共查询到20条相似文献，搜索用时 15 毫秒
1.
《Journal of Informetrics》2020,14(2):101032
Compared with journal articles, books can provide broader, deeper and more comprehensive information, and often have higher expertise and academic depth. However, most researches on book assessment focus on measuring academic value of books (e.g. citations analysis) or identifying attitudes of readers (e.g. book review mining), depth and breadth reflected by book contents is neglected. Therefore, in this paper, we measure books’ depth and breadth by mining books’ tables of contents, so as to enrich resources and methods for book assessment research, help users understand book contents quickly and improve efficiency of book selection. Specifically, we measured books’ depth and breadth based on books’ tables of contents via two levels: topic level and feature level. Firstly, we obtained topic-level metrics by identifying topics expressed in tables of contents and calculating topic distributions. Then, we got feature-level results via feature extraction and feature distribution calculation. Finally, we compared depth and breadth metrics and other book assessment metrics. Experimental results reveal that, books’ depth and breadth at two levels are different, and substantial differences between disciplines and book types are obvious. In addition, books’ depth and breadth can provide alternative and supplementary information for assessing multi-dimensional values of books. 相似文献
2.
[目的/意义] 比较分析不同学科的外文学术电子图书影响力差异,丰富电子图书评价方法,为完善电子图书分类分学科的科学评价体系提供有益参考。[方法/过程] 采用Bookmetrix,以经管类、教育类的学术电子图书为研究对象,对其传统引文指标与Altmetrics指标（Mendeley读者数、关注量、下载量）、书评量的相关性与一致性定量分析,比较两学科外文电子图书各指标之间的差异并进行非参数检验。[结果/结论] 研究发现：被引量、读者数、下载量等具有较高的指标覆盖率;经K-S Z独立双样本检验,经管类和教育类电子图书的被引量、下载量存在显著差异,关注量、读者数、书评量无显著差异（p=0.05）;指标相关性具有学科差异性,被引量与Mendeley读者数的相关性,经管类图书高于教育类图书;被引量测度的是学术电子图书的学术影响力,使用数据（下载量等）与补充计量学数据较多反映图书的社会影响力。评价中文学术电子图书应将多源异构数据处理转化,构建多指标综合评价体系,将定性与定量方法相融合,使评价更全面、科学。 相似文献
3.
Online book reviews reflect readers’ attitudes and opinions and serve as a data source for book impact assessment. Most research has only focused on the number of ratings and reviews to assess the impact of books. However, it is necessary to more thoroughly explore online book reviews, to analyze the viewpoints and sentiments expressed in them and the identity and motivation of the reviewers in order to evaluate the value of different types of book reviews. In this study, we collect Goodreads reviews of books indexed by the Book Citation Index and consider them according to the following three aspects: the popularity of highly cited books in Goodreads, the influence of reviewer roles (of author, librarian, and ordinary user) on book reviews, and the emotions and opinions behind reviewers’ ratings. Results consider the number of books reviewed in different disciplines, the variations in ratings of highly cited and non-highly cited books, differences in book reviews given by the reviewer roles, and the way reviewers express their sentiments about the books. The study concludes that if online reviews are to be used as indicators of book impact assessment, key considerations should include the subject discipline, the reviewer's role, and the sentiment polarity. 相似文献
4.
We evaluate article-level metrics along two dimensions. Firstly, we analyse metrics’ ranking bias in terms of fields and time. Secondly, we evaluate their performance based on test data that consists of (1) papers that have won high-impact awards and (2) papers that have won prizes for outstanding quality. We consider different citation impact indicators and indirect ranking algorithms in combination with various normalisation approaches (mean-based, percentile-based, co-citation-based, and post hoc rescaling). We execute all experiments on two publication databases which use different field categorisation schemes (author-chosen concept categories and categories based on papers’ semantic information).In terms of bias, we find that citation counts are always less time biased but always more field biased compared to PageRank. Furthermore, rescaling paper scores by a constant number of similarly aged papers reduces time bias more effectively compared to normalising by calendar years. We also find that percentile citation scores are less field and time biased than mean-normalised citation counts.In terms of performance, we find that time-normalised metrics identify high-impact papers better shortly after their publication compared to their non-normalised variants. However, after 7 to 10 years, the non-normalised metrics perform better. A similar trend exists for the set of high-quality papers where these performance cross-over points occur after 5 to 10 years.Lastly, we also find that personalising PageRank with papers’ citation counts reduces time bias but increases field bias. Similarly, using papers’ associated journal impact factors to personalise PageRank increases its field bias. In terms of performance, PageRank should always be personalised with papers’ citation counts and time-rescaled for citation windows smaller than 7 to 10 years. 相似文献
5.
