共查询到20条相似文献，搜索用时 234 毫秒
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
围绕LIS教育所处的环境、面临的挑战及应对思路,对2005年以来国际图情教育改革的研究成果进行总结,发现近几年来该领域的研究主题主要集中在以下几个方面:iSchool及其评价、LIS教育模式及其变革、LIS课程体系建设、LIS教学方法的研究及各国LIS教育进展和国际合作的研究。研究者多由LIS领域的教学科研人员组成;观察、问卷调查和网络调查、访谈等实证方法广为应用;新的理论和研究工具被引入该领域的研究,开辟了新的研究思路。2005至2010年间,LIS教育领域的研究成果数量众多,国内外研究人员在很多问题的基本观点上表现出一定的共性。 相似文献
8.
高校情报学研究状况的计量评价--武汉大学、南京大学、北京大学情报学论文的统计分析 总被引：1，自引：0，他引：1
论文利用文献计量学方法，对三所重点高校在情报学核心期刊上发表的论文进行文献数量分布、研究主题分布、发文被引和自引等方面的计量分析，以评价三所高校在情报学领域的研究热点、学科劳动组织和学科生产率。 相似文献
9.
10.
文章以中国学术期刊网络出版总库为信息源,对19种图书情报核心期刊进行统计,以≥70被引频次的高被引论文501篇为研究样本,从被引文献的年代分布、被引频次、著者、机构、来源期刊、地区分布以及研究主题等方面进行分析研究,旨在揭示图书情报学高被引文献全面而详细的信息,为图书情报工作人员开展学术研究提供参考依据。 相似文献
11.
Mike Thelwall 《Journal of Informetrics》2018,12(1):1-9
Microsoft Academic is a free academic search engine and citation index that is similar to Google Scholar but can be automatically queried. Its data is potentially useful for bibliometric analysis if it is possible to search effectively for individual journal articles. This article compares different methods to find journal articles in its index by searching for a combination of title, authors, publication year and journal name and uses the results for the widest published correlation analysis of Microsoft Academic citation counts for journal articles so far. Based on 126,312 articles from 323 Scopus subfields in 2012, the optimal strategy to find articles with DOIs is to search for them by title and filter out those with incorrect DOIs. This finds 90% of journal articles. For articles without DOIs, the optimal strategy is to search for them by title and then filter out matches with dissimilar metadata. This finds 89% of journal articles, with an additional 1% incorrect matches. The remaining articles seem to be mainly not indexed by Microsoft Academic or indexed with a different language version of their title. From the matches, Scopus citation counts and Microsoft Academic counts have an average Spearman correlation of 0.95, with the lowest for any single field being 0.63. Thus, Microsoft Academic citation counts are almost universally equivalent to Scopus citation counts for articles that are not recent but there are national biases in the results. 相似文献
12.
《Journal of Web Librarianship》2013,7(3):111-122
Abstract Two open source extensions to the Firefox browser, LibX and Zotero, can improve the research process for library staff and users. Once configured and installed, LibX provides Firefox users with an additional browser toolbar and right-click functionality that can search a library's catalog, OpenURL resolver or federated search engine, as well as other Web sites. LibX also includes an autolinking feature, which embeds searchable links within other Web sites such as Google, Amazon, or Yahoo. Zotero merges the best features of other citation management programs with those of popular Web 2.0 services. Zotero users can store full citation information and sort, tag, annotate, and search these citations from within the Firefox browser. Zotero can also “scrape” citations from certain Web sites, allowing users to selectively save citations into their research collection. Zotero can generate complete bibliographies in MLA, APA, and Chicago styles. The abilities to remotely store, synchronize, and share Zotero collections are under development with a planned release date in fall 2007. 相似文献
13.
The authors of this paper investigated the impact of the advanced search features of three common search engines on retrieval result performance: Yahoo, Google, and Live Search. The authors analyzed 240 search queries with different information need emphases to determine retrieval effectiveness differences among regular search, title search, exact phrase search, and PDF file format restriction search. A one-way ANOVA method and regression analysis method were used for the study. It was found that the PDF file format restriction search achieved the best retrieval performance among Yahoo, Google and Live Search. The regular search achieved the best web page ranking performance among Yahoo, Google, and Live Search. The findings of this study can be used to assist users in formulating an appropriate search strategy to improve search effectiveness, and to shed light on how search engines react to different types of search features in terms of retrieval effectiveness. 相似文献
14.
Dissertations can be the single most important scholarly outputs of junior researchers. Whilst sets of journal articles are often evaluated with the help of citation counts from the Web of Science or Scopus, these do not index dissertations and so their impact is hard to assess. In response, this article introduces a new multistage method to extract Google Scholar citation counts for large collections of dissertations from repositories indexed by Google. The method was used to extract Google Scholar citation counts for 77,884 American doctoral dissertations from 2013 to 2017 via ProQuest, with a precision of over 95%. Some ProQuest dissertations that were dual indexed with other repositories could not be retrieved with ProQuest-specific searches but could be found with Google Scholar searches of the other repositories. The Google Scholar citation counts were then compared with Mendeley reader counts, a known source of scholarly-like impact data. A fifth of the dissertations had at least one citation recorded in Google Scholar and slightly fewer had at least one Mendeley reader. Based on numerical comparisons, the Mendeley reader counts seem to be more useful for impact assessment purposes for dissertations that are less than two years old, whilst Google Scholar citations are more useful for older dissertations, especially in social sciences, arts and humanities. Google Scholar citation counts may reflect a more scholarly type of impact than that of Mendeley reader counts because dissertations attract a substantial minority of their citations from other dissertations. In summary, the new method now makes it possible for research funders, institutions and others to systematically evaluate the impact of dissertations, although additional Google Scholar queries for other online repositories are needed to ensure comprehensive coverage. 相似文献
15.
