共查询到20条相似文献，搜索用时 765 毫秒
1.
中美两国医院网站网络影响力指标对比评测研究 总被引：5，自引：0，他引：5
朱雷 《现代图书情报技术》2006,1(3):64-67
采用两种传统的网络影响因子：总网络影响因子（WIFt）、外部网络影响因子（WIFe）以及三种改进后的网络影响因子：门诊量网络影响因子（WIFo）、医务人员网络影响因子（WIFd）、病床数网络影响因子（WIFb）对中、美两国部分综合实力排名靠前的医院网站的网络影响力进行测度和分析，通过WIF值及各种统计学方法判断医院网站在网络空间中影响力的大小是否与医院实力排名存在相关，并根据研究结果探讨网络影响因子是否能作为评判医院类型网站在网络空间影响力大小的指标。 相似文献
2.
An expert ranking of forestry journals was compared with Journal Impact Factors and h-indices computed from the ISI Web of Science and internet-based data. Citations reported by Google Scholar offer an efficient way to rank all journals objectively, in a manner consistent with other indicators. This h-index exhibited a high correlation with the Journal Impact Factor (r = 0.92), but is not confined to journals selected by any particular commercial provider. A ranking of 180 forestry journals is presented, on the basis of this index. 相似文献
3.
《Journal of Informetrics》2022,16(3):101315
In 2021, Clarivate published a new version of the Journal Citation Reports (JCR) including a new indicator. The Journal Citation Indicator (JCI) is a new field-normalized metric at journal-level, which is calculated by averaging the Category Normalized Citation Impact (CNCI) of the journal's articles and reviews published in the preceding three-year period. Unlike the Journal Impact Factor (JIF), it is also calculated for the journals of the Arts & Humanities Citation Index (AHCI) and the Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI), which are now included in the JCR. To better understand this new indicator, this article analyses its main statistical characteristics in comparison with the other JCR indicators using all JCR journals and categories. The results highlight the similarities between the JCI and JIF, with a high Pearson correlation (0.853) and a similar distribution. This correlation is also high and homogeneous in the different categories, both for Science and Social Sciences. The JCI is therefore a perfect complement to the JIF, as well as representing an alternative to resolve the well-known problems of the JCR. 相似文献
4.
[目的/意义] 随着自主创新战略的提出，科技信息和科技情报在国家科技发展中的基础性作用日益受到重视，开展区域创新和经济发展的信息服务研究与实践，构建面向区域创新和经济发展的信息服务方法体系、实施方案，是十分必要的。[方法/过程] 通过对国内外文献情报机构服务区域创新和经济发展的实践调研，以及中国科学院文献情报中心在"十二五"和"十三五"期间面向省级科学院、中国科学院转化中心、地方政府、园区企业开展区域信息服务的整体设计和服务实践与案例分析，总结归纳中国科学院文献情报中心开展区域创新和经济发展知识服务的特色和成效。[结果/结论] 在实践的基础上提出图书馆面向区域创新和产业发展提供信息服务，进一步拓展了图书馆的服务领域，是图书馆发展的一个生长点，并将在服务内容与服务方式上不断发展完善。 相似文献
5.
[目的/意义] 随着自主创新战略的提出，科技信息和科技情报在国家科技发展中的基础性作用日益受到重视，开展区域创新和经济发展的信息服务研究与实践，构建面向区域创新和经济发展的信息服务方法体系、实施方案，是十分必要的。[方法/过程] 通过对国内外文献情报机构服务区域创新和经济发展的实践调研，以及中国科学院文献情报中心在"十二五"和"十三五"期间面向省级科学院、中国科学院转化中心、地方政府、园区企业开展区域信息服务的整体设计和服务实践与案例分析，总结归纳中国科学院文献情报中心开展区域创新和经济发展知识服务的特色和成效。[结果/结论] 在实践的基础上提出图书馆面向区域创新和产业发展提供信息服务，进一步拓展了图书馆的服务领域，是图书馆发展的一个生长点，并将在服务内容与服务方式上不断发展完善。 相似文献
6.
利用Google的PageRank原理进行期刊引文分析,提出期刊在引文网络中的影响力测度指标--引文网络影响力序位(Journal Impact Rank in Citation Net,Impact Rank或IR).通过对118种生物学领域的期刊进行期刊引文网络影响力测度,并将IR结果与JCR提供的影响因子(Impact Factor, IF)值进行统计学分析以考察二者的相关性和差异性.结果表明,IR值与IF值的相关性较弱,其差异性具有统计学意义.分析其原因,IR考虑了引证期刊的权重和期刊间的相互影响,更适于反映期刊在其相关学科或领域的引文网络中的相对影响力;IF值因其实质上是期刊论文篇均被引频次,其计算不考虑期刊之间的相互联系和引证期刊的权威性,因而更适用于期刊自身的纵向评价;IR与IF从两种不同角度评价期刊影响力,可互为补充. 相似文献
7.
