共查询到20条相似文献，搜索用时 451 毫秒
1.
This paper reports on a study of social scientists’ information seeking and use of scholarly journals to support scholarly communication and information needs. The goals of the study are: to explore the characteristics of information needs for social scientists; to discuss the importance of scholarly journals to social scientists and their information seeking and access means; to identify article reading patterns of social scientists; and to make comparisons between scholarly journals use and reading patterns of social scientists and other scientists in Taiwan and the USA. The author used a questionnaire survey and interview methods to investigate the information seeking, use and reading of scholarly journals, and article deep reading patterns of social scientists. The target population was social science faculty members from National Cheng-chi University in Taiwan. The article explores the characteristics of information needs for social scientists and shows that scholarly journals are important information resources for university social science faculty. Social science faculty in Taiwan use scholarly journals in multiple languages, mainly English, Chinese, German, and Japanese, which is different from scientists in the United States. In addition, they use electronic journals more than print journals. The number of article readings by social science faculty members was approximately 195 readings per year and nearly 440 h were spent reading per year. In contrast to scientists in the United States, the social scientists in Taiwan read fewer readings, spent more time reading, and read older articles. In addition, the study identifies article reading patterns of social scientists and proposes a six-type taxonomy of article deep reading. The study reports the scholarly journal use and reading behavior model of social scientists and shows there are some differences in scholarly journal seeking and use by social science faculty in Taiwan and scientists in the United States. Further studies of scholarly journal and electronic journal use and reading by social scientists across countries, subject disciplines, and languages of journals are needed. 相似文献
2.
3.
Scholarly article seeking,reading, and use: a continuing evolution from print to electronic in the sciences and social sciences 
下载免费PDF全文
下载免费PDF全文 Electronic journals are now the norm for accessing and reading scholarly articles. This article examines scholarly article reading patterns by faculty in five US universities in 2012. Selected findings are also compared to some general trends from studies conducted periodically since 1977. In the 2012 survey, over three‐quarters (76%) of the scholarly readings were obtained through electronic means and just over half (51%) of readings were read on a screen rather than from a print source or being printed out. Readings from library sources are overwhelmingly from e‐sources. The average number of articles read per month was 20.66, with most articles read by the medical and other sciences, and on average each article was read for 32 minutes. 相似文献
4.
Although scholarly articles play an important role in the work life of academics, specific patterns of seeking and reading scholarly articles vary. Subject discipline of the reader influences many patterns, including amount of reading, format of reading, and average time spent per reading. Faculty members in different disciplines exhibit quite distinct patterns of reading. Medical/health faculty read more than others and mainly for current awareness purposes, while engineering faculty spend more time on average per article reading, and they also read more for research. Other factors that influence some reading patterns include work responsibilities (weighted towards more teaching or more research), age (young faculty are more likely to read on-screen from the open Web) and productivity of the reader, and purpose of the reading (readings for research and writing are more likely to be from a library collection). The ability to predict scholarly article seeking and reading patterns will assist journal editors, publishers, and librarians design better, more targeted journal systems and services. 相似文献
5.
依据中国学科分类国家标准《学科分类与代码》,揭示了我国学术期刊的学科分布状况,并从人均期刊数和论文产出率两个角度对各个学科的期刊进行横向比较和评价,对部分学科还进行了中美两国之间的论文生产率比较研究。结果表明,中国学术期刊存在着学科结构不合理的现象。 相似文献
6.
科技期刊栏目设置是总体设计的一个项目,它可使文稿编排从无序到有序。其目的是便于编辑、检索和阅读。学报类期刊栏目较少;科普类栏目偏重于趣味性;技术类期刊栏目可有多样,如有的按文章属性、有的按内容、或读者对象、或目的、或作者身分分栏。设置栏目要求:突出个性,相对稳定,内涵明确。栏目应界限分明,栏内文章要与栏目适合。论著栏内的文章要有所前进、有所创新。 相似文献
7.
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
8.
Nila A. Sathe Jenifer L. Grady Nunzia B. Giuse 《Journal of the Medical Library Association》2002,90(2):235-243
Purpose: To begin investigating the impact of electronic journals on research processes such as information seeking, the authors conducted a pilot journal-use study to test the hypothesis that patrons use print and electronic journals differently.Methodology: We placed fifteen high-use print titles also available in electronic format behind the circulation desk; patrons were asked to complete a survey upon requesting a journal. We also conducted a parallel survey of patrons using library computers. Both surveys asked patrons to identify themselves by user category and queried them about their journal use.Results: During the month-long study, patrons completed sixty-nine surveys of electronic and ninety surveys of print journal use. Results analysis indicated that fellows, students, and residents preferred electronic journals, and faculty preferred print journals. Patrons used print journals for reading articles and scanning contents; they employed electronic journals for printing articles and checking references. Users considered electronic journals easier to access and search than print journals; however, they reported that print journals had higher quality text and figures.Discussion/Conclusion: This study is an introductory step in examining how electronic journals affect research processes. Our data revealed that there were distinct preferences in format among categories. In addition to collection management implications for libraries, these data also have implications for publishers and educators; current electronic formats do not facilitate all types of uses and thus may be changing learning patterns as well. 相似文献
9.
