共查询到20条相似文献，搜索用时 250 毫秒
1.
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
2.
OA期刊具有竞争力——BioMed Central期刊重获ISI影响因子 总被引：2，自引：0，他引：2
BioMed Central出版的OA期刊最近收到了与传统同领域期刊相比更有竞争力的影响因子.仅有几年发展的高影响因子OA期刊证明:研究文献的OA模式可以更快的速度产生影响,并且使高质量的文章更广泛的传播.…… 相似文献
3.
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
4.
OA期刊已成为科学信息的重要载体,OA期刊网站是OA期刊的网络载体。OA期刊的网络影响力不仅是0A期刊网站影响力的集中体现,同时也是OA期刊学术质量的折射。因此文章从网络计量学角度,采用网络文献量、网页数、站内链接数、WeMl文量、网络影响因子、外总影响因子、链接数、外部链接数、IP访问量、PV页面浏览量、人均页面浏览量11个指标,对483种生物医学OA期刊的网络影响力进行了评价研究。该文为2009年第六期“医学oA期刊”专题文章之一。 相似文献
5.
本文通过对SCIE收录的国际眼科学期刊开放获取（OA）情况和程度的研究发现：完全OA期刊随时间延长被引频次逐渐增长。完全OA、部分OA、非OA期刊文献计量学指标差异不大。与非OA论文相比,OA论文数量、百分比、总被引频次、年均被引频次稍高。OA期刊优势主要体现在被引频次的增长上,OA程度和资源利用度尚低。建议有关部门加大经费支持力度,期刊加强网站建设,提升自身影响力。 相似文献
6.
7.
毛丹 《大学图书情报学刊》2017,35(6):102-107
以DOAJ收录的图情类OA期刊论文为研究对象,运用文献计量学方法从文献增长率、国家和语言分布、出版机构分布、作者合著度、网络影响力、期刊引用率等多个角度,分析图情专业OA期刊发展现状,并通过对高频关键词的统计、论文主题分析等途径,总结国外图情专业研究热点与发展趋势,对我国图情专业科研人员了解国外优秀OA期刊信息,促进我国OA期刊发展具有一定参考价值。 相似文献
8.
学术期刊作为科研论文的重要载体,OA期刊作为一种在线免费取阅、付费发表、经同行评议的学术期刊,其学术质量最为引人关注。文章从引文的角度出发,采用影响因子（IF）百分位数排序、即年指数（lmlnd）百分位数排序、平均IF、平均lmlnd、平均载文量、平均被引频次等指标,对483种生物医学类0A期刊的学术影响力进行了评价研究,并探讨了生物医学与其他学科OA期刊学术影响力的差异。该文为2009年第六期“医学OA期刊”专题文章之一。 相似文献
9.
开发利用互联网上6类OA文献资源 总被引：2，自引：0，他引：2
于新国 《浙江高校图书情报工作》2009,(1)
从OA解读和OA文献资源两方面,对开发利用互联网上的OA期刊、论文、学术会议文献、标准文献、图书、教育视频文献等6类OA文献资源进行了探讨。 相似文献
10.
以<中国期刊全文数据库>为文献来源,运用文献计量学方法并结合文献内容,对我国图书馆绩效评估研究论文进行统计分析,统计内容包括论文的时间分布、期刊分布、作者分布及主题分布等,从而探讨我国图书馆绩效评估研究的现状和存在的问题,以期能对我国图书馆绩效评估今后的研究起到抛砖引玉的作用. 相似文献
11.
