基于“纵横向”拉开档次法和Kernel密度估计的图书情报类核心期刊的学术影响力研究
|
摘要
[目的/意义]为了有效评判图书情报类20种核心期刊的学术影响力,以期为主办单位正确认识期刊学术交流、渗透和利用现状及可能存在的问题,以便优化办刊模式提供一定的数据支撑和意见参考。[方法/过程]笔者采用"纵横向"拉开档次法和Kernel密度估计对图书情报类20种核心期刊2005-2016年学术影响力进行测算和动态演化的深度刻画。[结果/结论]研究发现:a.2005-2016年20种图书情报类核心期刊的学术影响力呈现W型上探下潜波动上升演化的状态,波动振幅较显著;b.不同期刊的学术影响力呈现阶梯型层级分布格局,层级间差异显著,层内差异较少,整体上图书馆类期刊学术影响力要优于情报类期刊;c.2005-2016年图书情报核心期刊学术影响力的高斯Kernel密度分布曲线呈现迂回运动状态,2011年是分割点,在此之前,不同期刊学术影响力稳步上升且差距逐渐缩小,而在此之后,不同期刊学术影响力不断下滑变且两级分化严重。
[Purpose/Significance]In order to effectively evaluate the academic influence of 20 core journals of Library and information science, and to provide some data support and suggestions for the sponsors to correctly understand the current situation and possible problems of academic exchanges, infiltration and utilization of journals, and optimize the mode of running journals.[Method/Process]the author uses the "vertical and horizontal" pull-apart grade method and Kernel density estimation to measure the academic influence of 20 core journals of Library and Information Science in 2005-2016 and to describe their dynamic evolution in depth.[Result/Conclusion]The results show that:(1) The academic influence of 20 core journals of Library and information science shows a W-shaped upward and downward upward fluctuation, and the amplitude of fluctuation is significant;(2) The academic influence of different journals presents a ladder-like distribution pattern, with significant differences among different levels, less differences within different levels, and the overall library category. The academic influence of periodicals is superior to that of information periodicals.(3) The Gauss Kernel density distribution curve of academic influence of core periodicals of Library and information from 2005 to 2016 shows a circuitous movement, and 2011 is the separation point. Before that, the academic influence of different periodicals rises steadily and the gap narrows gradually. After that, the influence of operation has been declining and the two level of differentiation is serious.
[Purpose/Significance]In order to effectively evaluate the academic influence of 20 core journals of Library and information science, and to provide some data support and suggestions for the sponsors to correctly understand the current situation and possible problems of academic exchanges, infiltration and utilization of journals, and optimize the mode of running journals.[Method/Process]the author uses the "vertical and horizontal" pull-apart grade method and Kernel density estimation to measure the academic influence of 20 core journals of Library and Information Science in 2005-2016 and to describe their dynamic evolution in depth.[Result/Conclusion]The results show that:(1) The academic influence of 20 core journals of Library and information science shows a W-shaped upward and downward upward fluctuation, and the amplitude of fluctuation is significant;(2) The academic influence of different journals presents a ladder-like distribution pattern, with significant differences among different levels, less differences within different levels, and the overall library category. The academic influence of periodicals is superior to that of information periodicals.(3) The Gauss Kernel density distribution curve of academic influence of core periodicals of Library and information from 2005 to 2016 shows a circuitous movement, and 2011 is the separation point. Before that, the academic influence of different periodicals rises steadily and the gap narrows gradually. After that, the influence of operation has been declining and the two level of differentiation is serious.
引文
[1]Gross P L,Gross E M.College libraries and chemical education[J].Science,1927(66):385-389.
[2]Garfield E.Citation indexes in sociological and historical research[J].American Documentation,1963,14(4):289-291.
[3]蒋勇青,齐萍.学术期刊影响力评价方法研究[J].中国软科学,2017(3):178-185.
[4]Schubert A,Braun T.Relative indicators and relational charts for comparative assessment of publication output and citation impact[J].Scientometrics,1986,9(5/6):281-291.
[5]Vinkler P.Evaluation of some methods for the relative assessment of scientific publications[J].Scientometrics,1986,10(3/4):157-177.
[6]Braun T,Glanzel W.World flash on basic research.A topographical approach to w orld publication output and performance in science[J].Scientometrics,1990(19):159-165.
[7]Moed H F,Bruin R E D,Leeuwen T N V.New bibliometric tools for the assessment of national research performance:Database description,overview of indicators and first applications[J].Scientometrics,1995,33(3):381-422.
[8]Hirsch J E.An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output[J].Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences,2005,102(46):16569-16572.
[9]Markpin T,Boonradsamee B,Ruksinsut K,et al.Article-count impact factor of materials science journals in SCI database[J].Scientometrics,2008,75(2):251-261.
[10]Prathap G.The 100 most prolific economists using the p-index[J].Scientometrics,2010,84(1):167-172.
[11]刘雪立,魏雅慧,盛丽娜,等.期刊PR8指数:一个新的跨学科期刊评价指标及其实证研究[J].图书情报工作,2017,61(11):116-123.