The paper introduces a new journal impact measure called The Reference Return Ratio (3R). Unlike the traditional Journal Impact Factor (JIF), which is based on calculations of publications and citations, the new measure is based on calculations of bibliographic investments (references) and returns (citations). A comparative study of the two measures shows a strong relationship between the 3R and the JIF. Yet, the 3R appears to correct for citation habits, citation dynamics, and composition of document types – problems that typically are raised against the JIF. In addition, contrary to traditional impact measures, the 3R cannot be manipulated ad infinitum through journal self-citations. 相似文献
8.
特征因子与影响因子及总被引频次的指标特性比较 ——基于“TOP期刊群”样本的实例分析 总被引：1，自引：0，他引：1
通过特征因子与影响因子及总被引频次的指标比较分析和实例佐证,发现特征因子在跨学科评价方面的优势较突出。对我国的优秀期刊进行特征因子指标分析,得到了与常规影响因子不同的结论:1)我国一流期刊实际的学术影响力远低于国际一流期刊的影响力;2)相对于其他学科,我国物理和化学学科期刊在国际上的学术影响力较大,在影响因子排名处于劣势的我国数学类期刊,在国际上也具有一定的影响力。 相似文献
9.
Twelve Chinese academic journals, indexed by SCI and financed by the National Natural Science Foundation (NNSF), were analysed using the 2000–2003 Total Citations and Impact Factor data from JCR. It is concluded that the quality of Chinese journals is generally low and has remained so despite recent government measures aimed at improvement. Several factors are influential – particularly the Chinese government's policy of encouraging submission to foreign journals. Finance, management, and the academic degree policy are also obstacles. It is suggested that the Chinese government should reconsider its current policies so as to encourage higher quality in domestic periodicals and thus a greater recognition of Chinese journals by the international academic community. 相似文献
10.
N. Yu. Berezkina O. N. Sikorskaya G. S. Khrenova 《Scientific and Technical Information Processing》2011,38(3):189-192
The use of citation indexes, such as the impact factor of the Journal Citation Reports, the Scopus SJR (SCImago Journal Rank)
and the SNIP (Source Normalized Impact per Paper) indicators, as well as the impact factor of the Russian Scientific Citation
Index, is investigated in order to qualitatively assess the content of scientific information resources that are available
at the Central Science Library of the National Academy of Sciences of Belarus. 相似文献
11.
《Journal of Informetrics》2014,8(1):13-24
The time evolution of mean received citations is calculated on a sample of journals from two ISI subject categories (“Chemistry, multidisciplinary”, ISI Science Edition, and “Management”, ISI Social Science edition) with the use of an original methodology. Mean received citations are plotted against the time gap in years existing between publication of the cited article and received citations. For most Chemistry journals in the sample the maximum number of average received citations occurs two years after publication, and then a decrease is experimented. Some peculiar cases present a different trend. Management journals, conversely, do not present in most cases a peak of citations: average received citations instead grow from year of publication to the age of 10 years (maximum time gap studied). A subsample of journals show similar results for longer time series (up to 23 years). Medians of average received citations per year partly show a similar behavior. Results suggest that citedness follows very different trends in very different fields, and partly suggest why differences in Journal Impact Factor exist between different categories. At the end of the work conclusions are drawn, together with suggestions for future research. 相似文献
12.
Ugo Finardi 《Journal of Informetrics》2013,7(2):357-370
Since its introduction, the Journal Impact Factor has probably been the most extensively adopted bibliometric indicator. Notwithstanding its well-known strengths and limits, it is still widely misused as a tool for evaluation, well beyond the purposes it was intended for. In order to shed further light on its nature, the present work studies how the correlation between the Journal Impact Factor and the (time-weighed) article Mean Received Citations (intended as a measure of journal performance) has evolved through time. It focuses on a sample of hard sciences and social sciences journals from the 1999 to 2010 time period. Correlation coefficients (Pearson's Coefficients as well as Spearman's Coefficients and Kendall's τα) are calculated and then tested against several null hypotheses. The results show that in most cases Journal Impact Factors and their yearly variations do not display a strong correlation with citedness. Differences also exist among scientific areas. 相似文献
13.
《Journal of Informetrics》2022,16(3):101313
Considerably little effort has been devoted to systematically exploring the landscape of government-funded innovation schemes, leaving policymakers and academics little empirical evidence with which to grasp the overall situation of national R&D funding strategies. In the United States (US), patents with a government right or financial interest are flagged, offering a window through which we can examine the landscape of today's patterns of government support for innovation. We conduct the examination from the perspectives of the leading government agencies, the promotor-recipient relationship, and the common concerns of different participants. The results show that the R&D project funding by federal agencies has, among other factors, contributed to the growth in the number of patent records. The Departments of Defense (DoD), Energy (DoE), and Health and Human Services (HHS), and the National Science Foundation (NSF) have issued the most funding and hold rights to more patent records than any other agencies. Moreover, reforms to the US patent system made 40 years ago to afford more protection to non-government assignees appear to have significantly impacted patenting activity. Universities, companies, and individuals have become far more active in fulfilling government-funded projects, with remarkable innovations as a result. In recent years, funding priorities have shifted toward research in biomedicine, fields related to human life, and computer science. However, the four dominant agencies responsible for most government funding differ in their investment priorities and frequently adjust which areas of innovation they support. This study is among the first attempts to support the landscape of the public-invested innovation using the full government-subsidized patent dataset. The analyses in this paper are instructive in understanding the dynamics of US government funding for innovation and informing effective policymaking around innovation. 相似文献
14.
