学术期刊话语引导的特征分析与评价:另类计量指标与评价方法的多重整合视角

IF 3.4 3区 管理学 0 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE
Xu Wang
{"title":"学术期刊话语引导的特征分析与评价:另类计量指标与评价方法的多重整合视角","authors":"Xu Wang","doi":"10.1108/lht-04-2022-0195","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PurposeUnder the background of open science, this paper integrates altmetrics data and combines multiple evaluation methods to analyze and evaluate the indicators' characteristics of discourse leading for academic journals, which is of great significance to enrich and improve the evaluation theory and indicator system of academic journals.Design/methodology/approachThis paper obtained 795,631 citations and 10.3 million altmetrics indicators data for 126,424 published papers from 151 medicine, general and internal academic journals. In this paper, descriptive statistical analysis and distribution rules of evaluation indicators are first carried out at the macro level. The distribution characteristics of evaluation indicators under different international collaboration conditions are analyzed at the micro level. Second, according to the characteristics and connotation of the evaluation indicators, the evaluation indicator system is constructed. Third, correlation analysis, factor analysis, entropy weight method and TOPSIS method are adopted to evaluate and analyze the discourse leading in medicine, general and internal academic journals by integrating altmetrics. At the same time, this paper verifies the reliability of the evaluation results.FindingsSix features of discourse leading integrated with altmetrics indicators are obtained. In the era of open science, online academic exchanges are becoming more and more popular. The evaluation activities based on altmetrics have fine-grained and procedural advantages. It is feasible and necessary to integrate altmetrics indicators and combine the advantages of multiple methods to evaluate the academic journals' discourse leading of which are in a diversified academic ecosystem.Originality/valueThis paper uses descriptive statistical analysis to analyze the distribution characteristics and distribution rules of discourse leading indicators of academic journals and to explore the availability of altmetrics indicators and the effectiveness of constructing an evaluation system. Then, combining the advantages of multiple evaluation methods, The author integrates altmetrics indicators to comprehensively evaluate the discourse leading of academic journals and verify the reliability of the evaluation results. This paper aims to provide references for enriching and improving the evaluation theory and indicator system of academic journals.","PeriodicalId":47196,"journal":{"name":"Library Hi Tech","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"12","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Characteristics analysis and evaluation of discourse leading for academic journals: perspectives from multiple integration of altmetrics indicators and evaluation methods\",\"authors\":\"Xu Wang\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/lht-04-2022-0195\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"PurposeUnder the background of open science, this paper integrates altmetrics data and combines multiple evaluation methods to analyze and evaluate the indicators' characteristics of discourse leading for academic journals, which is of great significance to enrich and improve the evaluation theory and indicator system of academic journals.Design/methodology/approachThis paper obtained 795,631 citations and 10.3 million altmetrics indicators data for 126,424 published papers from 151 medicine, general and internal academic journals. In this paper, descriptive statistical analysis and distribution rules of evaluation indicators are first carried out at the macro level. The distribution characteristics of evaluation indicators under different international collaboration conditions are analyzed at the micro level. Second, according to the characteristics and connotation of the evaluation indicators, the evaluation indicator system is constructed. Third, correlation analysis, factor analysis, entropy weight method and TOPSIS method are adopted to evaluate and analyze the discourse leading in medicine, general and internal academic journals by integrating altmetrics. At the same time, this paper verifies the reliability of the evaluation results.FindingsSix features of discourse leading integrated with altmetrics indicators are obtained. In the era of open science, online academic exchanges are becoming more and more popular. The evaluation activities based on altmetrics have fine-grained and procedural advantages. It is feasible and necessary to integrate altmetrics indicators and combine the advantages of multiple methods to evaluate the academic journals' discourse leading of which are in a diversified academic ecosystem.Originality/valueThis paper uses descriptive statistical analysis to analyze the distribution characteristics and distribution rules of discourse leading indicators of academic journals and to explore the availability of altmetrics indicators and the effectiveness of constructing an evaluation system. Then, combining the advantages of multiple evaluation methods, The author integrates altmetrics indicators to comprehensively evaluate the discourse leading of academic journals and verify the reliability of the evaluation results. This paper aims to provide references for enriching and improving the evaluation theory and indicator system of academic journals.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47196,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Library Hi Tech\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-10-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"12\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Library Hi Tech\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/lht-04-2022-0195\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Library Hi Tech","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/lht-04-2022-0195","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 12

