共查询到20条相似文献，搜索用时 687 毫秒
1.
文章以2016JCR中SSCI收录信息科学与图书馆学学科期刊为来源数据,采用Spearman分析2年影响因子百分位、5年影响因子百分位和他引影响因子百分位与WoS数据库其他文献计量学指标、与h指数及累积h指数、与Scopus数据指标的相关度的不同.5年影响因子百分位与WoS数据库计量指标总被引频次、5年影响因子、被引半衰期、论文影响分值、引用半衰期、特征因子和标准特征因子的相关度高于2年影响因子百分位和他引影响因子百分位;5年影响因子百分位与相同引证时间窗口h指数、累积h指数全部表现为最强相关性,与Scopus数据库计量指标CiteScore、SNIP和SJR均表现显著相关性.5年影响因子百分位对期刊的评价效力更高,更适用于期刊的学术评价. 相似文献
2.
期刊评价指标实证研究 总被引：1，自引：0，他引：1
本文选取F1000数据库中免疫学与生物信息学论文近2000篇,通过相关分析、聚类分析以及因子分析将对应260种期刊的影响因子、5年期影响因子、特征因子、论文影响分值、即时指数、SJR、SNIP、期刊h-指数进行相关性检验及分类,并对各项指标与同行评议结果即F1000因子进行相似性比较.结果表明各项指标虽源于WoS和Scopus不同数据库,计算方法也不尽相同,但其间具有较好的一致性,从而为WoS与Scopus在科学评价中的可选择性与替代性提供依据.本文论述中结合期刊评价进化历程,并通过各项指标优缺点的剖析,指出期刊评价的发展趋向. 相似文献
3.
通过对比F1000因子与被引频次、F1000因子与期刊评价指标,并对主要指标进行相关性分析,来验证同行评议与引文分析间的相关性。结果表明,F1000因子与被引频次呈正相关性,即专家打分与被引频次变动方向相同;但也存在专家打分高的论文被引频次低,而专家打分低的论文被引频次高的事实。相关性分析的结果表明：在特征因子、SNIP等主要指标中,SJR、IF与专家评议值相关度最大。 相似文献
4.
基于F1000与WoS的同行评议与文献计量相关性研究 总被引：1，自引：1，他引：0
为比较同行评议与文献计量方法在科学评价中的有效性及相关性,选取F1000以及Web of Science数据库,采用SPSS16.0软件,将近2000篇论文的F1000因子与Web of Science数据库中指标进行相关性比较。结果显示,F1000因子与统计区间内的被引频次呈显著正相关,同时一些F1000因子很高的论文并没有高频被引,反之亦然。结论指出:从统计学的视角,文献计量指标与同行评议结果具有正向相关性,但是无论是同行评议还是文献计量,单独作为科学评价标准都会有失偏颇,以引文分析为代表的定量指标与同行评议方法的结合将是未来科学评价的主流。 相似文献
5.
为了探讨同行评议、影响计量学以及传统文献计量指标在科学评价中的有效性,本文选取F1000、Mendeley以及Web of Science、Google Scholar数据库,采用SPSS 19.0软件,将心理学与生态学的1,3篇论文的同行评议结果即F1000因子、Mendeley阅读统计、期刊影响因子,以及Web of Science、Google Scholar数据库中被引频次进行相关分析。结果表明:同行评议结果、传统引文分析指标以及以Mendeley为代表的影响计量指标具有低度正相关性,这意味着上述指标在科学评价中审视视角的不同以及数字时代科学评价的多维构成;心理学筛选数据中F1000因子与期刊影响因子相关度几近为0,这一结论进一步证实了期刊影响因子与单篇论文影响力的严重背离;生态学与心理学指标相关分析结果的不同折射出科学评价中自然科学、社会科学的差异。图3。表4。参考文献10。 相似文献
6.
通过选取不同的数据源和分析方法探究Altmetrics文献计量方式对传统的引文计量方式的影响,以及这些计量指标如何评价单篇论文的影响力。结合ESI数据库热点文章的被引频次与Scopus平台提供的Altmetrics各项计量指标,尝试利用SPSS统计软件来分析传统的引文评价指标与Altmetrics各评价指标之间的相关性和差异性。通过研究分析发现:以引文为评价基础的ESI热点文章并不一定对应Altmetrics的高分值文献;进一步的研究从评价论文影响力的5个指标中简化为2个公因子——社交传媒因子和学术引用因子,可从不同群体对文献的不同传播利用方式来评价一篇论文的影响力;不同出版模式的文献在各评价指标上也有显著的差异。 相似文献
7.
8.