This report is based on research findings of a National Science Foundation (NSF)-funded study conducted by the Philadelphia/Camden Informal Science Education Collaborative (PISEC), which consists of four institutions: The Franklin Institute Science Museum, the New Jersey State Aquarium, The Academy of Natural Sciences, and the Philadelphia Zoological Garden. The first year's study addressed the question “How can we identify and measure family learning in science museums?” It documented a relationship between learning levels and observable behaviors. On the basis of coding family conversations and interview data for level of learning, we see that families do learn from exhibits and that the level of learning is related to specific observed behaviors. Grouping these behaviors as performance indicators provides a useful measure of exhibit learning. 相似文献
15.
《Journal of Informetrics》2014,8(2):421-430
Unlike Impact Factors (IF), Article Influence (AI) scores assign greater weight to citations that appear in highly cited journals. The natural sciences tend to have higher citation rates than the social sciences. We might therefore expect that relative to IF, AI overestimates the citation impact of social science journals in subfields that are related to (and presumably cited in) higher-impact natural science disciplines. This study evaluates that assertion through a set of simple and multiple regressions covering seven social science disciplines: anthropology, communication, economics, education, library and information science, psychology, and sociology. Contrary to expectations, AI underestimates 5IF (five-year Impact Factor) for journals in science-related subfields such as scientific communication, science education, scientometrics, biopsychology, and medical sociology. Journals in these subfields have low AI scores relative to their 5IF values. Moreover, the effect of science-related status is considerable—typically 0.60 5IF units or 0.50 SD. This effect is independent of the more general finding that AI scores underestimate 5IF for higher-impact journals. It is also independent of the very modest curvilinearity in the relationship between AI and 5IF. 相似文献
16.
《Government Information Quarterly》1996,13(2):175-186
With budget cuts looming, Federal agencies are revisiting user fees for information products. The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 provides for user fees no higher than the cost of information dissemination. Federal agencies are enjoined from making a profit on their information products and permitted only to recover costs. The real question is how much value agencies should add to their information strictly for the public's use. Practical considerations such as the administrative costs of fees and legal authority to receive revenues condition an agency's decision to begin user fees. Various factors such as allowable costs and differential pricing must be considered in computing users' fees. The author suggests an action strategy for agencies contemplating information user fees and concludes that coming budget cuts will lead to increased employment of user fees by Federal agencies. 相似文献
17.
我国四大引文数据库比较分析 总被引：22，自引：0，他引：22
本文针对目前最常用的四个引文数据库 :《中国科学引文数据库》、《中国科技论文与引文数据库》、《中文社会科学引文索引》、《中国学术期刊全文数据库》 ,从数据库收录数据、检索途径、检索功能等方面进行了比较分析 ,并针对使用中存在的一些问题 ,对数据库的改进提出了建议。 相似文献
18.
Zahiruddin Khurshid 《期刊图书馆员》2013,64(1):81-98
This research study evaluates the quality of articles published by Saudi and expatriate authors in foreign Library and Information Science (LIS) journals using three popular metrics for ranking journals—Journal Impact Factor (JIF), SCImago Journal Rank (SJR), and Google Scholar Metrics (GSM). The reason for using multiple metrics is to see how closely or differently journals are ranked by the three different methods of citation analysis. However, the 2012 JIF list of journals is too small, almost half the size of the SJR and GSM lists, which inhibited one-to-one comparison among the impact factors of the thirty-six journals selected by Saudi authors for publishing articles. Only seventeen journals were found common to all the three lists, limiting the usefulness of the data. A basic problem is that Saudi LIS authors generally lack the level of competency in the English language required to achieve publication in the most prominent LIS journals. The study will have implications for authors, directors, and deans of all types of academic libraries; chairmen and deans of library schools; and the Saudi Library Association. Hopefully these entities will take necessary steps to prepare and motivate both academics and practicing librarians to improve the quality of their research and publications and thus get published in higher ranked journals. 相似文献
19.
20.
《Library Acquisitions: Practice & Theory #》1988,12(3-4):363-378
A review of five domestic approval plan vendors was organized and conducted during 1986 and 1987 to meet several objectives. These objectives were: (1) to respond to some staff dissatisfaction with the vendor's service; (2) to determine if the budget was being utilized effectively; and (3) to decide if another vendor could provide better service. After completing a literature review, the Collection Development Resource Allocation Subcommittee developed a checklist which was sent to vendors to guide their onsite presentations. Members of the Acquisitions Department, the Humanities and Social Sciences Department, the Science and Technology Department and the subcommittee completed an evaluation form following each vendor's presentation. Staff also had the opportunity to provide an open-ended written response after all vendor visits were completed. The evaluation forms were tabulated and telephone evaluations were conducted with other libraries currently using one or more of the vendors. The Subcommittee and three department heads used the information obtained through these steps to recommend a change in vendors. 相似文献