[12]邱均平,李应萍.我国图书情报学期刊的学术影响力分析[J].图书馆,2010(1):64-66.
[13]程慧平.基于主成分分析与熵权TOPSIS方法的期刊学术影响力研究[J].情报科学,2015,33(12):77-82.
[14]孙莹琳,唐恒.三种情报学核心期刊学术影响力比较分析[J].图书情报研究,2017,10(2):70-77.
[15]俞立平,潘云涛,武夷山.基于结果一致度的学术期刊组合评价研究[J].中国科技期刊研究,2011,22(1):59-64.
[16]杨略.基于组合赋权法的图书馆期刊选定评价模型[J].现代情报,2012,32(2):20-22.
[17]张发明,王伟明.基于因子分析和诱导密度算子的学术期刊组合评价[J].情报杂志,2018,37(3):165-170.
[18]杨帅.国内外主要学术期刊评价体系对比研究及综合应用实证[D].中国科学技术信息研究所,2016.
[19]王术.主成分分析法在我国学术期刊综合评价中的应用综述[J].情报探索,2014(10):30-32.
[20]马虎兆,于挨福.基于乘法模型和层次分析法的科技期刊学术影响力评价研究---以科学研究类期刊为例[J].情报杂志,2009,28(6):101-104.
[21]王映.加权TOPSIS与RSR法在学术期刊影响力综合评价中的应用研究[J].图书情报工作,2013,57(2):92-96.
[22]张芳,唐崇忻.图书情报学领域学者论文学术影响力研究(2008-2017年)[J].图书馆工作与研究,2018(5):25-31.
[23]郭亚军.一种新的动态综合评价方法[J].管理科学学报,2002(2):49-54.
[24]刘华军,何礼伟,杨骞.中国人口老龄化的空间非均衡及分布动态演进:1989~2011[J].人口研究,2014,38(2):71-82.
[2]Garfield E.Citation indexes in sociological and historical research[J].American Documentation,1963,14(4):289-291.
[3]蒋勇青,齐萍.学术期刊影响力评价方法研究[J].中国软科学,2017(3):178-185.
[4]Schubert A,Braun T.Relative indicators and relational charts for comparative assessment of publication output and citation impact[J].Scientometrics,1986,9(5/6):281-291.
[5]Vinkler P.Evaluation of some methods for the relative assessment of scientific publications[J].Scientometrics,1986,10(3/4):157-177.
[6]Braun T,Glanzel W.World flash on basic research.A topographical approach to w orld publication output and performance in science[J].Scientometrics,1990(19):159-165.
[7]Moed H F,Bruin R E D,Leeuwen T N V.New bibliometric tools for the assessment of national research performance:Database description,overview of indicators and first applications[J].Scientometrics,1995,33(3):381-422.
[8]Hirsch J E.An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output[J].Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences,2005,102(46):16569-16572.
[9]Markpin T,Boonradsamee B,Ruksinsut K,et al.Article-count impact factor of materials science journals in SCI database[J].Scientometrics,2008,75(2):251-261.
[10]Prathap G.The 100 most prolific economists using the p-index[J].Scientometrics,2010,84(1):167-172.
[11]刘雪立,魏雅慧,盛丽娜,等.期刊PR8指数:一个新的跨学科期刊评价指标及其实证研究[J].图书情报工作,2017,61(11):116-123.
[12]邱均平,李应萍.我国图书情报学期刊的学术影响力分析[J].图书馆,2010(1):64-66.
[13]程慧平.基于主成分分析与熵权TOPSIS方法的期刊学术影响力研究[J].情报科学,2015,33(12):77-82.
[14]孙莹琳,唐恒.三种情报学核心期刊学术影响力比较分析[J].图书情报研究,2017,10(2):70-77.
[15]俞立平,潘云涛,武夷山.基于结果一致度的学术期刊组合评价研究[J].中国科技期刊研究,2011,22(1):59-64.
[16]杨略.基于组合赋权法的图书馆期刊选定评价模型[J].现代情报,2012,32(2):20-22.
[17]张发明,王伟明.基于因子分析和诱导密度算子的学术期刊组合评价[J].情报杂志,2018,37(3):165-170.
[18]杨帅.国内外主要学术期刊评价体系对比研究及综合应用实证[D].中国科学技术信息研究所,2016.
[19]王术.主成分分析法在我国学术期刊综合评价中的应用综述[J].情报探索,2014(10):30-32.
[20]马虎兆,于挨福.基于乘法模型和层次分析法的科技期刊学术影响力评价研究---以科学研究类期刊为例[J].情报杂志,2009,28(6):101-104.
[21]王映.加权TOPSIS与RSR法在学术期刊影响力综合评价中的应用研究[J].图书情报工作,2013,57(2):92-96.
[22]张芳,唐崇忻.图书情报学领域学者论文学术影响力研究(2008-2017年)[J].图书馆工作与研究,2018(5):25-31.
[23]郭亚军.一种新的动态综合评价方法[J].管理科学学报,2002(2):49-54.
[24]刘华军,何礼伟,杨骞.中国人口老龄化的空间非均衡及分布动态演进:1989~2011[J].人口研究,2014,38(2):71-82.