图书情报工作 ›› 2018, Vol. 62 ›› Issue (24): 110-123.DOI: 10.13266/j.issn.0252-3116.2018.24.015

• 情报研究 • 上一篇    下一篇

Q2 SRC-指数:基于情境的科学家科研生产力评价指标研究

赵丽梅1,2, 马海群1   

  1. 1. 黑龙江大学信息资源管理中心 哈尔滨 150080;
    2. 黑龙江大学哲学博士后流动站 哈尔滨 150080
  • 收稿日期:2018-03-07 修回日期:2018-08-28 出版日期:2018-12-20 发布日期:2018-12-20
  • 作者简介:赵丽梅(ORCID:0000-0001-8781-9120),副教授,博士,E-mail:hdzhaolimei@sina.com;马海群(ORCID:0000-0002-2091-7620),教授,博士,博士生导师。
  • 基金资助:
    本文系国家博士后基金面上项目"主体间性视域的高校科研团队知识创新研究"(项目编号:2015M571451)和黑龙江省高校基本科研业务费黑龙江大学专项资金项目"基于主体间际网络的高校科研团队知识创新及可持续机制研究"(项目编号:HDRC201616)研究成果之一。

Q2 SRC-index: A New Measure for Evaluating Scientist Research Productivity Based on Context

Zhao Limei1,2, Ma Haiqun1   

  1. 1. Research Center of Information Resources Management, Heilongjiang University, Harbin 150080;
    2. Philosophy of Postdoctoral Research Station, Heilongjiang University, Harbin 150080
  • Received:2018-03-07 Revised:2018-08-28 Online:2018-12-20 Published:2018-12-20

摘要: [目的/意义]科学家科研生产力一直是业内学者研究的焦点,主要从科研成果数量和质量(被引)两方面对其进行评价。以往科学家科研生产力的一些评价指标认为不同研究领域的论文质量和科学家的引用行为呈现迥异性特征,不仅可以跨领域对科学家科研生产力予以测定,而且可以跨越学术级别、依据机构规模或者参照不同期刊成果对其进行评价。但是以往的评价指标不仅忽略科学家所处的情境(Context)特征——科研评价中同一机构不同学术等级的职业晋升阈值要求是有差异的,而且不同机构对同一学术等级的职业晋升阈值要求也是有差异的,而科学家所处的情境特征正是其科研努力的参考标准,而且科研成果中合作科学家的知识贡献往往容易被忽略,这并不符合大科学时代的科研需求。[方法/过程]融合以往评价指标的研究成果和针对以往评价指标存在的局限,提出了Q2 SRC-指数以从多个维度综合评价科学家的科研生产力,不仅关注成果的数量和质量(Q&QQ2)、研究的主题领域(S)、科学家在其合作成果中的排序(R),而且强调科学家所处学术情境(Context)的特征。[结果/结论]该指标不仅提出了跨学科情境下综合评价科学家科研生产力的理论模型,而且具有重要的实践应用价值,即可作为科研评价中科学家学术晋升的参考依据,特别是科研评价中学术级别晋升数量有限的情况下,该指标是重要的客观综合标准。

关键词: 文献计量学指标, Q2 SRC-指数, 科研生产力, 学术级别晋升, 人才评价

Abstract: [Purpose/significance] Research productivity has been the scholars' research interested focus, which has been studied from both papers' quantity and quality(citations). As it is presented that scientists have various citation behaviors or papers' quality is various in different fields, and it is not only necessary that their productivities can be evaluated in different fields, but also it needs to measure and evaluate the scientists' productivities concerning different professional levels, different-size institutions, and papers in different journals. However, in the existing indices, the context characteristics are not considered, while there are different requirement thresholds for the same professional level or different professional levels in the same or various institutions, the characteristics of scientists' situated context is precisely the reference criterion of their efforts, and the co-authors' contributions are ignored for analyzing scientists' productivities, which is not corresponding to the research requirements of big science era.[Method/process] Based on the efforts and shortcomings of the existing evaluation indices, the Q2 SRC-index is presented to evaluate scientists' research productivities, with concerns of papers' quantity and quality(Q&Q, Q2), subject fields(S), scientists' rankings in papers(R), and different requirement thresholds for the same or different professional levels indicating scientists' contexts (C), which is more emphasized.[Result/conclusion] The measure is not only the theory model to be used to evaluate the scientists' research productivities comprehensively and compare them from different disciplinary backgrounds, but also it is practical and can be considered as the basis for scientists' professional promotions when there are limited professional positions in their institutions.

Key words: bibliometrics measures, Q2 SRC-index, research productivities, professional level promotion, talent evaluation

中图分类号: