共查询到20条相似文献，搜索用时 234 毫秒
1.
开放存取期刊论文质量和影响力的评价研究 总被引：9，自引：0，他引：9
随机抽取2004年生物学领域影响因子相近的完全OA期刊与非OA期刊各5种,排除评论性和综述性的文章,从论文的影响力、论丈间质量的差异性,作者合作度三个方面,采用平均被引频次.被引频次的极差、平均作者数,论文合著率4个指标进行统计分析,进而研究开放存取模式下论文的学术水平和影响力.研究结果显示,OAJ论文已经达到甚至超过非OAJ论文的质量和影响力. 相似文献
2.
基于CSSCI的《档案学通讯》h指数研究 总被引：1，自引：0，他引：1
《档案学通讯》作为档案学的核心期刊,肩负着促进该学科快速发展的重任。文章以CSSCI为数据源,研究了2000—2006年《档案学通讯》期刊的h指数,并利用灰色关联分析法研究了期刊h指数和核心作者h指数与载文数、被引频次、发表年龄、最高被引频次等制约因素相关度的大小。本研究对于科学地认识和评价该期刊,促进期刊更好更快地发展,更好地推动档案学事业的发展起到有益的帮助。 相似文献
3.
为了探讨开放存取模式下论文的质量和影响力,本文随机抽取2004年生物学领域影响因子相近的完全OA期刊与非OA期刊各5种,排除评论性和综述性的文章,从论文的影响力、论文间质量的差异性、作者合作度3个方面,采用平均被引频次、被引频次的极差、平均作者数、论文合著率4个指标进行了统计分析,进而研究开放存取模式下论文的学术水平和影响力。本文的研究结果显示,OA论文已经达到甚至超过非OA论文的质量和影响力。 相似文献
4.
中国、印度计算机科学领域论文影响力的比较研究 总被引：1，自引：0，他引：1
文章以1999-2008年Science Citation Index--Expanded为数据来源,从发文数量、被引频次、发文期刊的时间分布、期刊影响因子、被引频次等方面对中国和印度两国在计算机科学领域内论文的发文情况进行了比较研究。 相似文献
5.
以中国知网《中国学术期刊网络出版总库》和《中国引文数据库》为统计源,分析2006—2010年国内期刊出版专题研究高被引论文的分布规律。中国知网共收录2006—2010年国内期刊出版专题研究论文5万3 702篇,被引1万4 696篇,被引频次4万773次;前50篇高被引论文总被引频次2 019次,最高被引93次,最低28次,篇均被引40.38次。对50篇高被引论文的研究方向、源期刊及其地区、作者情况进行了统计和分析,以为出版专题的研究和编辑工作提供参考。 相似文献
6.
标题是学术论文的画龙点睛之笔，学术界较少关注论文标题长度与被引频次之间的关系，有必要对其进行深入的研究。以《情报杂志》期刊2017年发表的论文为研究对象，综合采用Mann-Whitney U检验、回归分析和分位数回归研究论文标题长度和被引频次的关系。研究结果表明：标题长度与内容相关带来了其与论文被引频次相关；标题长度较短时论文的平均被引频次较高；较长标题论文的平均被引频次较低；论文标题长度与其被引频次无关。 相似文献
7.
总被引频次作为常用的期刊评价指标，由于涉及到期刊自创办以来所有论文的被引次数，因此其评价时效性不高。为了解决此问题，本文提出采用5年被引频次代替总被引频次来进行评价，并以南京大学CSSCI评价与中国知网CI指数评价为例，基于图书馆情报与文献学CSSCI期刊(2017—2018版)进行了实证研究。结果表明：5年被引频次与总被引频次高度相关，但对排序影响较大；采用5年被引频次会改变CI指数评价的指标相对权重；CSSCI评价的时效性要优于CI指数评价；采用5年被引频次对CSSCI评价的影响小于对CI指数的影响，同时对CSSCI评价与CI指数的统计特征影响不大。建议从提高评价时效性出发，采用5年被引频次代替总被引频次进行评价。图1。表3。参考文献14。 相似文献
8.
9.
采用总被引频次这一衡量期刊学术质量的重要指标,从时间、学科和地域三个维度对2006—2010年《期刊引证报告》()收录的DOAJ期刊总被引频次进行系统分析,考察开放存取期刊的学术质量状况。 相似文献
10.