为了验证《中国学术期刊(光盘版)》电子杂志社提出的新型期刊评价指标——期刊影响力指数(Journal Clout Index,CI)的科学性,首先采用JCR数据分析影响因子(IF)与5年影响因子(IF5)、IF与即年指标(IM)、IF与总被引频次(TC)之间的相关性,得出结论:IF、IF5、IM是相关性显著的同类指标,IF与TC的相关性较弱;因而认为,TC和IF是可用来评价期刊影响力的主要指标,基于这2个指标的综合评价指标——期刊影响力指数(CI)具有合理性.进一步实证分析了CI这一综合指标对国际期刊的排序结果比采用单一指标——影响因子(IF)排序更符合实际经验认识. 相似文献
9.
科技期刊国际影响力评价指标研究 总被引：6，自引：1，他引：6
分析当前我国学术交流国际化与中国期刊走出去的差距及成因,提出一个评价我国学术期刊国际影响力的指标——期刊“国际影响力指数CI”.通过分析主要的定量评价指标——影响因子、总被引频次及其他指标的意义和作用,探讨基于他引总被引频次、他引影响因子“线性叠加”的综合排序方法与“双指标归一化向量平权统计模型”的优劣,提出按后一种算法得到的期刊CI是一种更科学、全面反映学术期刊影响力的综合指标.依据《中国学术期刊国际引证报告(2014年版)》的数据,讨论我国学术期刊与WOS收录期刊的相对水平与差距. 相似文献
10.
11.
Many studies demonstrate differences in the coverage of citing publications in Google Scholar (GS) and Web of Science (WoS). Here, we examine to what extent citation data from the two databases reflect the scholarly impact of women and men differently. Our conjecture is that WoS carries an indirect gender bias in its selection criteria for citation sources that GS avoids due to criteria that are more inclusive. Using a sample of 1250 U.S. researchers in Sociology, Political Science, Economics, Cardiology and Chemistry, we examine gender differences in the average citation coverage of the two databases. We also calculate database-specific h-indices for all authors in the sample. In repeated simulations of hiring scenarios, we use these indices to examine whether women's appointment rates increase if hiring decisions rely on data from GS in lieu of WoS. We find no systematic gender differences in the citation coverage of the two databases. Further, our results indicate marginal to non-existing effects of database selection on women's success-rates in the simulations. In line with the existing literature, we find the citation coverage in WoS to be largest in Cardiology and Chemistry and smallest in Political Science and Sociology. The concordance between author-based h-indices measured by GS and WoS is largest for Chemistry followed by Cardiology, Political Science, Sociology and Economics. 相似文献
12.
Previous research has shown that citation data from different types of Web sources can potentially be used for research evaluation. Here we introduce a new combined Integrated Online Impact (IOI) indicator. For a case study, we selected research articles published in the Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology (JASIST) and Scientometrics in 2003. We compared the citation counts from Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus with five online sources of citation data including Google Scholar, Google Books, Google Blogs, PowerPoint presentations and course reading lists. The mean and median IOI was nearly twice as high as both WoS and Scopus, confirming that online citations are sufficiently numerous to be useful for the impact assessment of research. We also found significant correlations between conventional and online impact indicators, confirming that both assess something similar in scholarly communication. Further analysis showed that the overall percentage for unique Google Scholar citations outside the WoS were 73% and 60% for the articles published in JASIST and Scientometrics, respectively. An important conclusion is that in subject areas where wider types of intellectual impact indicators outside the WoS and Scopus databases are needed for research evaluation, IOI can be used to help monitor research performance. 相似文献
13.
Bibliometric analysis is increasingly used to evaluate and compare research performance across geographical regions. However, the problem of missing information from author addresses has not attracted sufficient attention from scholars and practitioners. This study probes the missing data problem in the three core journal citation databases of Web of Science (WoS). Our findings reveal that from 1900 to 2015 over one-fifth of the publications indexed in WoS have completely missing information from the address field. The magnitude of the problem varies greatly among time periods, citation databases, document types, and publishing languages. The problem is especially serious for research in the sciences and social sciences published before the early 1970s and remains significant for recent publications in the arts and humanities. Further examinations suggest that many records with completely missing address information do not represent scholarly research. Full-text scanning of a random sample reveals that about 40% of the missing address articles have some address information that is not indexed in WoS. This study also finds that the problem of partially missing address information for U.S. research has diminished dramatically since 1998. The paper ends by providing some discussion and tentative remedies. 相似文献
14.
科学计量可视化软件的对比与数据预处理研究 总被引：2，自引：0，他引：2
从软件运行平台、数据来源、数据文件格式要求、数据导入规模与处理规模等角度对10款科学计量软件（Bibexcel、Bicomb、CiteSpace、HistCite、NetDraw、Pajek、SATI、SPSS、Ucinet、VOSviewer）的数据预处理要求进行比较,发现：CNKI、万方、CSSCI和WoS数据库的数据可由不同的软件处理;不同的软件仅能处理相应格式的Text、Excel、Html和其他文件格式的文件;软件不同,所能处理的数据量也有所差别。 相似文献
15.
