从高被引与零被引论文的引文结构差异看Research Front与Research Frontier的区别
收稿日期: 2015-02-05
修回日期: 2015-04-08
网络出版日期: 2015-04-20
基金资助
本文系国家自然科学基金项目"论文零被引的时间演化规律、影响因素及其应用研究"(项目编号:71373252)和ISTIC-ELSEVIER期刊评价研究中心开放基金资助项目"基于多源叙词索引资源的复合引文分析与科技评价方法研究"(项目编号:2013BS008)研究成果之一。
The Difference Between Research Front and Research Frontier Based on the Reference Structure Difference Between Highly Cited Papers and Un-cited Papers
Received date: 2015-02-05
Revised date: 2015-04-08
Online published: 2015-04-20
[目的/意义]借助引文分析与其他文献计量学研究方法对特定领域的"研究前沿"进行分析,是目前情报学研究的重要课题。但是中文"研究前沿"实际对应于Research Front与Research Frontier两个具有不同内涵的英文术语,厘清这两个术语关系有助于学者改进并正确应用"研究前沿"分析方法。[方法/过程]在分析Research Frontier与Research Front两个概念交集关系模型的基础上,以Scientometrics和JASIST两种期刊为样本,检验了常见Research Front引文分析指标的可靠性。[结果/结论]实证研究结果显示,尽管高被引论文比零被引在引文的新颖性、热点性、耦合关联性上具有相对显著的优势,但这些特征指标并不能高效地映射潜在的高被引论文。因此,Research Front与Research Frontier是具有显著差异的不同概念,学者们应该对这两组概念进行更为深入的讨论。
钟镇 . 从高被引与零被引论文的引文结构差异看Research Front与Research Frontier的区别[J]. 图书情报工作, 2015 , 59(8) : 87 -96 . DOI: 10.13266/j.issn.0252-3116.2015.08.013
[Purpose/significance]The Research Front(s) studies based on citation analysis and visualization methods were one of most important topics in informetrics.However, Research Front and Research Frontier are different terms, which translated into same Chinese Word. It is valuable to modify or apply these methods, that make distinction between the two concepts.[Method/process]Starting from the intersection relationship between Research Front and Research Frontier, the paper tested the reliability of citation analysis methods in Research Front, based on the comparison of reference structure difference between highly cited papers and un-cited papers which were from Scientometrics and JASIST.[Result/conclusion]The results showed that, though there were newer, hotter and closer relationship references in highly cited papers, nearly all general reference indicators could not efficiently identify the highly cited paper in future. Based on the results, this paper emphasized the reliability of testing and adaptive boundary condition of Research Front methods, and discussed the effect of the citation window selection in citation analysis.
[1] 张丽华, 张志强. 科学前沿迁移的研究进展 [J]. 图书情报工作, 2014,58(3): 5-12.
[2] Garfield E. Research front[J]. Current Contents, 1994,2015(41): 3-7.
[3] Morris S A, Yen G, Wu Z, et al. Time line visualization of research fronts [J]. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 2003,54(5): 413-422.
[4] Jarneving B. Bibliographic coupling and its application to research-front and other core documents [J]. Journal of Informetrics, 2007,1(4): 287-307.
[5] Chen Chaomei. CiteSpace II: Detecting and visualizing emerging trends and transient patterns in scientific literature [J]. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 2006,57(3): 359-377.
[6] Price D. Networks of scientific papers [J]. Science, 1965,149(3683): 510-515.
[7] Lucio-Arias D, Leydesdorff L. Main‐path analysis and path-dependent transitions in HistCiteTM-Based historiograms [J]. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 2008,59(12): 1948-1962.
[8] Leydesdorff L. Why words and co-words cannot map the development of the sciences [J]. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 1997,48(5): 418-427.
[9] Swanson D R. Fish oil, raynauds syndrome, and undiscovered public knowledge[J]. Perspectives in Biology and Medicine, 1986,30(1): 7-18.
[10] 陈立新, 刘则渊. 引文半衰期与普赖斯指数之间的数量关系研究 [J]. 图书情报知识, 2007(1): 25-28.
[11] 庞杰, 刘则渊, 姜春林. 基于学科主题共现的国际能源期刊分类与知识结构研究 [J]. 科学学与科学技术管理, 2010(9): 15-20.
[12] 张立伟, 姜春林, 刘学,等. 图书情报学高被引论文引用现象的实证研究 [J]. 图书情报工作, 2014,58(16): 116-121.
[13] 姜春林, 张立伟, 刘学. 牛顿抑或奥尔特加?——一项来自高被引文献和获奖者视角的实证研究 [J]. 自然辩证法研究, 2014,30(11): 79-85.
[14] 钟镇. 学术论文合著规模与引文影响力的相关性分析——以图书情报学为例 [J]. 情报杂志, 2013,32(12): 127-131,164.
[15] Van Raan A. Sleeping beauties in science [J]. Scientometrics, 2004,59(3): 467-472.
[16] Glanzel W. Seven myths in bibliometrics:About facts and fiction in quantitative science studies [J]. ISSI Newsletter, 2008,4(2): 24-32.
[17] Leydesdorff L. Betweenness centrality as an indicator of the interdisciplinarity of scientific journals [J]. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 2007,58(9): 1303-1319.
/
| 〈 |
|
〉 |