基于论文发表的普赖斯定律,以5本高被引核心期刊《科学学研究》《科研管理》《科学学与科学技术管理》《中国科技论坛》《研究与发展管理》刊载的1141篇文献为样本,实证检验论文被引频次的影响因素。结果表明：（1）论文被引频次整体程度不高,论文被引频次对刊载时间有较强依赖性的同时,二者之间也存在非线性关系;（2）作者是否合作、论文是否定量研究、论文下载次数、期刊影响因子与论文被引频次之间显著正相关,而期刊年发文量与论文被引频次之间显著负相关,且第一作者所在机构、性别以及论文受到基金资助的数量、期刊主办方等与论文被引频次之间不存在显著相关性。本研究的主要发现是论文特征决定论文被引频次,并得出相关启示,提出研究不足及未来方向。 相似文献
11.
OBJECTIVE: To quantify the impact of Pakistani Medical Journals using the principles of citation analysis. METHODS: References of articles published in 2006 in three selected Pakistani medical journals were collected and examined. The number of citations for each Pakistani medical journal was totalled. The first ranking of journals was based on the total number of citations; second ranking was based on impact factor 2006 and third ranking was based on the 5-year impact factor. Self-citations were excluded in all the three ratings. RESULTS: A total of 9079 citations in 567 articles were examined. Forty-nine separate Pakistani medical journals were cited. The Journal of the Pakistan Medical Association remains on the top in all three rankings, while Journal of College of Physicians and Surgeons-Pakistan attains second position in the ranking based on the total number of citations. The Pakistan Journal of Medical Sciences moves to second position in the ranking based on the impact factor 2006. The Journal of Ayub Medical College, Abbottabad moves to second position in the ranking based on the 5-year impact factor. CONCLUSION: This study examined the citation pattern of Pakistani medical journals. The impact factor, despite its limitations, is a valid indicator of quality for journals. 相似文献
12.
The promotion of scholarly journal articles to journalists and bloggers via the dissemination of press releases generates a positive impact on the number of citations that publicized journal articles receive. Research by John Wiley & Sons, Inc. shows that article‐level publicity efforts and media coverage boosts downloads by an average of 1.8 times and were found to increase citations by as much as 2.0–2.2 times in the articles analyzed in this study. We evaluated scholarly journal articles published in nearly 100 Wiley journals, which were also covered in 296 press releases. The results in this case study suggest a need for greater investment in media support for scholarly journals publishing research that sparks interest to a broad news audience, as it could increase citations. 相似文献
13.
Jerome K. Vanclay 《Journal of Informetrics》2013,7(2):265-271
Analysis of 131 publications during 2006–2007 by staff of the School of Environmental Science and Management at Southern Cross University reveals that the journal impact factor, article length and type (i.e., article or review), and journal self-citations affect the citations accrued to 2012. Authors seeking to be well cited should aim to write comprehensive and substantial review articles, and submit them to journals with a high impact factor which has previously carried articles on the topic. Nonetheless, strategic placement of articles is complementary to, and no substitute for careful crafting of good quality research. Evidence remains equivocal regarding the contribution of an author's prior publication success (h-index) and of open-access journals. 相似文献
14.
《Journal of Informetrics》2023,17(1):101379
We performed a citation analysis on the Web of Science publications consisting of more than 63 million articles and over a billion citations on 254 subjects from 1981 to 2020. We proposed the Article’s Scientific Prestige (ASP) metric and compared this metric to number of citations (#Cit) and journal grade in measuring the scientific impact of individual articles in the large-scale hierarchical and multi-disciplined citation network. In contrast to #Cit, ASP, that is computed based on the eigenvector centrality, considers both direct and indirect citations, and provides steady-state evaluation cross different disciplines. We found that ASP and #Cit are not aligned for most articles, with a growing mismatch amongst the less cited articles. While both metrics are reliable for evaluating the prestige of articles such as Nobel Prize winning articles, ASP tends to provide more persuasive rankings than #Cit when the articles are not highly cited. The journal grade, that is eventually determined by a few highly cited articles, is unable to properly reflect the scientific impact of individual articles. The number of references and coauthors are less relevant to scientific impact, but subjects do make a difference. 相似文献
15.
