高级检索|图表检索

图书情报工作 ›› 2018, Vol. 62 ›› Issue (5): 6-14.DOI: 10.13266/j.issn.0252-3116.2018.05.001

• 专题：协同创新环境下跨学科文献保障研究 • 上一篇    下一篇

国内与国际跨学科研究人员文献需求的对比分析——以南海争端问题为例

王新才1,2, 杨千1, 王海宁3   

  1. 1. 武汉大学信息资源研究中心 武汉 430072;
    2. 武汉大学图书馆 武汉 430072;
    3. 中国人民解放军66028部队 承德 067000
  • 收稿日期:2017-10-09 修回日期:2017-12-01 出版日期:2018-03-05 发布日期:2018-03-05
  • 作者简介:王新才(ORCID:0000-0002-3960-1343),馆长,研究员,博士生导师,E-mail:wangxincai@163.com;杨千(ORCID:0000-0003-4752-8382),硕士研究生;王海宁(ORCID:0000-0001-9043-4192),参谋,硕士研究生。
  • 基金资助:
    本文系国家社会科学基金项目"协同创新环境下跨学科文献保障研究"（项目编号：16BTQ032）研究成果之一。

A Comparative Analysis of the Collection Needs of Domestic and International Interdisciplinary Researchers: A Case Study of South China Sea Dispute Issue

Wang Xincai1,2, Yang Qian1, Wang Haining3   

  1. 1. Center for the Studies of Information Resources of Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072;
    2. Wuhan University Library, Wuhan 430072;
    3. PLA 66028 Unit, Chengde 067000
  • Received:2017-10-09 Revised:2017-12-01 Online:2018-03-05 Published:2018-03-05

PDF

摘要： [目的/意义]分析国内与国际跨学科研究人员文献需求的特点并比较异同，为跨学科研究的文献保障工作提供依据，以促进跨学科研究的国际合作。[方法/过程]使用引文分析法，以1998-2016年发表在CSSCI和Web of Science上南海争端相关文章的期刊与图书类引文为样本，从年代分布、被引频次、学科分布与出版机构等方面，分析国内与国际南海争端研究引文的特点与差异。[结果/结论]国内研究对较新中文期刊和经典外文图书依赖度高，中文图书缺乏国际认同。南海争端研究整体偏向人文社会科学领域，但国际研究较国内研究在引文学科的分布上更加广泛与均衡。权威、主流出版社是国内与国际研究共同的选择，少数研究机构出版社开始进入了跨学科研究者的视野。

关键词: 南海争端, 国内, 国际, 引文分析, 文献需求, 跨学科

Abstract: [Purpose/significance] This article analyzes the characteristics and differences of literature demands among domestic and international interdisciplinary researchers, in order to provide a basis for the literature guarantee of interdisciplinary research and to promote cooperation in international interdisciplinary researches.[Method/process] This article analyzes the characteristics and differences in domestic and international research over the issue of the South China Sea dispute from the aspects of age distribution, citation frequency, subject distribution and publishing institution by using citation analysis. Journals and books cited in the related articles in CSSCI and Web of Science from 1998 to 2016 are samples in this research.[Result/conclusion] The domestic researchers have a high degree of dependence on new Chinese journals and classic foreign books, Chinese books lack of international recognition. The South China Sea dispute research is biased towards the field of humanities and social sciences as a whole, but the international research is more extensive and balanced in the distribution of citation subjects. Authoritative and mainstream publishing houses are common choices between domestic and foreign research, a small number publishers of research institution also catch researchers' attention.

Key words: South China Sea dispute, domestic, international, citation analysis, literature demand, interdisciplinary

中图分类号: