中文学术图书的Altmetrics数据生成动机及数据可用性探析——以豆瓣读书平台“短评”为例

doi:10.13266/j.issn.0252-3116.2021.02.010

图书情报工作 ›› 2021, Vol. 65 ›› Issue (2): 98-106.DOI: 10.13266/j.issn.0252-3116.2021.02.010

中文学术图书的Altmetrics数据生成动机及数据可用性探析——以豆瓣读书平台“短评”为例

魏佳文, 韩毅

西南大学计算机与信息科学学院重庆 400715

收稿日期:2020-06-07 修回日期:2020-09-21 出版日期:2021-01-20 发布日期:2021-01-20
通讯作者: 韩毅(ORCID:0000-0001-7021-3229),教授,博士,通讯作者,E-mail:hanyi72@swu.edu.cn
作者简介:魏佳文(ORCID:0000-0002-1960-319X),硕士研究生。
基金资助:
本文系四川省社会科学规划重大课题“中文图书Altmetrics评价及其在四川哲学社会科学学科影响力分析中的应用”（项目编号：SC17EZD035）研究成果之一。

Generation Motivation of Altmetrics Data and its Availability to Evaluate Chinese Academic Books:A Case Study of “Short Comments” on Douban Reading Platform

Wei Jiawen, Han Yi

Wei Jiawen, Han Yi College of Computer and Information Science, Southwest University, Chongqing 400715

Received:2020-06-07 Revised:2020-09-21 Online:2021-01-20 Published:2021-01-20

摘要/Abstract

摘要： [目的/意义] 探讨用户在“豆瓣读书”发布短评的动机，尝试判断短评作为图书影响力的评估指标是否有效，以期为中文学术图书评价的Altmetrics指标建构提供参考。[方法/过程] 以CBKCI统计报告公布的被引前十的古籍类中文学术图书为样本，采用扎根理论对样本图书在“豆瓣读书”网的1 142条“短评”进行分析，探究短评的产生动机及相应短评数据的可用性。[结果/结论] 用户产生短评的动机包括讨论、分享、消遣娱乐、外界压力、情感宣泄和资料获取6个主范畴。其中，“讨论”动机是最主要的动机，其两个子动机“表达与图书有关的个人经验或想法”和“表达对图书的见解或个人解释”占所有短评数据的四成以上，表明用户不是仅复制图书部分句子或章节，而是试图找到并传播图书最有价值的部分，此类短评数据可用以评价中文学术图书价值；而“分享” “消遣娱乐” “外界压力” “情感宣泄”和“资料获取”等动机相对来说难以较好地反映用户对图书的态度和认知，不宜纳入中文学术图书Altmetrics评价指标中。

关键词: 中文学术图书, Altmetrics数据, 数据生成动机, 数据可用性, 豆瓣读书平台, 短评

Abstract: [Purpose/significance] This paper discusses the users' motivation to publish short reviews on the Douban Reading platform, and tries to judge whether the short reviews are effective as indicators to evaluate the influence of books, so as to get inspiration for the indicator construction for Altmetrics to assess Chinese academic books.[Method/process] Taking the top 10 cited books of ancient Chinese academic ones published in the CBKCI statistical report as samples, this paper used the grounded theory to analyze the 1,142 "short comments" of the sample books on Douban Reading website, and explored the motivation of the short comments and its availability to assess the social influences of academic books.[Result/conclusion] 6 main motivation for users to generate short reviews are identified, such as discussion, sharing entertainment, external pressure, emotional venting, and data acquisition. Among them, the "discussion" motivationis is the main one and its two sub-motivations "expressing personal experiences or ideas related to books" and "expressing opinions or personal explanations on books" account for more than 40% of all short review data. It indicates that most users do not only just copy a certain sentence or a certain chapter of a book, but try to find and spread the most valuable information of the book. Such short-review data can be used to evaluate Chinese academic books. Others motivation, such as "share", "recreational entertainment", "outside pressure", "emotional vent", and "data acquisition", are relatively difficult to reflect well users' attitude and cognition about the books, and these data should not be included in the Altmetrics index to evaluate Chinese academic books.

Key words: Chinese academic books, Altmetrics data, motivation for data generation, data availability, douban reading platform, short review data

中图分类号:

G250.2

魏佳文, 韩毅. 中文学术图书的Altmetrics数据生成动机及数据可用性探析——以豆瓣读书平台“短评”为例[J]. 图书情报工作, 2021, 65(2): 98-106.