Using 17 open-access journals published without interruption between 2000 and 2004 in the field of library and information science, this study compares the pattern of cited/citing hyperlinked references of Web-based scholarly electronic articles under various citation ranges in terms of language, file format, source and top-level domain. While the patterns of cited references were manually examined by counting the live hyperlinked-cited references, the patterns of citing references were examined by using the cited by tag in Google Scholar. The analysis indicates that although language, top-level domain, and file format of citations did not differ significantly for articles under different citation ranges, sources of citation differed significantly for articles in different citation ranges. Articles with fewer citations mostly cite less-scholarly sources such as Web pages, whereas articles with a higher number of citations mostly cite scholarly sources such as journal articles, etc. The findings suggest that 8 out of 17 OA journals in LIS have significant research impact in the scholarly communication process. 相似文献
10.
11.
《The Journal of Academic Librarianship》2022,48(1):102484
Although there are at least six dimensions of journal quality, Beall's List identifies predatory Open Access journals based almost entirely on their adherence to procedural norms. The journals identified as predatory by one standard may be regarded as legitimate by other standards. This study examines the scholarly impact of the 58 accounting journals on Beall's List, calculating citations per article and estimating CiteScore percentile using Google Scholar data for more than 13,000 articles published from 2015 through 2018. Most Beall's List accounting journals have only modest citation impact, with an average estimated CiteScore in the 11th percentile among Scopus accounting journals. Some have a substantially greater impact, however. Six journals have estimated CiteScores at or above the 25th percentile, and two have scores at or above the 30th percentile. Moreover, there is considerable variation in citation impact among the articles within each journal, and high-impact articles (cited up to several hundred times) have appeared even in some of the Beall's List accounting journals with low citation rates. Further research is needed to determine how well the citing journals are integrated into the disciplinary citation network—whether the citing journals are themselves reputable or not. 相似文献
12.
《期刊图书馆员》2013,64(1-2):52-63
SUMMARY The thesis that scholarly journals should be treated as public goods is based on five arguments. First, scholarly journal articles have many public good characteristics, and many of their private good characteristics are created by choice. Second, our current system undersupplies students with scholarly journals. Third, the supply chain for journals from publisher to user is burdened by many deadweight losses. Fourth, online publishing might reduce those deadweight losses enough to fund a system freely available to scholars. Finally, treating scholarly journals as public goods can meet the needs of all stakeholders. Explanations of the economic concepts of public good, deadweight loss, and Pareto optima are given to support the arguments. 相似文献
13.
Jill O'Neill 《Learned Publishing》2000,13(2):105-109
The journal impact factor, as a metric developed in the mid‐1960s by Dr Eugene Garfield and Dr Irving Sher, represents the influence that an ‘average article’ published in a specific journal has on the scholarly discipline and audience that it serves. Originally intended to serve as an equalizer for use by the Institute for Scientific Information® (ISI®) in making comparative evaluations of large and small journals in a particular discipline, the impact factor now has numerous applications for publishers, librarians, and researchers. Ideally, the journal impact factor should be seen by publishers as a useful tool in gauging the effectiveness of their publication product in serving the needs of a particular scholarly community. The significance of a journal impact factor, its appropriate usage by the scholarly publishing community and its extension into the electronic environment are discussed. 相似文献
14.
The study explores the publication trends of scholarly journal articles in two core Library and Information Science (LIS) journals indexed under ScienceDirect Database during the period for the period 2000–2010, and for the “Top 25 Hottest Papers” for 2006–2010. It examines and presents an analysis of 1000 research papers in the area of LIS published in two journals: The International Information & Library Review (IILR) and Library & Information Science Research (LISR). The study examines the content of the journals, including growth of the literature, authorship patterns, geographical distributions of authors, distribution of papers by journal, citation pattern, ranking pattern, length of articles, and most cited authors. Collaboration was calculated using Subramanyam's formula, and Lotka's law was used to identify authors' productivity. The results indicated that authors' distributions did not follow Lotka's law. The study identified the eight most productive authors with a high of 19 publications in this field. The findings indicate that these publications experienced rapid and exponential growth in literature production. The contributions by scientists from India are examined. 相似文献
15.
