitative criteria, wherein the principle and mechanism of such an assessment was actually intuitive and defied quantitative description. That is why the urgent task was undertaken to create a system for evaluating scientific activity based on some objective indicators of the activity of a particular scientist; in search of such criteria, in the 1970s–1980s, the term “citation index” appeared. Although a close examination of this indicator revealed its limitations and in a number of cases even inadequacy in assessing scientific activity, it has nevertheless since the 1990s gained very wide popularity in the scientific community. This has contributed to the emergence of numerous works aimed at finding new and ideal indicators for assessing publication activity (so-called bibliometric indices). To date, several dozen such indices have been proposed, the most significant of which was the so-called Hirsch index or h-index. Nevertheless, despite the incredibly significant advances in this specific area of sociology, the above problem is still far from resolved. In this regard, the key task of this Special Issue is to familiarize its readers with the latest achievements both in the search for new, more advanced bibliometric indicators and in the improvement of existing ones.
Humanities --- Social interaction --- conference indicator --- conference impact factor --- conference accreditation --- bibliometric measure --- n/a --- scientometrics --- scientometric indicators --- Russian professors --- sociological polls --- scientometric politics --- scientometric indexes --- scholarly publications --- scientific contribution of individual --- author-suggested weighted citation index --- bibliometric --- human capital --- universities --- trends --- higher education --- citation analysis --- emerging country --- Kazakhstan --- Lotka’s law --- network analysis --- publication trend --- research productivity --- scientific activity --- technology assessment --- research collaboration --- patent analysis --- bibliometric indicators --- sustainable development goals --- systematic review --- meta-analysis --- academic surgery --- Lotka's law
Choose an application
As is known, an objective assessment of scientific activity is one of the most difficult problems, in terms of the relationship within itself as well as with society. However, for many decades, the significance of scientists’ contribution to the development of the corresponding branch of science was assessed by the scientific community only by meaningful qualitative criteria, wherein the principle and mechanism of such an assessment was actually intuitive and defied quantitative description. That is why the urgent task was undertaken to create a system for evaluating scientific activity based on some objective indicators of the activity of a particular scientist; in search of such criteria, in the 1970s–1980s, the term “citation index” appeared. Although a close examination of this indicator revealed its limitations and in a number of cases even inadequacy in assessing scientific activity, it has nevertheless since the 1990s gained very wide popularity in the scientific community. This has contributed to the emergence of numerous works aimed at finding new and ideal indicators for assessing publication activity (so-called bibliometric indices). To date, several dozen such indices have been proposed, the most significant of which was the so-called Hirsch index or h-index. Nevertheless, despite the incredibly significant advances in this specific area of sociology, the above problem is still far from resolved. In this regard, the key task of this Special Issue is to familiarize its readers with the latest achievements both in the search for new, more advanced bibliometric indicators and in the improvement of existing ones.
conference indicator --- conference impact factor --- conference accreditation --- bibliometric measure --- n/a --- scientometrics --- scientometric indicators --- Russian professors --- sociological polls --- scientometric politics --- scientometric indexes --- scholarly publications --- scientific contribution of individual --- author-suggested weighted citation index --- bibliometric --- human capital --- universities --- trends --- higher education --- citation analysis --- emerging country --- Kazakhstan --- Lotka’s law --- network analysis --- publication trend --- research productivity --- scientific activity --- technology assessment --- research collaboration --- patent analysis --- bibliometric indicators --- sustainable development goals --- systematic review --- meta-analysis --- academic surgery --- Lotka's law
Choose an application
This volume, the fourth to result from a remarkably productive collaboration between the National Bureau of Economic Research and the Japan Center for Economic Research, presents a selection of thirteen high-caliber papers addressing issues in the employment practices, labor markets, and health, benefit, and pension policies of the United States and Japan. After an opening chapter assessing the recent ascendance of the U.S. economy, papers diverge to tackle a range of specific issues. Focusing less on international comparison than on the assembly of high-quality research, contributors hone in on a variety of individual topics. Chapters delve into issues of youth employment, participatory employment, information sharing, fringe benefits, and drug coverage in Japan, as well as the dynamics of medical savings accounts, private insurance coverage, and benefit options in the U.S. Like previous volumes stemming from NBER/JCER collaboration, this book represents a valuable mass of empirical data on some of the most notable employment and benefits issues in each nation, information that will both anchor and provoke scholarly analysis of these topics well into the future.
Employee fringe benefits --- Labor market --- Employee fringe benefits. --- Employee fringe benefits - Japan - Congresses. --- Labor market - Japan - Congresses. --- Labor market - United States - Congresses. --- Labor market. --- Socioeconomic Factors --- Insurance, Health --- Personnel Management --- Income --- Culture --- Sociology --- Anthropology, Cultural --- Organization and Administration --- Population Characteristics --- Insurance --- Health Services Administration --- Social Sciences --- Health Care --- Financing, Organized --- Anthropology --- Anthropology, Education, Sociology and Social Phenomena --- Economics --- Health Care Economics and Organizations --- Cross-Cultural Comparison --- Health Benefit Plans, Employee --- Salaries and Fringe Benefits --- Employment --- Business & Economics --- Labor & Workers' Economics --- Benefits, Employee --- Benefits, Fringe --- Employee benefits --- Fringe benefits --- Non-wage payments --- Perks (Employee fringe benefits) --- Perquisites (Employee fringe benefits) --- Employees --- Market, Labor --- Supply and demand for labor --- Supply and demand --- Compensation management --- Labor costs --- Wages --- Markets --- Japan. --- United States. --- E-books --- Paternity Benefits --- Pay Equity --- Salaries --- Fringe Benefits --- Benefit, Fringe --- Benefit, Paternity --- Benefits, Paternity --- Equities, Pay --- Equity, Pay --- Fringe Benefit --- Paternity Benefit --- Pay Equities --- Salary --- Wage --- CHAMPUS --- Employee Health Benefit Plans --- Cost Sharing --- Transcultural Studies --- Comparison, Cross-Cultural --- Comparisons, Cross-Cultural --- Cross Cultural Comparison --- Cross-Cultural Comparisons --- Studies, Transcultural --- Study, Transcultural --- Transcultural Study --- Cultural Characteristics --- Employment Insecurity --- Employment Status --- Labor Force --- Marginal Employment --- Occupational Status --- Precarious Employment --- Status, Occupational --- Underemployment --- Employment Termination --- Employment Insecurities --- Employment, Marginal --- Employment, Precarious --- Insecurity, Employment --- Labor Forces --- Status, Employment --- Termination, Employment --- Rehabilitation, Vocational --- Work --- Bonin Islands --- Employee fringe benefits - United States --- Labor market - United States --- Employee fringe benefits - Japan --- Labor market - Japan --- work, workforce, marketplace, benefits, policy, policymaker, international, global, eastern, western, japanese, usa, america, american, academic, scholarly, research, collaboration, collaborative, national, bureau, economic, economics, economy, finance, financial, wealth, income, power, money, monetary, essay collection, pension, health, retirement, employment, employer, savings, medical, insurance.
Listing 1 - 5 of 5 |
Sort by
|