Wei Jiawen, Han Yi. Generation Motivation of Altmetrics Data and its Availability to Evaluate Chinese Academic Books:A Case Study of “Short Comments” on Douban Reading Platform[J]. Library and Information Service, 2021, 65(2): 98-106.

参考文献

[1] 任红娟.我国图书评价方法研究述评[J].图书情报知识,2016(5):22-29.
[2] 韩毅.非正式交流回归语境下科技评价的融合路径取向[J].中国图书馆学报,2016,42(4):64-74.
[3] PRIEM J, HENNUBGER B H. Scientometrics 2.0:new metrics of scholarly impact on thesocial Web[EB/OL].[2020-08-27]. http://pear.accc.uic.edu/ojs/index.php/fm/article/viewArticle/2874.
[4] In metrics we trust?Prospects & pitfalls of new research metrics[EB/OL].[2020-08-27]. http://www.sussex.ac.uk/spru/newsandevents/2014h/conferences/metricsworkshop.
[5] 刘晓娟,赵卓婧,宋婉姿.Altmetrics在学术评价中的可用性研究综述[J].数字图书馆论坛,2017(8):38-45.
[6] 余厚强,别克扎提·木拉提.从ISSI 2019会议解读替代计量学研究新进展[J].情报理论与实践,2020,43(7):157-164.
[7] 金燕,翟丽辉.社交媒体环境下用户转发行为对信息质量影响的调查与分析[J].图书馆理论与实践,2016(9):91-95.
[8] BARILAN J. JASIST 2001-2010[J]. Bulletin of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 2012,38(6):24-28.
[9] 孙会,李丽娜.高频次转发微博的特征及用户转发动机探析——基于新浪微博"当日转发排行榜"的内容分析[J].现代传播(中国传媒大学学报),2012,34(6):137-138.
[10] NEYLON C. Altmetrics:what are they good for?[J/OL]. Plos-opens, 2014.[2020-08-27]. https://blogs.plos.org/opens/.
[11] HTOO T H H, NA J C. Who are tweeting research articles and why?[J]. Journal of information science theory and practice,2017,5(3):48-60.
[12] NA J C. User motivations for tweeting research articles:a content analysis approach[C]//International conference on asian digital libraries. Seoul:Springer, 2015:197-208.
[13] SHEMA H, BARILAN J, THELWALL M, et al. How is research blogged? A content analysis approach[J]. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 2015, 66(6):1136-1149.
[14] SCHNITZLER K, DAVIES N, ROSS F, et al. Using twitter?to drive research impact:a discussion of strategies, opportunities and challenges[J]. International journal of nursing studies, 2016, 59(7):15-26.
[15] POWER A. Twitter's potential to enhance professional networking[J]. The British journal of midwifery, 2015, 23(1):65-67.
[16] FAHLBERG B. Leveraging social media to facilitate recruitment and dissemination in doctoral research[J]. Advances in nursing doctoral education and research, 2015,3(1):10-14.
[17] SHIELDS R. Following the leader? Network models of "world-class" universities on twitter[J]. Higher education,2016,71(2):253-268.
[18] O'CONNOR A, JACKSON L,GOLDSMITH L, et al. Can I get a retweet please? health research recruitment and the twitter sphere[J]. Journal of advanced nursing, 2014,70(3):599-609.
[19] BORD D M, GOLDER S, LOTAN G. Tweet, Tweet, retweet:conversational aspects of retweeting on Twitter[C]//201043rd Hawaii international conference on system sciences. Hawaii:IEEE, 2010:1-10.
[20] MOHAMMADI E, THELWALL M, KOUSHA K. Can Mendeley bookmarks reflect readership? a survey of user motivations[J]. Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology,2016,67(5):1198-1209.
[21] SYN S Y, OH S. Why do social network site users share information on facebook and twitter[J]. Journal of information science, 2015, 41(5):553-569.
[22] HUANG Y K, YANG W I. Dissemination motives and effects of internet book reviews[J]. The electronic library,2010,28(6):804-817.
[23] 张辉,徐晓林.博客评论行为动机因素实证研究[J].情报杂志,2013,32(11):107-109,201.
[24] YU H, XU S, XIAO T, et al. Global science discussed in local altmetrics:weibo and its comparison with twitter[J]. Journal of Informetrics, 2017, 11(2):466-482.