By examining citations in international relations journal articles published between 2000 and 2005, this study reveals that international relations scholars more heavily rely on books rather than on journals. Less than 2% of the citations are from electronic resources. Materials in foreign languages are utilized insignificantly, with English language citations dominating the research literature. The analysis of subject scatter details the main disciplines that are associated with international relations research. Qualitative scholars cite a higher proportion of monographic literature, while quantitative scholars display a higher journal citation rate. 相似文献
16.
Hamid R. Jamali 《Library & information science research》2018,40(3-4):201-207
In spite of the increasing use of qualitative research methods in library and information studies, it is unclear whether using qualitative methods (grounded theory, ethnography, and phenomenology) results in an above average impact in library and information science (LIS). Articles using any of the three qualitative methods published from 2003 to 2013 and indexed in Web of Science in the category of “Information Science & Library Science” (N?=?299) were studied. The number of citations and Mendeley readers for each article was compared to the other articles published in the same journal and same volume using mean normalised rank (rank-1/articles-1). The results showed no statistically significant difference between the citation rates of qualitative articles with those of other articles. Qualitative articles on average had a smaller Mendeley readership than the other articles did and the difference was statistically significant. Given the increasing interest in qualitative methods, it is suggested that LIS schools in their education programs and journals in their editorial policies should put more emphasis on issues related to the rigour of qualitative research. 相似文献
17.
Journal weighted impact factor: A proposal 总被引：3，自引：0，他引：3
The impact factor of a journal reflects the frequency with which the journal's articles are cited. It is the best available measure of journal quality. For calculation of impact factor, we just count the number of citations, no matter how prestigious the citing journal is. We think that impact factor as a measure of journal quality, may be improved if in its calculation, we not only take into account the number of citations, but also incorporate a factor reflecting the prestige of the citing journals relative to the cited journal. In calculation of this proposed “weighted impact factor,” each citation has a coefficient (weight) the value of which is 1 if the citing journal is as prestigious as the cited journal; is >1 if the citing journal is more prestigious than the cited journal; and is <1 if the citing journal has a lower standing than the cited journal. In this way, journals receiving many citations from prestigious journals are considered prestigious themselves and those cited by low-status journals seek little credit. By considering both the number of citations and the prestige of the citing journals, we expect the weighted impact factor be a better scientometrics measure of journal quality. 相似文献
18.
This study shows how a journal's influence can be calculated by using citations obtained from Google Scholar and other methods even though the journal is not covered by any citation databases. Influence is measured in terms of foreign contributions, ‘equivalent’ immediacy scores of recent articles, and the calculation of citations and ‘equivalent’ impact factor. A total of 580 articles published in the Medical Journal of Malaysia (MJM) between 2004 and 2008 served as the sample. Very few foreign authors contributed to MJM (12.5%), implying its low regional acceptance as a channel for research communication. Immediacy scores for each year indicate citations were received by recently published articles. A total of 1,164 citations were received by 446 of the 580 articles and the main citing sources were journals (1,083) with reasonable h index and impact factor. Yearly impact scores ranged between 0.367 and 0.616. Higher impact factor scores were obtained by older articles. 相似文献
19.
选取中国科技论文与引文数据库中2003—2012年的论文及引文数据,以综合大学学报类和医学综合类期刊的首篇文章为例,从单篇论文评价的角度探讨首篇文章(同行评议质量较高)与同期的总体论文、高h指数论文、高被引论文之间的关系。结果发现:相比同期的其他论文,期刊的首篇文章具有更高的影响力,论文的h指数均值及篇均被引都高于前者;期刊的首篇论文中,38%同时为当期论文中的h指数最高论文,10%为当期论文中的被引频次最高论文,定量评价的高质量论文与同行评议的高品质论文——首篇文章,具有较好的重合度。值得注意的是,这种重合度随着时间的推移在不断增长。 相似文献
20.
影响因子在我国科技期刊评价中的作用分析 总被引：57，自引：9，他引：48
通过分析目前我国科技期刊中作者和期刊自引过度的问题，认为要提高我国科技期刊的影响力，应从期刊评价系统本身、期刊管理及评价部门以及期刊编辑部3个方面加强工作，使影响因子能客观反映出期刊在学术思想传播中的深度和广度，并有效地发挥其评价作用。 相似文献