| Altmetrics视角下的科研院校学术影响力综合评价研究 |
| |
| 引用本文： | 王菲菲,李佳慧,黄雅雯,王雨薇.Altmetrics视角下的科研院校学术影响力综合评价研究[J].现代情报,2009,40(2):132-140. |
| |
| 作者姓名： | 王菲菲 李佳慧 黄雅雯 王雨薇 |
| |
| 作者单位： | 北京工业大学经济与管理学院, 北京 100124 |
| |
| 基金项目： | 国家社会科学基金青年项目"基于多维信息计量分析的学术影响力综合评价研究"（项目编号：15CTQ023）；广东省自然科学基金项目"面向生物医药领域的前沿技术预判方法论与模型构建研究"（项目编号：2018A030313695）。 |
| |
| 摘 要： | 目的/意义] 伴随着网络化的科学交流，新的计量指标的提出，科研院校评价方法也随之改变。本文旨在探讨Altmetrics视角下科研院校学术影响力综合评价的可行途径，并以医学信息学领域为例进行实证研究，进而为院校影响力的全面综合判定提供参考。方法/过程] 融合Altmetric.com和Web of Science两类数据源，编程并筛选获取627个院校的Altmetrics数据和引文数据，选取7个计量指标进行相关性分析。再使用熵权法和层次分析法给指标赋权，并在此基础上，用TOPSIS方法分别计算出主观和客观的院校得分，并与QS排名作对比。结果/结论] 指标之间存在中强相关性，主观和客观赋权方法所得的院校综合排名QS医学与生命科学排名，三者具有较强一致性，进而验证了Altmetrics指标在院校影响力评价中的有效性。又分别把层次分析-TOPSIS和熵权-TOPSIS与QS进行了相关性检验，就整体角度来讲，熵权-TOPSIS的评价结果更好。此外，根据两个评价方法和QS前30院校之间的交集，筛选出了各方面综合表现俱佳的10所院校，美国院校占绝大多数。且根据与QS交集个数，在高水平院校中，层次分析-TOPSIS评价效果更好。
|
| 关 键 词： | 学术影响力评价 Altmetrics 医学信息学 熵权法 层析分析法 TOPSIS |
Research on Comprehensive Evaluation of Academic Influence of Scientific Research Institutions from the Perspective of Altmetrics |
| |
| Authors: | Wang Feifei Li Jiahui Huang Yawen Wang Yuwei |
| |
| Institution: | School of Economics and Management, Beijing University of Technology, Beijing 100124, China |
| |
| Abstract: | Purpose/Meaning] With the scientific exchange of networking and the introduction of new measurement indicators,the evaluation methods of scientific institutions have also changed.This paper aimed to explore the feasible ways to comprehensively evaluate the academic influence of scientific research institutions from the perspective of Altmetrics,and to conduct empirical research in the field of medical informatics,and to provide reference for the comprehensive judgment of institutional influence.Method/Process] Combining Altmetric.com and Web of Science data sources,we programed and filtered the Altmetrics data and citation data of 627 institutions,and selected 7 metrology indicators for correlation analysis.Then the entropy weight method and the analytic hierarchy process were used to assign weights to the indicators.On this basis,the subjective and objective institutional scores were calculated by the methods of TOPSIS,and compared with the QS rankings.Results/Conclusions] There was a strong correlation between the indicators.The subjective and objective weighting methods had a comprehensive ranking of QS medical and life sciences rankings.The three had strong consistency,which further validated the Altmetrics indicators in institutional impact evaluation.The correlation analysis between analytic hierarchy-TOPSIS and entropy weight-TOPSIS and QS was carried out.On the whole,the evaluation result of entropy weight-TOPSIS was better.Furthermore,basing the intersection of two models,this paper selected 10 excellent institutions and most of them were from America.And based on the number of intersections with QS,the analytic hierarchy-TOPSIS evaluation was better when evaluating high-level institutions. |
| |
| Keywords: | scholarly impact evaluations Altmetrics medical informatics entropy weight method AHP TOPSIS |
|
| 点击此处可从《现代情报》浏览原始摘要信息 |
| 点击此处可从《现代情报》下载免费的PDF全文 |
