我国生态文明建设的文献计量学分析     

刘娟 《黑龙江科技信息》2015,(20)

以中国期刊全文数据库为数据源,采用定量分析的方法,通过对1993-2012年我国生态文明研究论文的时间分布、作者、关键词、学科类别方面进行统计分析,得出了大量翔实可靠的数据,为我国生态文明研究提供参考资源。  相似文献   

Research characteristics on health law in China: Social network analysis     

Qing Chang  Chao Long  Mark A. Hall  Zhiguang Duan 《The Journal of Academic Librarianship》2019,45(2):126-136

To determine the nature and extent of the emerging field of “health law” scholarship in China, we retrieved 2956 publications about various aspects of health law published up through 2014 in 268 journals from the “Chinese Social Science Citation Index” and from the list of Chinese “Core Journals” maintained by the Peking University Library. By bibliometric analysis, we observed some interesting results which were different from our expectations. The collaboration network among Chinese health law (CHL) authors was relatively small, loose, unstable and early in its development. Kan Tian and Lixin Yang were leading authors, Renmin University of China was the primary institution, and Beijing was the predominant region studying Chinese health law (CHL). Kan Tian ranked 1st in the collaboration network and Lixin Yang published the most number of articles on CHL. Comprehensive universities made up the majority of institutions studying CHL, while medical colleges did not focus on health law research, possibly due to medical schools focusing mainly on clinical education and not attaching as much importance to social and humanistic aspects of medicine. Food safety, health administration, and the general principles of civil law were the main areas of focus in CHL research, which is basically in line with what we expected.  相似文献   

广东基础研究竞争力探究：基础研究产出视角     

陈恩强  黄学文  周虹  霍明 《科技管理研究》2022,(12):91-98

高水平科研论文是体现基础研究成果的主要载体。为科学把握广东在国内的科技竞争力地位,利用Access、CiteSpace等工具和波士顿矩阵分析方法,从论文产出、卓越论文、国际合作论文和学科优势等维度对2010—2019年广东SCI论文情况进行定量定性分析。结果发现：广东SCI论文数量全国排名第四、增幅居全国首位,论文被引用强度明显提升;但广东在SCI论文数量和质量,以及基础研究产出和学科建设方面,与北京、上海等地存在一定差距,发展仍较为滞后。广东建设更高水平的科技创新强省,要进一步加强对基础研究的重视、引入和培育优秀科技人员、再创学科新优势和打造高水平科技期刊等学术交流平台。  相似文献   

The balance of knowledge flows     

Giovanni Abramo  Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo  Massimiliano Carloni 《Journal of Informetrics》2019,13(1):1-9

  相似文献   

Do altmetrics assess societal impact in a comparable way to case studies? An empirical test of the convergent validity of altmetrics based on data from the UK research excellence framework (REF)     

Lutz Bornmann  Robin Haunschild  Jonathan Adams 《Journal of Informetrics》2019,13(1):325-340

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   

Measuring scientific contributions with modified fractional counting     

Gunnar Sivertsen  Ronald Rousseau  Lin Zhang 《Journal of Informetrics》2019,13(2):679-694

We develop and propose a new counting method at the aggregate level for contributions to scientific publications called modified fractional counting (MFC). We show that, compared to traditional complete-normalized fractional counting, it eliminates the extreme differences in contributions over time that otherwise occur between scientists that mainly publish alone or in small groups and those that publish with large groups of co-authors. As an extra benefit we find that scientists in different areas of research turn out to have comparable average contributions to scientific articles. We test the method on scientists at Norway’s largest universities and find that, at an aggregate level, it indeed supports comparability across different co-authorship practices as well as between areas of research. MFC is thereby useful whenever the research output from institutions with different research profiles are compared, as e.g., in the Leiden Ranking. Finally, as MFC is actually a family of indicators, depending on a sensitivity parameter, it can be adapted to the circumstances.  相似文献   

On the Shapley value and its application to the Italian VQR research assessment exercise     

Camil Demetrescu  Francesco Lupia  Angelo Mendicelli  Andrea Ribichini  Francesco Scarcello  Marco Schaerf 《Journal of Informetrics》2019,13(1):87-104

Research assessment exercises have now become common evaluation tools in a number of countries. These exercises have the goal of guiding merit-based public funds allocation, stimulating improvement of research productivity through competition and assessing the impact of adopted research support policies. One case in point is Italy's most recent research assessment effort, VQR 2011–2014 (Research Quality Evaluation), which, in addition to research institutions, also evaluated university departments, and individuals in some cases (i.e., recently hired research staff and members of PhD committees). However, the way an institution's score was divided, according to VQR rules, between its constituent departments or its staff members does not enjoy many desirable properties well known from coalitional game theory (e.g., budget balance, fairness, marginality). We propose, instead, an alternative score division rule that is based on the notion of Shapley value, a well known solution concept in coalitional game theory, which enjoys the desirable properties mentioned above. For a significant test case (namely, Sapienza University of Rome, the largest university in Italy), we present a detailed comparison of the scores obtained, for substructures and individuals, by applying the official VQR rules, with those resulting from Shapley value computations. We show that there are significant differences in the resulting scores, making room for improvements in the allocation rules used in research assessment exercises.  相似文献   

When research assessment exercises leave room for opportunistic behavior by the subjects under evaluation     

《Journal of Informetrics》2019,13(3):830-840

This study inserts in the stream of research on the perverse effects that PBRF systems can induce in the subjects evaluated. The authors’ opinion is that more often than not, it is the doubtful scientific basis of the evaluation criteria that leave room for opportunistic behaviors. The work examines the 2004–2010 Italian national research assessment (VQR) to test the lack of possible opportunistic behavior by universities in order to limit the penalization of their performance (and funding) due to the presence of scientifically unproductive professors in faculty. In particular, institutions may have favored “gift authorship” practices. The analysis thus focuses on the output of professors who were unproductive in the VQR publication window, but became productive (“new productives”) in the following five years. A number of universities show a higher than average share of publications by new productives that are in co-authorship exclusively with colleagues from the same university. Although this might be thought to reflect opportunistic behavior by universities, the empirical evidence does not support this assumption.  相似文献   

评析工具书对图书馆、情报与文献学科学术发展的影响     

贾洁 《图书馆工作与研究》2011,(8):70-72

本文借助《中文社会科学引文索引》(2000-2007)数据,利用引文分析法,对图书馆、情报与文献学学科论文引用的图书进行了统计,推出该学科领域最具学术影响力的21种工具书。通过简要介绍这些著作的内容,并结合来源文献主题对这些著作被引情况进行分析,以反映这些著作在本领域内的学术影响。  相似文献   

基矛科研绩效框架（REF）的三种文献计量模式     

邓荔萍 《江苏图书馆学报》2011,(11):46-49

科研绩效框架（REF）是英国政府提出的一种评估科研的全新理念。论文概述REF评价的主客体,并从精确性、成本效益、行为动机三方面对三种文献计量模式进行比较分析,然后论述其对未来评估体系的影响,认为REF中的引文分析不仅给年轻科研人员带来不公平的影响,而且不适用于所有学科,对不同学科的评价也有局限性。  相似文献