收稿日期: 2015-01-15
修回日期: 2015-02-17
网络出版日期: 2015-03-05
Study on Correlation of Researcher Influence Indicators
Received date: 2015-01-15
Revised date: 2015-02-17
Online published: 2015-03-05
[目的/意义]随着Web 2.0环境下社交网络的普及与开放获取运动的兴起,学者影响力表现为两个方面:学术影响力与社会影响力.目前反映学者社会影响力的评价指标已达20多种,故需要遴选合理的评价指标,避免强相关性的指标,最终构建客观、公正的学者影响力评价指标体系.[方法/过程]收集PlumX/Pitt工具中提供的指标和数据,采用Spearman方法尝试探究学者学术影响力指标(被引频次)与替代计量学中社会影响力指标之间的相关性以及各项社会影响力指标之间的相关性并进行分析.[结果/结论]要综合评价学者的影响力,应当引入社会影响力指标;从数据关联性角度,一些学者影响力的评价指标需要进行调整.
王妍 , 郭舒 , 张建勇 . 学者影响力评价指标的相关性研究[J]. 图书情报工作, 2015 , 59(5) : 106 -112,127 . DOI: 10.13266/j.issn.0252-3116.2015.05.017
[Purpose/significance] With the popularity of social network and the rise of open access movement under the environment of Web 2.0, researcher influence can be expressed as two aspects: Academic influence and social influence. At present, the number of evaluation indicators which can reflect researchers' social influence have reached more than 20, So there is an need for us to select the reasonable evaluation indicators, avoid the use of strong correlation ones and ultimately build an objective and fair evaluation index system of researcher influence.[Method/process] We collect the indicators and data provided by PlumX/Pitt tool, use the Spearman method and try to explore and analyze the correlation relationship between the indicators of researchers' academic influence and social influence, as well as correlation relationship between various indicators of social influence. [Result/conclusion] The results showed that in order to evaluate researcher influence comprehensively, social influence indicators should be added. And from the perspective of the data relevance, some indicators need to be adjusted.
Key words： academic influence; social influence; correlation; altmetrics
[1] Priem J,Taraborelli D, Groth P, et al.Altmetrics: A manifesto [EB/OL]. [2014-11-15]. http://altmetrics.org/manifesto/.
[2] Noorden V R. Twitter buzz about papers does not mean citations later[EB/OL].[2014-08-19]. http://www.nature.com/news/twitter-buzz-about-papers-does-not-mean-citations-later-1.14354.
[3] 丁洁兰. 科研人员学术影响力二维测度研究[D].北京:中国科学院文献情报中心, 2011.
[4] 朱大明. 基于引证的科研人员学术影响力评价方法讨论[J]. 科技管理研究, 2008, 28(11): 86-87.
[5] 叶鹰. 一种学术排序新指数——f指数探析. 情报学报,2009,28(1):142-149.
[6] 金碧辉. R指数、 AR指数:h指数功能扩展的补充指标[J]. 科学观察, 2007, 2(3):1-8.
[7] Egghe L. Theory and practise of the g-index[J]. Scientometrics, 2006, 69(1): 131-152.
[8] Wan Jinkun, Hua Pinghuan, Rousseau R. The pure h-index: Calculating an author's h-index by taking co-authors into account[J]. Collnet Journal of Scientometrics and Information Management, 2007, 1(2): 1-5.
[9] Chai Jingchun, Hua Pinghuan, Rousseau R, et al. The adapted pure h-index[EB/OL]. [2014-12-20]. http://fiz1.fh-potsdam.de/volltext/wis08/09031.pdf.
[10] Schreiber M. A Modification of the h-index: The hm-index accounts for multi-authored manuscripts[J]. Journal of Informetrics, 2008, 2(3): 211-216.
[11] Schreiber M. A case study of the modified Hirsch index hm accounting for multiple coauthors[J]. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 2009, 60(6): 1274-1282.
[12] Hu Xiaojun, Rousseau R, Chen Jin. In those fields where multiple authorship is the rule, the h-index should be supplemented by role-based h-indices[J]. Journal of Information Science, 2010, 36(1): 73-85.