Jiang Li Mark Sanderson Peter Willett Michael Norris Charles Oppenheim 《Journal of Informetrics》2010,4(4):554-563
This paper studies the correlations between peer review and citation indicators when evaluating research quality in library and information science (LIS). Forty-two LIS experts provided judgments on a 5-point scale of the quality of research published by 101 scholars; the median rankings resulting from these judgments were then correlated with h-, g- and H-index values computed using three different sources of citation data: Web of Science (WoS), Scopus and Google Scholar (GS). The two variants of the basic h-index correlated more strongly with peer judgment than did the h-index itself; citation data from Scopus was more strongly correlated with the expert judgments than was data from GS, which in turn was more strongly correlated than data from WoS; correlations from a carefully cleaned version of GS data were little different from those obtained using swiftly gathered GS data; the indices from the citation databases resulted in broadly similar rankings of the LIS academics; GS disadvantaged researchers in bibliometrics compared to the other two citation database while WoS disadvantaged researchers in the more technical aspects of information retrieval; and experts from the UK and other European countries rated UK academics with higher scores than did experts from the USA. 相似文献
16.
H指数和类H指数的机理分析与实证研究导引 总被引：9，自引：0，他引：9
讨论了h指数和类h指数的形成机理,提出基于国际WoS、JCR、ESI三大数据库和国内CSTPC、CSSCI两大数据库,利用SPSS等支持软件通过数据实验归纳发现新的类h指数并与h指数进行比较的实证思想。作为2005年国际上新提出的评价指标,h指数和类h指数具有发展成为下一代核心评价参数的可能,因而对h指数和类h指数进行系统研究具有重大现实意义和学术价值。 相似文献
17.
《Journal of Informetrics》2014,8(4):912-916
This paper examined the citation impact of Chinese- and English-language articles in Chinese-English bilingual journals indexed by Scopus and Web of Science (WoS). Two findings were obtained from comparative analysis: (1) Chinese-language articles were not biased in citations compared with English-language articles, since they received a large number of citations from Chinese scientists; (2) a Chinese-language community was found in Scopus, in which Chinese-language articles mainly received citations from Chinese-language articles, but it was not found in WoS whose coverage of Chinese-language articles is only one-tenth of Scopus. The findings suggest some implications for academic evaluation of journals including Chinese-language articles in Scopus and WoS. 相似文献
18.
[目的/意义] 鉴于Scopus、Web of Science(WoS)与Google Scholar(GS)3个单源数据库在计量学研究和应用中的局限,发展综合利用多源数据信息的复合型引文分析方法可为计量学分析提供一种补充思路。[方法/过程] 以期刊总被引次数这一底层参量为切入点,用图书情报学国际期刊2009-2014年数据为实证基础,尝试对多源数据复合引文算术均值、几何均值及调和均值方法进行比较讨论。[结果/结论] 结果发现,算术均值、几何均值和调和均值虽有差异,但亦有线性关联,应用中可选其一;累计算术均值、几何均值和调和均值与期刊数之间未证实存在布拉德福定律,但在期刊数量等同的三分区内,累计被引均值满足形如n2:n:1的经验分布;多源数据复合引文与单个数据库引文的期刊排名差异呈现"两端小、中间大"之现象;期刊的算术均值排名与GS排名结果更接近,几何均值排名则与Scopus相似度更高,而调和均值与WoS的排名差异最小。 相似文献
19.
Benedetto Lepori Michael Thelwall Bareerah Hafeez Hoorani 《Journal of Informetrics》2018,12(3):806-818
While ResearchGate has become the most popular academic social networking site in terms of regular users, not all institutions have joined and the scores it assigns to academics and institutions are controversial. This paper assesses the presence in ResearchGate of higher education institutions in Europe and the US in 2017, and the extent to which institutional ResearchGate Scores reflect institutional academic impact. Most of the 2258 European and 4355 US higher educational institutions included in the sample had an institutional ResearchGate profile, with near universal coverage for PhD-awarding institutions found in the Web of Science (WoS). For non-PhD awarding institutions that did not publish, size (number of staff members) was most associated with presence in ResearchGate. For PhD-awarding institutions in WoS, presence in RG was strongly related to the number of WoS publications. In conclusion, a) institutional RG scores reflect research volume more than visibility and b) this indicator is highly correlated to the number of WoS publications. Hence, the value of RG Scores for institutional comparisons is limited. 相似文献
20.
Diana B. Cohen 《International Information and Library Review》2013,45(3):231-262
AbstractUsing a scientometric approach, this study examines scholarly publications by library and information science (LIS) researchers affiliated with Iranian institutions that were published in non-Iranian journals and indexed in the Web of Science (WoS) database, together with publications in Iranian LIS journals from 1980 through 2016. The results show that Iranian authors published 538 LIS documents indexed in WoS and another 7,837 in national journals. The research article was the predominant document type at both the national and international levels. The total number of international publications in LIS by all countries was 313,449; Iran ranked 34th among the countries for publications in LIS. 相似文献