Week 4 Graded Assessment Due date: 2024-05-05, 23:59 IST. Assignment not submitted 1 point Impact factor is NOT Author metric Journal metric Calculated in 2, 3 or 5 years basis helpful in journal targeting 1 point Which journal metric tracks citations of last two years CiteScore Impact Factor H5 index Article Influence 1 point Which journal metric tracks citations of last three years CiteScore Impact Factor H5 index Eigenfactor 1 point Five year based journal metric is CiteScore Impact Factor SNIP Article Influence 1 point Impact factor depends on (select more than one options, if applicable) Number of citations Number of publications Number of downloads Number of views 1 point Eigenfactor is the Journal metrics for controversial fields of research True False 1 point Review Articles are cited more than other types of articles True False 1 point Cite score covers All types of publications Only research articles Only review articles b & c both 1 point Which is the right answer regarding the following pair of metrics and their number of year's basis Eigenfactor, AI – 5 year CiteScore, SNIP, SJR – 3 year Impact Factor – 2 year All of the above 1 point Which is an indexing agency NASA SCOPUS MHRD Turnitin

Impact factor is NOT Author metric Journal metric Calculated in 2, 3 or 5 years basis helpful in journal targeting1 pointWhich journal metric tracks citations of last two years CiteScore Impact Factor H5 index Article Influence1 pointWhich journal metric tracks citations of last three years CiteScore Impact Factor H5 index Eigenfactor1 pointFive year based journal metric is CiteScore Impact Factor SNIP Article Influence1 pointImpact factor depends on (select more than one options, if applicable) Number of citations Number of publications Number of downloads Number of views1 pointEigenfactor is the Journal metrics for controversial fields of research True False1 pointReview Articles are cited more than other types of articles True False1 pointCite score covers All types of publications Only research articles Only review articles b & c both1 pointWhich is the right answer regarding the following pair of metrics and their number of year's basis Eigenfactor, AI – 5 year CiteScore, SNIP, SJR – 3 year Impact Factor – 2 year All of the above1 pointWhich is an indexing agency NASA SCOPUS MHRD Turnitin

Which journal metric tracks citations of last three years CiteScore Impact Factor H5 index Eigenfactor

Please attempt the weekly quiz. The quiz is graded and designed for internal assessment. 1 point Which is an author metric CiteScore Impact Factor H index H5 index 1 point For author’s publications, if each 10 papers are cited 10 or more times, the h index will be 2 20 10 15 1 point H index Increases always Increases or decreases with IF Does not change Increases or decreases in every three years 1 point For an author, generally H index is the highest in Web of Science Scopus a & b both Google Scholar 1 point According to Hirsch, for a below average biomedical researcher h index < no. of years of experience h index = number of years of experience h index > no. of years of experience h index = 1 1 point Platform-independent author identifier is ORCID LinkedIn Scopus ID RGscore 1 point i10 index refers to 10 paper with 10 or more citations number of paper with 10 or more citations a & b None of the above 1 point g-index gives more weight to number of citations only highly impact journals number of publications only highly-cited articles 1 point H index cannot indicate historical potential of author credibility of research of author a & b both Current potential of a senior author 1 point I10 index is an author metric by Web of Science scopus Google scholar LinkedIn

Which of these is not a potential internal factor that can cause a metric change?Choose the correct answer from below:Your score for this problem will be decided based on your FIRST SUBMISSION ONLYGeographyCompetitorsUser DemographicsPlatform

