共查询到20条相似文献，搜索用时 125 毫秒
1.
钱紫微 《大学图书情报学刊》2022,(4):121-128
文章基于Journal Citation Reports(JCR)的期刊数据,选取图书情报与档案管理学(Information Science&Library Science)领域内4个JCR分区中的代表性期刊为数据源,统计2010-2015年6年间在Web of Science核心合集数据库中固定引文窗口下的发文和被引情况,借助统计分析软件SPSS,从作者合著人数、作者所属机构间的合作规模、作者分布地区间的合作规模等3个合著属性的角度,研究作者合著与科研成果影响力之间的关系,并探究最佳的作者合著模式。 相似文献
2.
统计2008年～2012年河南省档案学作者在各类期刊上发表的学术论文,从核心作者分布、合著情况、作者单位分布、论文被引率、研究热点、期刊分布和作者地域分布等方面进行分析,总结特点,寻找不足,提出改进建议. 相似文献
3.
基于社会网络分析的国内计量学作者合作关系研究 总被引：1，自引：0，他引：1
利用社会网络分析方法,研究我国计量学领域作者合作关系。选取2000-2010年论文数据,通过分析合著关系网络密度、中心性及小团体,得出计量学作者总体合作程度高,但核心作者间合作有待加强;刘则渊及邱均平为该领域中心作者;作者合作关系受地理位置影响大;该领域研究群体以图书情报、医学情报人员为主;各小团体均有其本身特点。通过本研究,以揭示该领域作者合作关系,促进知识交流及学科发展。 相似文献
4.
考虑到科学交流方式和作者学术关系,应从引用和合作两个角度综合反映作者学术影响力。但目前研究有两点不足,一是作者被引次数、h指数未考虑到合著论文的作者数及每位作者的贡献程度;二是中心度指标均将作者合作网络视为无权重网络,而无法反映不同作者之间有不同的合作强度的实际情形。本文将署名次序（反映作者在合著论文中不同的贡献度）、合著频次（表征作者之间的合作强度）两个因素引入作者引用指标和合作指标,提出“调和h指数+调和R指数”、“h度+R度”分别测度更加真实客观的引用影响力和合作影响力。实证研究表明,作者传统引用影响力、调和引用影响力、合作影响力指标之间均呈正相关,但相关程度并不高,合作影响力能够反映出区别于引用影响力的另一种角度的影响力,从而建立二维测度框架,从引用和合作两个角度遴选领域高影响力学者,可为相关机构的人才评价和引进提供支持服务。 相似文献
5.
基于作者贡献的合著网络加权模式研究 总被引：1，自引：0，他引：1
文摘社会网络分析方法越来越多地被应用到合著关系研究当中,目前几种合著网络边权计算的方法均存在各自的缺点和不足。本文针对根据合著次数及合著强度计算合著网络边权方法中将文献中各作者之间合著关系做相同处理,而不考虑不同作者之间合著关系强度差异性这一缺点,从作者贡献的角度,引入作者署名次序、通讯作者情况等因素对这种方法进行改进。并对改进前后的结果进行对比分析,结果表明基于作者贡献的合著网络模型比基于作者数量的合著网络模型更好地反映合著状态。 相似文献
6.
基于合著作者贡献大小分配权值的p指数探讨 总被引：1，自引：0，他引：1
[目的/意义] 为了合理平衡合著论文中作者的科研贡献,在总结前人p指数计算方法的基础上,针对合著论文作者署名次序与作者贡献均等问题,提出基于合著作者贡献大小分配权值的p指数方法,以使p指数用于人才评价时更加有效合理。[方法/过程] 以图书情报学领域两位作者的科研论文产出为例,通过数据统计与对比分析得出4种不同p指数方法的计算结果。[结果/结论] 发现只考虑独著和第一作者发文情况的p1指数与不考虑合著只要参与就计一次的p2指数属于极端的处理方式;而按均分合著者权重计算的pa指数忽略了著者署名次序的问题;根据娄策群的作者贡献率等级分配法计算所得的pw指数不仅考虑到作者合著情况,还考虑到对于一篇科研论文处于不同署名位次的作者贡献率不同。因此,根据贡献大小分配权值的pw指数更具有客观合理性。 相似文献
7.
基于社会网络分析方法构建科学数据开放共享领域作者合著网络,并对合著网络的密度、中心性、结构洞和成分指标进行测度分析;在研究核心作者团体的基础上,对该团体的合著网络和研究主题进行分析,揭示出核心作者团体合著网络特点,并挖掘领域内研究主题,以期推动科学数据开放共享研究领域的发展。 相似文献
8.
《图书馆理论与实践》2014,(11)
从整体合作程度、合作模式、国际合作、合作网络演化维度,运用合作度、合作率、不同作者人数的合著文献占比、国际合作中核心作者的国家分布比例以及网络平均度等社会网络分析中的指标,揭示和比较了中美两国合作研究状态的特征和差异,并得出以下四点结论:(1)LIS领域中国合作率高于美国;(2)中国中等团体合著文献突出,美国小团体和极大团体合著文献突出;(3)国际作用对中国LIS领域研究所起的作用更大,对美国的影响相对更小;(4)前后两个时间段对比显示中国LIS领域发展比美国更快。 相似文献
9.
10.
[目的/意义]在科学研究问题越来越复杂、科研合著越来越盛行的大科学时代，迫切需要对论文合著作者进行学术贡献评估和分配，以减少科研人员之间的摩擦，促进科研合作。[方法/过程]分析作者贡献声明的研究和实践现状以及目前合著者贡献率测度方法的功能和不足，结合作者贡献要素声明和作者对不同贡献要素的参与程度，提出并构建一种具有定性性质的合著者贡献率定量测度方法。[结果/结论]该方法不仅改进了既有合著者贡献率测度方法的相关缺陷，而且将文献计量由单篇论文单元深入推进至论文作者的贡献要素单元，提升了文献计量评估指标的精度和效度。案例分析表明，该方法能较客观地反映作者的贡献程度和学术能力状况，具有一定的先进性和适用性。 相似文献
11.
