Library and Information Service >
Discussion of P-index Based on the Co-author Contribution Division Value
Received date: 2016-06-19
Revised date: 2016-10-18
Online published: 2016-11-05
[Purpose/significance] In order to reasonably balance the co-authors' research contribution, this article summarizes predecessors' calculation method of p-index and aims at analyzing the co-authorship phenomenon and solving author signature sorting problems of the paper. Then, we present four calculation methods of p-index based on the co-author contribution division value, making the p-index for scientific research evaluation more effective and reasonable. [Method/process] Taking two experts in the field of library and information science as examples, we compared and analyzed the results of four kinds of different calculations by data statistics and calculation.[Result/conclusion] It finds out the two p-index calculation methods. One method only considers the situation of individual writing and the first author and the other method does not consider the situation of the co-authorship phenomenon. These two methods belong to the extreme treatments. The pa-index which averagely distributes the co-author weight ignoring the author signature sorting problem. The pw-index calculated by Lou Cequn's author contribution rate levels distribution method not only takes the co-authorship phenomenon into account, but also considers the different author contribution rate in different author signature ranking. Therefore, the pw-index based on the co-author contribution division value is more objective and rational.
Liu Yunmei , Li Changling , Liu Xiaohui . Discussion of P-index Based on the Co-author Contribution Division Value[J]. Library and Information Service, 2016 , 60(21) : 81 -86 . DOI: 10.13266/j.issn.0252-3116.2016.21.011
[1] GARFIELD E.Citation indexs for science:a new dimension in documentation through association of ideas[J].Science,1955,122(3159):108-111.
[2] 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.
[3] 金碧辉,ROUSSRAU R.R指数、AR指数:h指数功能扩展的补充指标[J].科学观察,2007(3):1-8.
[4] PRATHAP G.Is there a place for a mock h-index?[J].Scientometrics,2010,84(1):153-165.
[5] 夏慧,韩毅.一个新的综合性科技评价指标——p指数研究综述[J].图书情报工作,2014,58(8):128-132.
[6] PRATHAP G.The 100 most prolific economists using the p-index[J].Scientometrics,2010,84(1):167-172.
[7] PRATHAP G.A performance index approach to library collection[J].Performance measurement and metrics,2010,11(3):259-265.
[8] PRATHAP G.The fractional and harmonic p-indices for multiple authorship[J].Scientometrics,2011,86(2):239-244.
[9] PRATHAP G.E=Pi2-the energy of ideas approach to biblometric research assessment[J].Scientometrics,2010,57(3):282-286.
[10] PRATHAP G.The iCE approach for journal evaluation[J]. Scientometrics,2010,85(2):561-565.
[11] PRATHAP G. An iCE map approach to evaluate performance and efficiency of scientific production of countries[J].Scientometrics,2010,85(1):185-191.
[12] PRATHAP G.Qualifying scholarly impact using an iCX (impact-Citations-Exergy) analysis[J]. DESIDOC Journal of library & information technology,2011,31(5):382-386.
[13] 韩毅,夏慧.时间因素视角下科研人员评价的Pt指数研究[J].中国图书馆学报, 2015(6):73-85.
[14] 王志军,郑德俊.p指数运用于人才评价的有效性实证研究[J].图书情报工作,2012,56(14):93-97.
[15] 张正慧,郑德俊.P指数用于中文社会科学学术期刊评价的适用性分析[J].图书情报工作, 2013,57(19):121-126.
[16] 王圣洁,蒋旭,何晓庆.期刊P指数与其他评价指标相关性探讨[J].中国科技期刊研究,2014,25(11):1404-1407.
[17] PRATHAP G.Evaluating journal performance metrics[J].Scientometrics,2012,92(2):403-408.
[18] 娄策群.社会科学评价的文献计量理论与方法[M].武汉:华中师范大学出版社,1999:149.
[19] 胡仕湘.合作作品探究[J].法学家,1993,1(2):23-26.
[20] 陈希宁,冯远景.科技期刊合著论文作者署名及排序[J].中国科技期刊研究,2002(5):405-407. 作者贡献说明:刘运梅:负责数据搜集与处理,撰写论文; 李长玲:负责研究设计,指导与修改论文; 刘小慧:负责论文修改与校对。
/
| 〈 |
|
〉 |