《Journal of Informetrics》2007,1(3):239-248
The last few years have seen the emergence of several open access options in scholarly communication which can broadly be grouped into two areas referred to as ‘gold’ and ‘green’ open access (OA). In this article we review the literature examining the relationship between OA status and citation counts of scholarly articles. Early studies showed a correlation between the free online availability or OA status of articles and higher citation counts, and implied causality without due consideration of potential confounding factors. More recent investigations have dissected the nature of the relationship between article OA status and citations. Three non-exclusive postulates have been proposed to account for the observed citation differences between OA and non-OA articles: an open access postulate, a selection bias postulate, and an early view postulate. The most rigorous study to date (in condensed matter physics) showed that, after controlling for the early view postulate, the remaining difference in citation counts between OA and non-OA articles is explained by the selection bias postulate. No evidence was found to support the OA postulate per se; i.e. article OA status alone has little or no effect on citations. Further studies using a similarly rigorous approach are required to determine the generality of this finding. 相似文献
12.
《Journal of Informetrics》2014,8(2):406-418
The journal impact factor is not comparable among fields of science and social science because of systematic differences in publication and citation behavior across disciplines. In this work, a source normalization of the journal impact factor is proposed. We use the aggregate impact factor of the citing journals as a measure of the citation potential in the journal topic, and we employ this citation potential in the normalization of the journal impact factor to make it comparable between scientific fields. An empirical application comparing some impact indicators with our topic normalized impact factor in a set of 224 journals from four different fields shows that our normalization, using the citation potential in the journal topic, reduces the between-group variance with respect to the within-group variance in a higher proportion than the rest of indicators analyzed. The effect of journal self-citations over the normalization process is also studied. 相似文献
13.
《Journal of Informetrics》2014,8(1):175-180
The findings of Bornmann, Leydesdorff, and Wang (2013b) revealed that the consideration of journal impact improves the prediction of long-term citation impact. This paper further explores the possibility of improving citation impact measurements on the base of a short citation window by the consideration of journal impact and other variables, such as the number of authors, the number of cited references, and the number of pages. The dataset contains 475,391 journal papers published in 1980 and indexed in Web of Science (WoS, Thomson Reuters), and all annual citation counts (from 1980 to 2010) for these papers. As an indicator of citation impact, we used percentiles of citations calculated using the approach of Hazen (1914). Our results show that citation impact measurement can really be improved: If factors generally influencing citation impact are considered in the statistical analysis, the explained variance in the long-term citation impact can be much increased. However, this increase is only visible when using the years shortly after publication but not when using later years. 相似文献
14.
运用引文增强技术对《档案管理》的发文和被引数据进行深层关联分析,从施引学科、施引群体、施引机构、学术宣传效果等角度探讨该刊的学术影响力特征及影响因素。本研究发现该刊的学科影响力主要局限在档案学领域,施引机构多集中在高校,该刊的论文价值发现周期偏长,被错引的比例较高,且高频施引者占比较少,建议该刊扩大选题范围,积极吸纳亲缘学科的相关论文;奖励活跃贡献者,提高作者回报率;重视学术宣传工作,降低被误引的概率,从而进一步提升学术影响力。 相似文献
15.
Hajar Sotudeh Hakimeh Arabzadeh Mahdieh Mirzabeigi 《The Journal of Academic Librarianship》2019,45(4):377-385
Hybrid open access journals generally authorize self-archiving along with Author-pays model. Given the dependence of the Author-pays model on APCs paid by authors, it is expected to have a negative association with the free-of-charge Green model. By exploring a sample of 52,150 papers published in 47 Elsevier's hybrid journals, the study compares the OA models' citation performances to non-open access (NOA) model's and investigates the relationship between the quantities of their papers.Three OA groups are identified, including Green-only, APC-only and Green-APC. The OA papers show a citation advantage over the NOA articles, despite their lower number. The mixed APC-Green, gains the highest citation compared to the three other access models. However, the number of Green and APC-funded papers are revealed to have a negative association. Although, the combination of the Green and APC models magnifies the impact of OA papers, the inverse association between the quantities of their papers signifies that the lower number of the latter can be partially explained by the prevalence of the former. The results help academic librarians involved in advocating and managing OA to better understand authors' behaviors towards OA models and adopt a more supportive role for OA according to their preferences. 相似文献
16.