6.
《Journal of Informetrics》2020,14(4):101071
The aim of this study is to introduce two groups of impact indicators, Weighted Altmetric Impact (WAI) and Inverse Altmetric Impact (IAI). WAI is based in weights from the contributions of each metric to different components or impact dimensions (Principal Component Analysis). IAI is calculated according to the inverse prevalence of each metric in different impact dimensions (TF/IDF). These indicators were tested against 29,500 articles, using metrics from Altmetric.com, PlumX and CED. Altmetric Attention Score (AAScore) was also obtained to compare the resulting scores. Several statistical analyses were applied to value the advantages and limitations of these indicators. Frequency distributions showed that each group of metrics (Scientific Impact, Media Impact and Usage Impact) follows power law trends although with particular patterns. Correlation matrices have depicted associations between metrics and indicators. Multidimensional scaling (MDS) has plotted these interactions to visualize distances between indicators and metrics in each dimension. The 2018 Altmetric Top 100 was used to distinguish differences between rankings from AAScore and the proposed indicators. The paper concludes that the theoretical assumptions of dimensions and prevalence are suitable criteria to design transparent and reproducible impact indicators. 相似文献
7.
The process of assessing individual authors should rely upon a proper aggregation of reliable and valid papers’ quality metrics. Citations are merely one possible way to measure appreciation of publications. In this study we propose some new, SJR- and SNIP-based indicators, which not only take into account the broadly conceived popularity of a paper (manifested by the number of citations), but also other factors like its potential, or the quality of papers that cite a given publication. We explore the relation and correlation between different metrics and study how they affect the values of a real-valued generalized h-index calculated for 11 prominent scientometricians. We note that the h-index is a very unstable impact function, highly sensitive for applying input elements’ scaling. Our analysis is not only of theoretical significance: data scaling is often performed to normalize citations across disciplines. Uncontrolled application of this operation may lead to unfair and biased (toward some groups) decisions. This puts the validity of authors assessment and ranking using the h-index into question. Obviously, a good impact function to be used in practice should not be as much sensitive to changing input data as the analyzed one. 相似文献
8.
清代编纂了数量众多的私修类书,按照其目的用途,可以划分为博通治学、诗文词赋、童蒙科举、道德教化、日用应酬五个类型,不同类型的私修类书在顺治朝至道光朝的时段内编纂数量各不相同,反映了不同时期的历史特征。对清代私修类书展开研究,有助于发掘其中蕴含的文献学和历史学价值。 相似文献
9.
《Journal of Informetrics》2014,8(3):667-682
Previous research shows that researchers’ social network metrics obtained from a collaborative output network (e.g., joint publications or co-authorship network) impact their performance determined by g-index. We use a richer dataset to show that a scholar's performance should be considered with respect to position in multiple networks. Previous research using only the network of researchers’ joint publications shows that a researcher's distinct connections to other researchers, a researcher's number of repeated collaborative outputs, and a researchers’ redundant connections to a group of researchers who are themselves well-connected has a positive impact on the researchers’ performance, while a researcher's tendency to connect with other researchers who are themselves well-connected (i.e., eigenvector centrality) had a negative impact on the researchers’ performance. Our findings are similar except that we find that eigenvector centrality has a positive impact on the performance of scholars. Moreover, our results demonstrate that a researcher's tendency toward dense local neighborhoods and the researchers’ demographic attributes such as gender should also be considered when investigating the impact of the social network metrics on the performance of researchers. 相似文献
10.
