Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Morton V. Malin

dblp:316/6185 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
2ranked-venue papers
2as first author
0since 2021 · last 1981
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Human-computer interaction and ubiquitous computing · 2 · 2 first-author

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Interdisciplinary, comprehensive, and emerging computing
2 papers
Computational social science and digital humanities · 100%
Databases, data mining, and information retrieval
2 papers
Information retrieval · 100%

Topics — the 2 heaviest of 2, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Computational social science and digital humanities › scientometrics
bibliometric analysis
0.021981
Bibliometric analysis of isi's Arts & Humanities Citation index · CHI (1) 1981
Bibliometric analysis of ISI's Arts & Humanities Citation Index (abstract only) · CHI (1) 1981
Information retrieval
citation analysis
0.021981
Bibliometric analysis of isi's Arts & Humanities Citation index · CHI (1) 1981
Bibliometric analysis of ISI's Arts & Humanities Citation Index (abstract only) · CHI (1) 1981

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

lotka's law · 0.0bradford's distribution · 0.0
YearPublicationVenuePosition
1981 Bibliometric analysis of ISI's Arts & Humanities Citation Index (abstract only)
abstract
The most frequently cited journal articles in the Arts & Humanities Citation Index (A&HCI) are analyzed in terms of their disciplinary classification. Four years (1976-79) of the A&HCI data base yielded 144 journal articles which were cited 10 or more times during the period. These articles are predominantly from the disciplines of Language and Linguistics (31%), Philosophy (23%), History (13%), Religion (8%), and Archeology (6%).However, most citations in the A&HCI are to books rather than journal articles (96% versus 4% among those items cited 10 or more times). The discipline of Literature (or Literary Criticism) is predominant in the list of highly cited books.These statistics suggest systematic variation in the resources used by the different disciplines. Various other aspects of the A&HCI data base are explored, and some specific examples are discussed in depth.
Morton V. Malin, Martha C. Dean
CHI (1)1
1981 Bibliometric analysis of isi's Arts & Humanities Citation index
abstract
Bibliometrics, the quantitative study of literature, has made a considerable contribution to the management of scientific libraries and to the understanding of the sociology of science. It has joined operations research as effective management tools in making substantial impact on optimization of library services, resources sharing and allocation in library networks. With the common belief that humanistic literatures are different, these analytic techniques have not been applied to any extent. We believe that although sociological factors may impact on the humanities in different ways, patterns of regularity in communication, individual contribution, and literature growth shall be studied. Knowledge of the characteristics of humanistic literatures may enable us to improve information access and to maximize available resources in space, manpower, and funds for books. A pilot study has been attempted on a bibliography of the history of the American Revolution.The data base is constructed from the Writings on American History: A Subject Bibliography of Articles under the heading "Revolution & Confederation (1763-1789)". To facilitate the analysis, the data management program FAMULUS was used.Selected Results: 1095 articles were published between 1962-1976 by 790 authors in 224 journals or publishing sources. The average author productivity is 1.39 which is similar to other fields studied. As expected, a few highly prolific authors dominated the field, and their productivity distribution follows the well-known Lotka's Law. The dispersion of publications over journals also adheres to Bradford's distribution, identifying the most productive journal in this field as the William and Mary Quarterly. Thus, scholarship in general assumes certain common characteristics regardless of the discipline. Yet differences exist. There are only 77 (10%) authors who have ever co-authored in a mere 47 (4%) of the total literature. This is a dramatic departure from the intensely collaborative enterprise of science in which almost all scientific writers co-author.From our experience, FAMULUS is a useful tool in bibliometric analysis in addition to being a good personal documentation system to replace our shoebox of cards. We have also used it in the teaching of indexing and retrieval of documents.
Morton V. Malin, Martha C. Dean
CHI (1)1