This study aimed to explore the causes, types, and consequences of authorship conflicts among the researchers of selected research institutions in Dhaka, Bangladesh; and to suggest ways to reduce conflicts. A sample of 100 researchers was given a semi‐structured questionnaire; 45 subjects responded. The responses were confidential and anonymous. Over two‐thirds of the respondents were aware of authorship conflicts, and one‐third had actually faced conflicts with their co‐authors. Of them, four faced conflicts with their juniors, while 13 faced conflicts with their seniors or supervisors. The primary causes of such conflicts appear to be unethical claims of authorship, violation of authorship order, and deprivation of authorship. In most cases, the victims became frustrated and had to give up, and avoided a direct clash to safeguard their job. Four respondents claimed to have been victimized for raising their voice. Conflict was never resolved in seven cases. To reduce conflicts, respondents suggested that authorship should be decided before the study begins, order of authorship must be determined according to contribution, and a standard code of authorship should be followed strictly. Authorship conflicts arise among researchers mostly due to what they regard as unethical practice of their co‐authors, supervisors, and department heads in the absence of any formal authorship policy in the institutions. A standard code of authorship, sensitization of researchers to the problem through open discussions and advocacy, and formation of a grievance redress committee are suggested to minimize such conflicts. Although the sample size was small, some of the specific recommendations will be appropriate in many other cases. 相似文献
12.
Ludo Waltman 《Journal of Informetrics》2012,6(4):700-711
There are different ways in which the authors of a scientific publication can determine the order in which their names are listed. Sometimes author names are simply listed alphabetically. In other cases, authorship order is determined based on the contribution authors have made to a publication. Contribution-based authorship can facilitate proper credit assignment, for instance by giving most credits to the first author. In the case of alphabetical authorship, nothing can be inferred about the relative contribution made by the different authors of a publication.In this paper, we present an empirical analysis of the use of alphabetical authorship in scientific publishing. Our analysis covers all fields of science. We find that the use of alphabetical authorship is declining over time. In 2011, the authors of less than 4% of all publications intentionally chose to list their names alphabetically. The use of alphabetical authorship is most common in mathematics, economics (including finance), and high energy physics. Also, the use of alphabetical authorship is relatively more common in the case of publications with either a small or a large number of authors. 相似文献
13.
Ali GAZNI 《Learned Publishing》2015,28(3):195-204
This study investigated changes in the internationality of national publishers' journals for the period 1990–2013. The patterns of foreign and interregional authorship in papers and references of 4,199 journals from 3,529 publishers were analyzed. The results revealed that foreign authorship increased from 36% to 62% during the period, but interregional authorship only grew from 77% to 82%. The growth in internationality is not the same across disciplines and regions of the world. Agricultural sciences, psychiatry/psychology, and economics and business have the least number of foreign authors, while journals in space science, mathematics, and physics have the most. According to the number of both foreign‐authored papers and foreign‐authored citations, clinical medicine is one of the least international fields. Latin America and Middle East publishers have a greater tendency to publish papers from authors in their countries. In contrast, national publishers in North America have become considerably more international over time. Russia, China, and Brazil publish the least number of foreign authored‐papers in their journals, while Switzerland's journals publish the most. 相似文献
14.
15.
16.
17.
为了保护原创作者的著作权,促进学术期刊的健康发展,对科技期刊论文署名不端现象及其法律意义进行分析,并提出风险防范的措施。认为国家应当尽快建立署名不端的判定及惩罚机制,从法律的层面规范期刊作者署名。 相似文献
18.
Melanie Ramdarshan Bold 《Publishing Research Quarterly》2013,29(1):73-92
This paper gives a detailed overview of contemporary authorship in Scotland through the analysis of interviews with and a survey of Scottish authors. These results are compared to previous studies to highlight the changing nature of authorship over the years. Both the survey and interview results paint a pessimistic picture of authorship in the twenty-first century, with the majority of authors earning very little from their writing and depending on alternative avenues to improve their income. Additionally, Scottish authors are not benefiting from the numerous new platforms to exploit their work through, which could help to enhance their income. This is partly because many Scottish authors still have a traditional view of publishing and do not think about their work commercially, and partly because, in many cases, their rights are controlled by their publishers and not widely exploited. This survey also found that Scottish authors with London literary agents earned more income than their counterparts with Scottish agents; however, this was mainly because they were more likely to be published with London publishers. This shows that Scottish publishers are failing their authors by not fostering their rights efficiently and effectively: fostering these rights more effectively could help supplement authors’ income. 相似文献
19.
共同第一作者和作者同等贡献的描述在国外科技期刊中多见,国内期刊中亦有增多趋势,但因此也会带来滥用作者署名权的问题。针对此类问题,认为应主张在接受投稿时就引入作者关于各自贡献的陈述,这有利于审稿人、编者、读者甄别作者排名的真实性,监督作者署名权的使用,维护科研工作的严谨性。 相似文献
20.
从集体作者的署名方式谈对作者的版权保护 总被引：1，自引：0，他引：1
调查、比较了国内外53种学术类和技术类期刊论文中集体作者的署名情况及方式。由结果可见，在集体作者的署名方式上，国内期刊突出的是集体，淡化了个人，而国外一流的医学期刊突出的是论文的主要作者，同时兼顾了集体。 相似文献