[13] Rousseau R, Hu Xiaojun. An outgrow index[J]. Science, 2010, 24(4): 265-269.
[14] Hirsch J E. An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output that takes into account the effect of multiple coauthorship[J]. Scientometrics, 2010,85(3): 741-754.
[15] Hagen N T. Harmonic allocation of authorship credit: Source-level correction of bibliometric bias assures accurate publication and citation analysis[J]. PLoS One, 2008, 3(12): e4021.
[16] Egghe L. Mathematical theory of the h- and g-index in case of fractional counting of authorship[J]. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 2008, 59(10): 1608-1616.
[17] 孙海生, 韩红. 引用认同用于科研人员评价的实证分析[J]. 情报杂志, 2011, 30(7): 30-33.
[18] Matsas G E A. What are scientific leaders? The introduction of a normalized impact factor[J]. Brazilian Journal of Physics, 2012, 42(5/6): 319-322.
[19] 由庆斌, 汤珊红. 补充计量学及应用前景[J]. 情报理论与实践, 2013, 36(12): 6-10.
[20] San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment—Putting science into the assessment of research[EB/OL].[2014-12-20]. http://www.ascb.org/dora/.
[21] Jensen M. The new metrics of scholarly authority[J]. Chronicle of Higher Education, 2007, 53(41):B6.
[22] Taraborelli D. Soft peer review: Social software and distributed scientific evaluation[EB/OL]. [2014-12-20]. http://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/8279/1/8279.pdf.
[23] Anderson K. The impact factor: A tool form a bygone era?[EB/OL]. [2014-12-20]. http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2009/06/29/is-the-impact-factor-from-a-bygone-era/
[24] Cheverie J F, Boettcher J, Buschman J. Digital scholarship in the university tenure and promotion process: A report on the sixth scholarly communication symposium at Georgetown University Library[J]. Journal of Scholarly Publishing, 2009, 40(3): 219-230.
[25] Priem J, Hemminger B H. Scientometrics 2.0: New metrics of scholarly impact on the social Web[EB/OL].[2014-12-20].http://pear.accc.uic.edu/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/2874/2570.
[26] Plum Analytics｜Metrics[OL].[2014-12-20]. http://www.plumanalytics.com/metrics.html.
[27] Cabezas-Clavijo Á, Torres-Salinas D. Indicadores de uso y participación en las revistas científicas 2.0:El caso de PLoS One[J]. El profesional de la información, 2010, 19(4): 431-434.
[28] Eysenbach G. Can tweets predict citations? Metrics of social impact based on Twitter and correlation with traditional metrics of scientific impact[J]. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 2011, 13(4):123-129.
[29] Li Xuemei, Thelwall M, Giustini D. Validating online reference managers for scholarly impact measurement[J]. Scientometrics, 2012, 91(2): 461-471.
[30] 宋丽萍, 王建芳. 基于 F1000 与 WoS 的同行评议与文献计量相关性研究[J]. 中国图书馆学报, 2012,38(2): 62-69.
[31] 刘春丽, 何钦成. 不同类型选择性计量指标评价论文相关性研究——基于 Mendeley、 F1000 和 GoogleScholar 三种学术社交网络工具[J]. 情报学报, 2013, 32(2): 206-212.
[32] 由庆斌, 汤珊红. 不同类型论文层面计量指标间的相关性研究[J]. 图书情报工作, 2014, 58(8): 79-84.
[33] PlumX [OL]. [2014-12-10]. https://plu.mx/.
[34] 丁佐奇, 郑晓南, 吴晓明. 科技论文被引频次与下载频次的相关性分析[J]. 中国科技期刊研究, 2010, 21(4): 467-470.
[35] Announcing Sina Weibo support[OL]. [2015-02-07].http://www.altmetric.com/blog/announcing-sina-weibo-support/.
[36] iAuthor中国科学家在线[OL]. [2015-02-01]. http://iauthor.las.ac.cn/welcome/index.xhtml.
/
| 〈 |
|
〉 |