美国公共图书馆评价方法在我国区域图书馆评价中的应用 总被引：1，自引：1，他引：0
在介绍美国公共图书馆等级评价方法的基础上,利用2011《中国图书馆年鉴》中的数据,运用美国公共图书馆评价指标对我国各省公共图书馆进行评价,从人均支出、资料经费占总预算比例、人均图书经费、人均图书量等输入指标以及流通费用、人均访问次数、人均流通量、每次访问流通量等输出指标按照人口类别进行排序.在统计基础上对排名靠前和靠后的典型省份进行分析,并与美国相关数据比较.对我国公共图书馆发展提出建议:立法保障各级政府对公共图书馆的经费投入;中央政府加大对经济欠发达地区公共图书馆建设的支持力度;引入社会力量参与公共图书馆评价.表5.参考文献12. 相似文献
11.
《Journal of Informetrics》2007,1(2):103-114
This paper describes science and technology (S&T) metrics, especially impact of metrics on strategic management. The main messages to be conveyed from this paper are: (1) metrics play many roles in supporting management of the S&T enterprise; (2) metrics can influence S&T development incentives; (3) incorrect selection and implementation of metrics can have negative unintended consequences on the research and research documentation generated and (4) before implementing metrics, an organization should identify and evaluate the intended and unintended consequences of the specific metrics’ implementation, and identify the impact of these consequences on the organization's core mission. 相似文献
12.
[目的/意义]学术评价对整个学术生态系统的发展具有重要意义。以影响因子和谷歌学术指标为视角,跟踪国内外学术评价指标发展的新动态,思考和探索学术评价指标优化发展的可能方向。[方法/过程]分别选取h5指数排名前50的中英文出版物并查询对应影响因子,分析并检验h5指数与影响因子的关系;对比中英文出版物在学科分布、时间范围、"被引"统计标准等方面的异同和优缺点,总结学术评价指标应考虑的诸多因素。从评价主体、评价对象等维度对网络环境下新的学术评价方式进行探索,对Altmetrics、RCR、PubPeer的创新性学术评价实践进行案例分析。[结果/结论]学术评价体系系统而复杂,与学术出版、交流与传播、保存利用等各环节密切关联,科学合理的评价体系应平衡数量与质量、保持客观中立、兼顾内容与形式,应分层次、多维度、全方位进行学术评价。 相似文献
13.
Altmetrics have been proposed as a way to assess the societal impact of research. Although altmetrics are already in use as impact or attention metrics in different contexts, it is still not clear whether they really capture or reflect societal impact. This study is based on altmetrics, citation counts, research output and case study data from the UK Research Excellence Framework (REF), and peers’ REF assessments of research output and societal impact. We investigated the convergent validity of altmetrics by using two REF datasets: publications submitted as research output (PRO) to the REF and publications referenced in case studies (PCS). Case studies, which are intended to demonstrate societal impact, should cite the most relevant research papers. We used the MHq’ indicator for assessing impact – an indicator which has been introduced for count data with many zeros. The results of the first part of the analysis show that news media as well as mentions on Facebook, in blogs, in Wikipedia, and in policy-related documents have higher MHq’ values for PCS than for PRO. Thus, the altmetric indicators seem to have convergent validity for these data. In the second part of the analysis, altmetrics have been correlated with REF reviewers’ average scores on PCS. The negative or close to zero correlations question the convergent validity of altmetrics in that context. We suggest that they may capture a different aspect of societal impact (which can be called unknown attention) to that seen by reviewers (who are interested in the causal link between research and action in society). 相似文献
14.
国家图书馆藏贵阳文通书局版图书约210种,出版年代从1909年—1953年,图书内容涉及社会生活各个方面。近年来随着国家图书馆对馆藏民国图书抢救保护力度的加强,其馆藏文通书局版图书亦得到系统整理,文章仅对这一部分图书的现存状况做一简单描述。 相似文献
15.
中国原创图画书开始走向世界,但中国图画书的历史可能比西方更早。图画书本质上是一种出版现象,在中西方不同文化背景中有不同的呈现方式。中西方图画书同源于儿童读物的插图,随着出版科技的进步和读图时代的到来,从“出版热”逐渐形成“文学热”,从“文字的儿童读物”演化为“图画书的儿童文学”,在新世纪交流融合中发展为儿童文学的典型样式——绘本。中国原创图画书的复兴有其深刻的历史文化背景和深厚的民族文学传统,建设中国特色的图画书评价标准和理论体系应该提上议事日程。 相似文献
16.
