作为大学排名指标的博士顶点理论:来自机器学习方法的见解

IF 9 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL
Ionut Dorin Stanciu , Nicolae Nistor
{"title":"作为大学排名指标的博士顶点理论:来自机器学习方法的见解","authors":"Ionut Dorin Stanciu ,&nbsp;Nicolae Nistor","doi":"10.1016/j.chb.2024.108504","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Although journal articles dominate visibility and recognition in scholarly output, doctoral theses or capstones represent a significant, yet often overlooked, component of university research. This study takes a learning analytics perspective to explore the relationship between university rankings and the theoretical frameworks used in doctoral capstones within the education field, an area largely underexamined in prior research. Using the 2023 Academic Ranking of World Universities (ARWU) for education, a dataset of 9770 doctoral capstone abstracts, and a curated list of 59 learning theories, we investigated theory prevalence relative to university ranking. Employing machine learning to calculate cosine similarity between capstones and learning theories, followed by multivariate ANOVA, we identified statistically significant differences in theory usage across ranking groups. These findings suggest that theoretical choices in capstones may contribute to the external evaluations underpinning university rankings, offering insights for aligning doctoral programs with ranking criteria. However, this study's limitations, mainly its correlational nature and the U.S.-exclusive dataset, suggest the need for further research on interdisciplinarity and theory clustering across global institutions. The study makes headway in the empirical investigation into how theoretical frameworks of doctoral research may be related to university rankings, and its findings pertain to the management of educational and psychological research at doctoral level by means of learning analytics.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48471,"journal":{"name":"Computers in Human Behavior","volume":"164 ","pages":"Article 108504"},"PeriodicalIF":9.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Doctoral capstone theories as indicators of university rankings: Insights from a machine learning approach\",\"authors\":\"Ionut Dorin Stanciu ,&nbsp;Nicolae Nistor\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.chb.2024.108504\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Although journal articles dominate visibility and recognition in scholarly output, doctoral theses or capstones represent a significant, yet often overlooked, component of university research. This study takes a learning analytics perspective to explore the relationship between university rankings and the theoretical frameworks used in doctoral capstones within the education field, an area largely underexamined in prior research. Using the 2023 Academic Ranking of World Universities (ARWU) for education, a dataset of 9770 doctoral capstone abstracts, and a curated list of 59 learning theories, we investigated theory prevalence relative to university ranking. Employing machine learning to calculate cosine similarity between capstones and learning theories, followed by multivariate ANOVA, we identified statistically significant differences in theory usage across ranking groups. These findings suggest that theoretical choices in capstones may contribute to the external evaluations underpinning university rankings, offering insights for aligning doctoral programs with ranking criteria. However, this study's limitations, mainly its correlational nature and the U.S.-exclusive dataset, suggest the need for further research on interdisciplinarity and theory clustering across global institutions. The study makes headway in the empirical investigation into how theoretical frameworks of doctoral research may be related to university rankings, and its findings pertain to the management of educational and psychological research at doctoral level by means of learning analytics.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48471,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Computers in Human Behavior\",\"volume\":\"164 \",\"pages\":\"Article 108504\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":9.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Computers in Human Behavior\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0747563224003728\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Computers in Human Behavior","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0747563224003728","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

尽管期刊文章在学术产出中主导着知名度和认可度,但博士论文或顶点论文是大学研究的重要组成部分,但往往被忽视。本研究从学习分析的角度探讨了大学排名与教育领域博士学位课程中使用的理论框架之间的关系,这一领域在以前的研究中很大程度上没有得到充分的研究。我们利用2023年世界大学教育学术排名(ARWU)、9770篇博士论文摘要数据集和59种学习理论,调查了与大学排名相关的理论流行程度。利用机器学习计算顶点和学习理论之间的余弦相似度,然后进行多变量方差分析,我们确定了排名组之间理论使用的统计显着差异。这些发现表明,顶点课程的理论选择可能有助于支撑大学排名的外部评估,为使博士课程与排名标准保持一致提供见解。然而,本研究的局限性,主要是其相关性和美国独有的数据集,表明需要进一步研究跨全球机构的跨学科和理论聚类。该研究在实证调查博士研究的理论框架如何与大学排名相关方面取得了进展,其研究结果与通过学习分析方法管理博士水平的教育和心理学研究有关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Doctoral capstone theories as indicators of university rankings: Insights from a machine learning approach
Although journal articles dominate visibility and recognition in scholarly output, doctoral theses or capstones represent a significant, yet often overlooked, component of university research. This study takes a learning analytics perspective to explore the relationship between university rankings and the theoretical frameworks used in doctoral capstones within the education field, an area largely underexamined in prior research. Using the 2023 Academic Ranking of World Universities (ARWU) for education, a dataset of 9770 doctoral capstone abstracts, and a curated list of 59 learning theories, we investigated theory prevalence relative to university ranking. Employing machine learning to calculate cosine similarity between capstones and learning theories, followed by multivariate ANOVA, we identified statistically significant differences in theory usage across ranking groups. These findings suggest that theoretical choices in capstones may contribute to the external evaluations underpinning university rankings, offering insights for aligning doctoral programs with ranking criteria. However, this study's limitations, mainly its correlational nature and the U.S.-exclusive dataset, suggest the need for further research on interdisciplinarity and theory clustering across global institutions. The study makes headway in the empirical investigation into how theoretical frameworks of doctoral research may be related to university rankings, and its findings pertain to the management of educational and psychological research at doctoral level by means of learning analytics.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
19.10
自引率
4.00%
发文量
381
审稿时长
40 days
期刊介绍: Computers in Human Behavior is a scholarly journal that explores the psychological aspects of computer use. It covers original theoretical works, research reports, literature reviews, and software and book reviews. The journal examines both the use of computers in psychology, psychiatry, and related fields, and the psychological impact of computer use on individuals, groups, and society. Articles discuss topics such as professional practice, training, research, human development, learning, cognition, personality, and social interactions. It focuses on human interactions with computers, considering the computer as a medium through which human behaviors are shaped and expressed. Professionals interested in the psychological aspects of computer use will find this journal valuable, even with limited knowledge of computers.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信