Assignment overview   Title: Literature ReviewIndividual assignment Assessment type: Academic Literature review Weighting: 40% Word count (or equivalent): 1500 words, excluding references.Due date: Wednesday, 3rd April 2024, due at Midday Submission procedure:  via Turnitin, add the relevant statement from the Turnitin Links to an external site.guide.Feedback date: 2-3 weeks after submission. Referencing style: APA 7 or Harvard  Assignment explanationCritical Analysis Literature Review - up to 1500 words – excluding reference list.individual assignment 40%Due: Week 6This paper takes the form of a critical analysis of a selected topic (see below).You are required to choose a topic from the list below and then chooseone aspect or issue within the topic. This assessment word limit is 1,500words (excluding references), so your analysis must be selective.Once you have chosen an issue from the topics on the list below, you are required toread the appropriate academic literature to enable you to criticallyanalyse, compare, and make recommendations. Your paper should include a minimum of 20 academic references - this does not include websites.Choose an issue from one of the topics below a particular issue to undertake aliterature review (Note - these are topic areas below, not issues):- Job Crafting- Psychological Contract- Career Management- Mentoring TaskSee SyllabusInstructionsSee SyllabusRubricYou will be marked according to the rubric. View the rubric to support your completion of this assignment. RubricCritical Literature ReviewCritical Literature ReviewCriteria Ratings PtsThis criterion is linked to a learning outcomeIdentification of key issues6 to >4.74 PtsSuperior and comprehensive identification of the all issues.4.74 to >4.14 PtsThorough identification of most of the issues.4.14 to >3.54 PtsSatisfactory identification of the several issues.3.54 to >2.94 PtsBasic identification of the key issues and problems presented.2.94 to >0 PtsPoor comprehension and/or identification of the issues.6 ptsThis criterion is linked to a learning outcomeAnalysis and synthesisIncludes the ability to find, use and disseminate information in a digital world.20 to >15.8 PtsOutstanding development of the case with excellent details. Synthesises in-depth information from relevant sources.15.8 to >13.8 PtsLogical development of the case with thorough details. Synthesises information from relevant sources.13.8 to >11.8 PtsReasonable development of the case with adequate details. Summarises information from relevant sources.11.8 to >9.8 PtsBasic development of the case with few details. Presents information from relevant sources.9.8 to >0 PtsLittle or no development of the case with irrelevant details. Presents information from irrelevant sources.20 ptsThis criterion is linked to a learning outcomeInsights10 to >7.9 PtsCreative and original insights developed from the earlier analyses with alternative views offered showing connections among ideas and using information, theories and/or frameworks from a variety of sources.7.9 to >6.9 PtsClear insights developed from the earlier analyses showing sound evidence of understanding of ideas and information, theories and/or frameworks from different sources.6.9 to >5.9 PtsAdequate insights developed with links to previous analyses demonstrating good understanding, theories and/or frameworks of ideas and information.5.9 to >4.9 PtsBasic insights provided with opportunity to be better supported by analyses, theories and/or frameworks.4.9 to >0 PtsNo or little insights provided or shown. Poor attempt to link to analyses, theories and/or frameworks.10 ptsThis criterion is linked to a learning outcomePresentation and referencing2 to >1.58 PtsThe analysis is logically structured, easy to understand. It contains highly informative details and excellent use of referencing.1.58 to >1.38 PtsThe analysis is well structured, unambiguous. Contains informative details and very good use of referencing.1.38 to >1.18 PtsThe analysis has a clear structure, is generally unambiguous with adequate details. Good referencing.1.18 to >0.98 PtsThe analysis has an implicit structure, requires some reading between the lines, and needs editing. Adequate referencing.0.98 to >0 PtsThe analysis has an illogical or no structure and/or is difficult to understand. Few details are provided. Referencing requires significant attention.2 ptsThis criterion is linked to a learning outcomeGrammar and expression2 to >1.58 PtsUses sophisticated, expressive and appropriate language that skilfully communicates meaning to readers eloquently and is grammatically error free1.58 to >1.38 PtsUses expressive and appropriate language that competently communicates meaning to readers with clarity and fluency and is grammatically correct1.38 to >1.18 PtsUses language that generally conveys meaning to readers with clarity. Attention to detail is evident.1.18 to >0.98 PtsUses straightforward language that generally conveys meaning to readers. The language is understandable but there may be significant room for grammatical improvement.0.98 to >0 PtsUses language that sometimes impedes meaning because of errors in usage.