[目的/意义] 针对60年间作者引用行为演变的分析,了解引文评价的局限性,促进学术论文评价方法的发展和完善。[方法/过程] 通过对1957-2017年物理学和哲学代表性期刊的280篇论文的3 314条参考文献和5 222次引文进行识别,判断和统计其在不同年代的引用特征,并讨论引用行为的演变趋势对引文评价的可能影响。[结果/结论] 通过调查发现如下结论：一是期刊论文在参考文献载体类型和年代分布上没有明显变化,但在篇均参考文献量、参考文献文内平均被引用次数、论文的引用认同和引用深度等方面存在明显变化趋势;二是引用行为的变化,使得引文分析作为学术论文评价的依据受到质疑。论文篇均参考文献量的增长以及深度引用与负面引用比重的下降,使得引文评价的参考性减弱。 相似文献
17.
《Journal of Informetrics》2019,13(2):593-604
In the past few decades, there has been increasing interest in public-private collaboration, which has motivated lengthy discussion of the implications of collaboration in general, and co-authorship in particular, for the scientific impact of research. However, despite this strong interest in the topic, there is little systematic knowledge on the relation between public-private collaboration and citation impact. This paper examines the citation impact of papers involving public-private collaboration in comparison with academic research papers. We examine the role of a variety of factors, such as international collaboration, the number of co-authors, academic disciplines, and whether the research is mainly basic or applied. We first examine citation impact for a comprehensive dataset covering all Web of Science journal articles with at least one Danish author in the period 1995–2013. Thereafter, we examine whether citation impact for individual researchers differs when collaborating with industry compared to work only involving academic researchers, by looking at a fixed group of researchers that have both engaged in public-private collaborations and university-only publications. For national collaboration papers, we find no significant difference in citation impact for public-only and public-private collaborations. For international collaboration, we observe much higher citation impact for papers involving public-private collaboration. 相似文献
18.
Henk F. Moed 《Journal of Informetrics》2010,4(3):265-277
This paper explores a new indicator of journal citation impact, denoted as source normalized impact per paper (SNIP). It measures a journal's contextual citation impact, taking into account characteristics of its properly defined subject field, especially the frequency at which authors cite other papers in their reference lists, the rapidity of maturing of citation impact, and the extent to which a database used for the assessment covers the field's literature. It further develops Eugene Garfield's notions of a field's ‘citation potential’ defined as the average length of references lists in a field and determining the probability of being cited, and the need in fair performance assessments to correct for differences between subject fields. A journal's subject field is defined as the set of papers citing that journal. SNIP is defined as the ratio of the journal's citation count per paper and the citation potential in its subject field. It aims to allow direct comparison of sources in different subject fields. Citation potential is shown to vary not only between journal subject categories – groupings of journals sharing a research field – or disciplines (e.g., journals in mathematics, engineering and social sciences tend to have lower values than titles in life sciences), but also between journals within the same subject category. For instance, basic journals tend to show higher citation potentials than applied or clinical journals, and journals covering emerging topics higher than periodicals in classical subjects or more general journals. SNIP corrects for such differences. Its strengths and limitations are critically discussed, and suggestions are made for further research. All empirical results are derived from Elsevier's Scopus. 相似文献
19.
高Altmetrics指标科技论文学术影响力研究 总被引：9，自引：0，他引：9
引入"公平性测试"方法以消除时间窗口对被引次数的影响。以高Altmetrics指标论文作为样本,选取与样本论文发表在同一期刊同一期上前后两篇论文作为参照。利用Altmetric.com、Web of Science分别获取273篇样本及参照论文的Altmetric分数、底层数据值和被引用次数。通过比较分析后发现:Altmetrics和引文数两种指标反映出读者对文献的不同关注方向,底层数据源中大众媒体对于Altmetric分数的影响最明显,高Altmetrics指标论文同时具有较高的学术影响力。作为一种早期指标,高Altmetrics指标在一定程度上能够被视作文章在未来获得高被引的风向标。 相似文献
20.
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