摘要

目的在开放科学背景下,本文整合altmetrics数据,结合多种评价方法,对学术期刊话语引导指标特征进行分析和评价,对丰富和完善学术期刊评价理论和指标体系具有重要意义。设计/方法论/方法本文获得了151种医学、普通和内部学术期刊上发表的126424篇论文的795631次引用和1030万个altmetrics指标数据。本文首先从宏观层面对评价指标进行描述性统计分析和分布规律。从微观层面分析了不同国际合作条件下评价指标的分布特征。其次,根据评价指标的特点和内涵,构建了评价指标体系。第三,采用相关分析、因子分析、熵权法和TOPSIS法,结合altmetrics对医学、普通和内部学术期刊的语篇主导进行评价和分析。同时,验证了评价结果的可靠性。研究发现,结合altmetrics指标,获得了语篇引导的六个特征。在开放科学时代,在线学术交流越来越受欢迎。基于altmetrics的评估活动具有细粒度和程序性的优势。整合altmetrics指标,结合多种方法的优势,在多元化的学术生态系统中评价学术期刊的话语主导性是可行的,也是必要的。原创性/价值本文采用描述性统计分析方法,分析了学术期刊话语主导指标的分布特征和分布规律,探讨了altmetrics指标的可用性和构建评价体系的有效性。然后,结合多种评价方法的优势,结合altmetrics指标对学术期刊的语篇领先性进行综合评价,验证评价结果的可靠性。本文旨在为丰富和完善学术期刊评价理论和指标体系提供参考。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Characteristics analysis and evaluation of discourse leading for academic journals: perspectives from multiple integration of altmetrics indicators and evaluation methods
PurposeUnder the background of open science, this paper integrates altmetrics data and combines multiple evaluation methods to analyze and evaluate the indicators' characteristics of discourse leading for academic journals, which is of great significance to enrich and improve the evaluation theory and indicator system of academic journals.Design/methodology/approachThis paper obtained 795,631 citations and 10.3 million altmetrics indicators data for 126,424 published papers from 151 medicine, general and internal academic journals. In this paper, descriptive statistical analysis and distribution rules of evaluation indicators are first carried out at the macro level. The distribution characteristics of evaluation indicators under different international collaboration conditions are analyzed at the micro level. Second, according to the characteristics and connotation of the evaluation indicators, the evaluation indicator system is constructed. Third, correlation analysis, factor analysis, entropy weight method and TOPSIS method are adopted to evaluate and analyze the discourse leading in medicine, general and internal academic journals by integrating altmetrics. At the same time, this paper verifies the reliability of the evaluation results.FindingsSix features of discourse leading integrated with altmetrics indicators are obtained. In the era of open science, online academic exchanges are becoming more and more popular. The evaluation activities based on altmetrics have fine-grained and procedural advantages. It is feasible and necessary to integrate altmetrics indicators and combine the advantages of multiple methods to evaluate the academic journals' discourse leading of which are in a diversified academic ecosystem.Originality/valueThis paper uses descriptive statistical analysis to analyze the distribution characteristics and distribution rules of discourse leading indicators of academic journals and to explore the availability of altmetrics indicators and the effectiveness of constructing an evaluation system. Then, combining the advantages of multiple evaluation methods, The author integrates altmetrics indicators to comprehensively evaluate the discourse leading of academic journals and verify the reliability of the evaluation results. This paper aims to provide references for enriching and improving the evaluation theory and indicator system of academic journals.
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
Library Hi Tech
Library Hi Tech INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE-
CiteScore
8.30
自引率
44.10%
发文量
97
期刊介绍: ■Integrated library systems ■Networking ■Strategic planning ■Policy implementation across entire institutions ■Security ■Automation systems ■The role of consortia ■Resource access initiatives ■Architecture and technology ■Electronic publishing ■Library technology in specific countries ■User perspectives on technology ■How technology can help disabled library users ■Library-related web sites
×
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