主题词组合新颖性与论文学术影响力的关系研究 总被引：1，自引：0，他引：1
[目的/意义] 研究学术论文内容的组合新颖性与其学术影响力的关系,为研究论文的学术影响力提供新的研究视角。[方法/过程] 采用文本挖掘方法对论文题目、摘要和关键词中的主题词进行提取,通过构建领域主题词共现网络,为每篇论文设计了新颖组合率、中等组合率和常规组合率3个指标,将领域论文划分为不同的新颖性/常规性类型,然后对不同类型论文中高被引论文所占的比例进行统计分析。[结果/结论] 同时具有主题词组合高新颖性和高常规性特点的论文成为高被引论文的几率显著高于其他类型的论文,因此建议研究者在科学研究中应注重新颖知识与常规知识的适当组合。 相似文献
17.
《Journal of Informetrics》2020,14(1):101005
Despite the increasing use of citation-based metrics for research evaluation purposes, we do not know yet which metrics best deliver on their promise to gauge the significance of a scientific paper or a patent. We assess 17 network-based metrics by their ability to identify milestone papers and patents in three large citation datasets. We find that traditional information-retrieval evaluation metrics are strongly affected by the interplay between the age distribution of the milestone items and age biases of the evaluated metrics. Outcomes of these metrics are therefore not representative of the metrics’ ranking ability. We argue in favor of a modified evaluation procedure that explicitly penalizes biased metrics and allows us to reveal metrics’ performance patterns that are consistent across the datasets. PageRank and LeaderRank turn out to be the best-performing ranking metrics when their age bias is suppressed by a simple transformation of the scores that they produce, whereas other popular metrics, including citation count, HITS and Collective Influence, produce significantly worse ranking results. 相似文献
18.
[目的/意义]旨在分析协同搜索用户在信息搜索任务过程中的交流内容与模式,从而理解协同搜索用户的关注重点与搜索过程。[研究设计/方法]基于书籍交互检索平台(CLEF-Social Book Search)设计实验,共招募18名被试完成两种搜索任务,通过录音记录对话并对其进行编码和分析,总结交流内容特征和模式。结合任务类型、认知类型组合、服务器记录的搜索交互行为日志以及问卷收集的搜索体验进行了探索分析。[结论/发现]从交流内容上看,协同搜索用户主要理解与评判书目信息、商讨搜索任务计划;比起认知类型不同的用户,相同认知类型的用户在操作交互方面交流更多,在评判决策方面交流较少。交流模式依据讨论内容比重可分为理解评判型、评判主导型、均衡交流型三种,评判主导型用户的任务完成满意度最高。[创新/价值]协同搜索用户的交流反映出搜索过程中需要与同伴商讨协同的焦点,也是需要系统提供协助的重点,给协同搜索系统设计提供一定参考。本研究针对协同搜索的交流内容设计的编码系统对相关的协同交流研究也有借鉴意义。 相似文献
19.
抗战胜利后,追缴中国被日军劫掠的图书成为当时的一件大事。为了索回国立中央图书馆等在香港寄存而被掠走的图书,中国的图书馆界及其他各界爱国人士积极奔走,通过各种渠道搜集线索、证据,何多源在1946年5月14日致袁同礼的信札就是在这样的背景下写就的。透过该信札的内容,我们得以将日军掠夺我国图书的卑劣行径揭露出来,同时也为中国索还行动提供了有力的证据。 相似文献
20.
The Influence of James C. McCroskey’s Research in South Korea 总被引：1，自引：1，他引：0
In honor and remembrance of Dr. James C. McCroskey, this article looks at McCroskey’s influence in Korean academic fields. We find that McCroskey’s scholarly articles and books were increasingly cited from 2001 to 2016 and that his work has been cited in Korean journals across diverse fields. In addition to the communication and education fields, McCroskey was cited also in the fields of science and medicine in South Korea. The findings document the international and interdisciplinary impact of McCroskey’s scholarship. 相似文献