The study explores the publication trends of scholarly journal articles in two core Library and Information Science (LIS) journals indexed under ScienceDirect Database during the period for the period 2000–2010, and for the “Top 25 Hottest Papers” for 2006–2010. It examines and presents an analysis of 1000 research papers in the area of LIS published in two journals: The International Information & Library Review (IILR) and Library & Information Science Research (LISR). The study examines the content of the journals, including growth of the literature, authorship patterns, geographical distributions of authors, distribution of papers by journal, citation pattern, ranking pattern, length of articles, and most cited authors. Collaboration was calculated using Subramanyam's formula, and Lotka's law was used to identify authors' productivity. The results indicated that authors' distributions did not follow Lotka's law. The study identified the eight most productive authors with a high of 19 publications in this field. The findings indicate that these publications experienced rapid and exponential growth in literature production. The contributions by scientists from India are examined. 相似文献
16.
中国作者对发表SCI论文有巨大的需求,但目前SCIE收录的中国期刊数量较少,且总体水平未达到世界平均水平。将SCI-E收录的中国期刊根据语种和论文作者的国籍进行分类后发现:甲类期刊(以中文刊载的论文大于50%)和乙类期刊(发表论文的作者至少50%来自中国,且至少50%的论文以英文形式发表)学术水平未达到国际平均水平,2001—2011年期间变化不大;但乙类期刊是SCI-E收录的中国期刊中的绝大多数。丙类期刊(其刊载的论文至少50%是以英文发表的,且至少50%的论文第一作者为非中国作者)引用指数(JCS)逐年上升,上升幅度明显,2011年超过国际平均水平。说明通过改变语种不能提高期刊的国际影响力。在这3类期刊中,丙类年刊均载文量最低,为117.27篇/刊,2007后呈逐年下降趋势,2011年甚至降至91.07篇/刊。中国被SCI-E收录的期刊数量少,与国内发表SCI论文的巨大需求,以及中国期刊走上国际舞台,发挥更大的学术影响力的需求差距甚远,的确有必要创办更多的英文科技期刊;但是在此过程中,有必要慎重评价SCI-E收录期刊的学术影响力和作用。 相似文献
17.
18.
Jerome K. Vanclay 《Journal of Informetrics》2012,6(1):19-26
Publication patterns of 79 forest scientists awarded major international forestry prizes during 1990-2010 were compared with the journal classification and ranking promoted as part of the ‘Excellence in Research for Australia’ (ERA) by the Australian Research Council. The data revealed that these scientists exhibited an elite publication performance during the decade before and two decades following their first major award. An analysis of their 1703 articles in 431 journals revealed substantial differences between the journal choices of these elite scientists and the ERA classification and ranking of journals. Implications from these findings are that additional cross-classifications should be added for many journals, and there should be an adjustment to the ranking of several journals relevant to the ERA Field of Research classified as 0705 Forestry Sciences. 相似文献
19.
The purpose of this study was to create a substantial body of knowledge about the factors that influence the success of electronic journals, and to share this knowledge with that in the fields of astronomy and astrophysics in order to help facilitate change.Structured questionnaires for users (Academic Members, Post-Doctoral Fellows and Research Scholars) containing 40 different questions, many of which were further subdivided and framed in order to get information on various aspects of the usage of electronic journals. The purpose was to identify the basic minimum infrastructure necessary to provide users access to electronic journals and to facilitate easy response in all major A&A organizations in India.The increasing use of the electronic information-seeking environment has produced changes in the practice of science. Significant research has been conducted already on the impact of new information and communication technologies on scholarly work.This study was limited to astronomy and astrophysics libraries and information centres in India.This paper identifies the information needs of the users. Each community and discipline has its own specific legacy of journal structure, reading, publishing, and researching practices, and it will take trial and error to establish which kinds of e-journals are the most effective and useful.Case study. 相似文献
20.
The journal impact factor (JIF) has been questioned considerably during its development in the past half-century because of its inconsistency with scholarly reputation evaluations of scientific journals. This paper proposes a publication delay adjusted impact factor (PDAIF) which takes publication delay into consideration to reduce the negative effect on the quality of the impact factor determination. Based on citation data collected from Journal Citation Reports and publication delay data extracted from the journals’ official websites, the PDAIFs for journals from business-related disciplines are calculated. The results show that PDAIF values are, on average, more than 50% higher than JIF results. Furthermore, journal ranking based on PDAIF shows very high consistency with reputation-based journal rankings. Moreover, based on a case study of journals published by ELSEVIER and INFORMS, we find that PDAIF will bring a greater impact factor increase for journals with longer publication delay because of reducing that negative influence. Finally, insightful and practical suggestions to shorten the publication delay are provided. 相似文献