The authors of this paper investigated the impact of the advanced search features of three common search engines on retrieval result performance: Yahoo, Google, and Live Search. The authors analyzed 240 search queries with different information need emphases to determine retrieval effectiveness differences among regular search, title search, exact phrase search, and PDF file format restriction search. A one-way ANOVA method and regression analysis method were used for the study. It was found that the PDF file format restriction search achieved the best retrieval performance among Yahoo, Google and Live Search. The regular search achieved the best web page ranking performance among Yahoo, Google, and Live Search. The findings of this study can be used to assist users in formulating an appropriate search strategy to improve search effectiveness, and to shed light on how search engines react to different types of search features in terms of retrieval effectiveness. 相似文献
16.
Despite recent evidence that Microsoft Academic is an extensive source of citation counts for journal articles, it is not known if the same is true for academic books. This paper fills this gap by comparing citations to 16,463 books from 2013 to 2016 in the Book Citation Index (BKCI) against automatically extracted citations from Microsoft Academic and Google Books in 17 fields. About 60% of the BKCI books had records in Microsoft Academic, varying by year and field. Citation counts from Microsoft Academic were 1.5 to 3.6 times higher than from BKCI in nine subject areas across all years for books indexed by both. Microsoft Academic found more citations than BKCI because it indexes more scholarly publications and combines citations to different editions and chapters. In contrast, BKCI only found more citations than Microsoft Academic for books in three fields from 2013-2014. Microsoft Academic also found more citations than Google Books in six fields for all years. Thus, Microsoft Academic may be a useful source for the impact assessment of books when comprehensive coverage is not essential. 相似文献
17.
Alberto Martín-Martín Enrique Orduna-Malea Emilio Delgado López-Cózar 《Journal of Informetrics》2018,12(2):494-509
The new web-based academic communication platforms do not only enable researchers to better advertise their academic outputs, making them more visible than ever before, but they also provide a wide supply of metrics to help authors better understand the impact their work is making. This study has three objectives: a) to analyse the uptake of some of the most popular platforms (Google Scholar Citations, ResearcherID, ResearchGate, Mendeley and Twitter) by a specific scientific community (bibliometrics, scientometrics, informetrics, webometrics, and altmetrics); b) to compare the metrics available from each platform; and c) to determine the meaning of all these new metrics. To do this, the data available in these platforms about a sample of 811 authors (researchers in bibliometrics for whom a public profile Google Scholar Citations was found) were extracted. A total of 31 metrics were analysed. The results show that a high number of the analysed researchers only had a profile in Google Scholar Citations (159), or only in Google Scholar Citations and ResearchGate (142). Lastly, we find two kinds of metrics of online impact. First, metrics related to connectivity (followers), and second, all metrics associated to academic impact. This second group can further be divided into usage metrics (reads, views), and citation metrics. The results suggest that Google Scholar Citations is the source that provides more comprehensive citation-related data, whereas Twitter stands out in connectivity-related metrics. 相似文献
18.
Elaine M. Lasda Bergman 《The Journal of Academic Librarianship》2012,38(6):370-379
Past studies of citation coverage of Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar do not demonstrate a consistent pattern that can be applied to the interdisciplinary mix of resources used in social work research. To determine the utility of these tools to social work researchers, an analysis of citing references to well-known social work journals was conducted. Web of Science had the fewest citing references and almost no variety in source format. Scopus provided higher citation counts, but the pattern of coverage was similar to Web of Science. Google Scholar provided substantially more citing references, but only a relatively small percentage of them were unique scholarly journal articles.The patterns of database coverage were replicated when the citations were broken out for each journal separately. The results of this analysis demonstrate the need to determine what resources constitute scholarly research and reflect the need for future researchers to consider the merits of each database before undertaking their research. This study will be of interest to scholars in library and information science as well as social work, as it facilitates a greater understanding of the strengths and limitations of each database and brings to light important considerations for conducting future research. 相似文献
19.
In this work we investigate the sensitivity of individual researchers’ productivity rankings to the time of citation observation. The analysis is based on observation of research products for the 2001–2003 triennium for all research staff of Italian universities in the hard sciences, with the year of citation observation varying from 2004 to 2008. The 2008 rankings list is assumed the most accurate, as citations have had the longest time to accumulate and thus represent the best possible proxy of impact. By comparing the rankings lists from each year against the 2008 benchmark we provide policy-makers and research organization managers a measure of trade-off between timeliness of evaluation execution and accuracy of performance rankings. The results show that with variation in the evaluation citation window there are variable rates of inaccuracy across the disciplines of researchers. The inaccuracy results negligible for Physics, Biology and Medicine. 相似文献
20.
Richard S.J. Tol 《Journal of Informetrics》2013,7(2):522-527
This paper applies the Ijiri–Simon test for systematic deviations from Gibrat's law to citation numbers of economists. It is found that often-cited researchers attract new citation numbers that are disproportionate to the quality of their work. It is also found that this Matthew effect is stronger for economists who started their academic career earlier. 相似文献