[25] BAEK K, HOLTON A, HARP D, et al. The links that bind:uncovering novel motivations for linking on facebook[J]. Computers in human behavior,2011,27(6):2243-2248.
[26] HAUSTEIN S, BOWMAN T D, COSTAS R. Interpreting "Altmetrics":viewing acts on social media through the lens of citation and social theories[EB/OL].[2019-12-10]. http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1502/1502.05701.pdf.
[27] CHIN C Y, LU H P, WU C M. Facebook users' motivation for clicking the"like"button[J]. Social behavior and personality, 2015,43(4):579-592.
[28] JIANG J, NI C, HE D, et al. Mendeley group as a new source of interdisciplinarity study:how do disciplines interact on mendeley?[C]//ACM/IEEE-cs joint conference on digital libraries. Newark:ACM, 2013:135-138.
[29] SHEMA H, BAR-LLAN J, THELWALL M. How is research blogged?A content analysis approach[J]. Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology,2014,66(6):1136-1149.
[30] GHAISANI A P, HANDAYANI P W, MUNAJAT Q. Users' motivation in sharing information on social media[J]. Procedia computer science, 2017, 124:530-535.
[31] SUGIMOTO C R.Theories of informetrics:a festschrift in honor of blaise cronin[M]//HAUSTEIN S,BOWMAN T D,COSTAS R.Interpreting"Altmetrics":viewing acts on social media through the lens of citation and social theories.Berlin:De Gruyter,2016:372-405.
[32] 王鹏飞,刘烜贞.基于内容分析的Altmetrics本质研究[J].图书情报工作,2017,61(2):114-120.
[33] LEMKE S, PETERS I. Coping with Altmetrics' heterogeneity-a survey on social media platforms' usage purposes and target groups for researchers[C]//Proceedings of the 17th International conference on Scientometrics and Informetrics. Rome:Italy, 2019:2320-2325.
[34] THELWALL M, TSOU A, WEINGART S, et al. Tweeting links to academic articles[J]. Cybermetrics:international journal of Scientometrics, Informetrics and Bibliometrics, 2013,17(1):1-8.
[35] BORNMANN L. What do altmetrics counts mean? a plea for content analyses[J]. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 2016, 67(4):1016-1017.
[36] 刘晓娟,王晨琳.用户动机视角下的Altmetrics指标研究[J].图书情报知识,2020(3):63-70,96.
[37] DENSCOMBE M.怎样做好一项研究——小规模社会研究指南[M].陶保平,译.上海:上海教育出版社,2011:73.
[38] MACMILLAN K, KOENIG T. The wow factor:preconceptions and expectations for data analysis software in qualitative research[J]. Social science computer review, 2004,22(2):179-186.
[39] 项目介绍.中文学术图书引文索引[EB/OL].[2020-08-27]. http://cssrac.nju.edu.cn/cbkci/index.php?m=Home&c=Article&a=lists&category=project-intr.
[40] CBKCI:被引排名前十位图书[EB/OL].[2020-08-27]. http://css-rac.nju.edu.cn/cbkci/index.php?m=Home&c=Article&a=lists&category=stat_2.
[41] 李明,李江,陈铭,等.中文学术图书引文量与Altmetrics指标探索性分析及其启示[J].情报学报,2019,38(6):557-567.
[42] 赵红.豆瓣阅读平台研究[D].南京:南京大学,2016.
[43] 韩正彪,周鹏.扎根理论质性研究方法在情报学研究中的应用[J].情报理论与实践,2011,34(5):19-23.
[44] PANDIT N R. The creation of theory:a recent application of the grounded theory method[J]. The qualitative report, 1996, 2(4):1-14.
[45] 张云.基于"豆瓣读书"模式的图书馆社会化阅读推广[J].晋图学刊,2014(5):1-6.
[46] 聂磊,王延飞.网络行为数据的适用性评估问题初探[J].图书情报工作,2019,63(6):29-34.
[47] 巴比.社会研究方法[M].邱泽奇,译.11版.北京:华夏出版社,2009.

中文学术图书的Altmetrics数据生成动机及数据可用性探析——以豆瓣读书平台“短评”为例

Generation Motivation of Altmetrics Data and its Availability to Evaluate Chinese Academic Books:A Case Study of “Short Comments” on Douban Reading Platform

PDF

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 3

编辑推荐

Metrics

[1]	彭秋茹, 何贝, 黄水清. 中文人文社会科学学术图书的影响力评价——以图书馆情报与文献学为例[J]. 图书情报工作, 2021, 65(21): 108-117.
[2]	卢晓荣, 张树良. 国内社交媒体用于学术成果Altmetrics评价存在问题及对策[J]. 图书情报工作, 2019, 63(21): 87-96.
[3]	雷淑义, 吕先竞. 我国人文社会科学学术图书Altmetrics评价:挑战及应用[J]. 图书情报工作, 2017, 61(11): 133-139.