电子期刊影响的网络分析:方法、问题和议题

S. P. Harter, C. Ford
{"title":"电子期刊影响的网络分析:方法、问题和议题","authors":"S. P. Harter, C. Ford","doi":"10.1002/1097-4571(2000)9999:9999%3C::AID-ASI1029%3E3.0.CO;2-P","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study1 assesses the ways in which citation searching of scholarly print journals is and is not analogous to backlink searching of scholarly e‐journal articles on the WWW, and identifies problems and issues related to conducting and interpreting such searches. Backlink searches are defined here as searches for Web pages that link to a given URL. Backlink searches were conducted on a sample of 39 scholarly electronic journals. Search results were processed to determine the number of backlinking pages, total backlinks, and external backlinks made to the e‐journals and to their articles. The results were compared to findings from a citation study performed on the same e‐journals in 1996. A content analysis of a sample of the files backlinked to e‐journal articles was also undertaken. The authors identify a number of reliability issues associated with the use of “raw” search engine data to evaluate the impact of electronic journals and articles. No correlation was found between backlink measures and ISI citation measures of e‐journal impact, suggesting that the two measures may be assessing something quite different. Major differences were found between the types of entities that cite, and those that backlink, e‐journal articles, with scholarly works comprising a very small percentage of backlinking files. These findings call into question the legitimacy of using backlink searches to evaluate the scholarly impact of e‐journals and e‐journal articles (and by extension, e‐journal authors).","PeriodicalId":50013,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology","volume":"8 1","pages":"1159-1176"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2000-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"67","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Web-based analyses of E-journal impact: Approaches, problems, and issues\",\"authors\":\"S. P. Harter, C. Ford\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/1097-4571(2000)9999:9999%3C::AID-ASI1029%3E3.0.CO;2-P\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This study1 assesses the ways in which citation searching of scholarly print journals is and is not analogous to backlink searching of scholarly e‐journal articles on the WWW, and identifies problems and issues related to conducting and interpreting such searches. Backlink searches are defined here as searches for Web pages that link to a given URL. Backlink searches were conducted on a sample of 39 scholarly electronic journals. Search results were processed to determine the number of backlinking pages, total backlinks, and external backlinks made to the e‐journals and to their articles. The results were compared to findings from a citation study performed on the same e‐journals in 1996. A content analysis of a sample of the files backlinked to e‐journal articles was also undertaken. The authors identify a number of reliability issues associated with the use of “raw” search engine data to evaluate the impact of electronic journals and articles. No correlation was found between backlink measures and ISI citation measures of e‐journal impact, suggesting that the two measures may be assessing something quite different. Major differences were found between the types of entities that cite, and those that backlink, e‐journal articles, with scholarly works comprising a very small percentage of backlinking files. These findings call into question the legitimacy of using backlink searches to evaluate the scholarly impact of e‐journals and e‐journal articles (and by extension, e‐journal authors).\",\"PeriodicalId\":50013,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology\",\"volume\":\"8 1\",\"pages\":\"1159-1176\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2000-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"67\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-4571(2000)9999:9999%3C::AID-ASI1029%3E3.0.CO;2-P\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-4571(2000)9999:9999%3C::AID-ASI1029%3E3.0.CO;2-P","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 67

摘要

本研究评估了学术印刷期刊的引文检索与学术电子期刊文章在WWW上的反向链接检索的相似之处和不同之处,并确定了与进行和解释此类检索相关的问题。这里将反向链接搜索定义为对链接到给定URL的网页的搜索。反向链接搜索以39种学术电子期刊为样本进行。对搜索结果进行处理,以确定反向链接页面的数量、总反向链接以及对电子期刊及其文章的外部反向链接。这些结果与1996年在同一电子期刊上进行的引文研究的结果进行了比较。还对反向链接到电子期刊文章的文件样本进行了内容分析。作者指出了一些与使用“原始”搜索引擎数据来评估电子期刊和文章影响相关的可靠性问题。没有发现反向链接测量和ISI引用测量之间的相关性,这表明这两种测量方法可能评估的是完全不同的东西。在引用电子期刊文章的实体类型和反向链接的实体类型之间发现了重大差异,学术作品在反向链接文件中所占的比例非常小。这些发现对使用反向链接搜索来评估电子期刊和电子期刊文章(以及电子期刊作者)的学术影响的合法性提出了质疑。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Web-based analyses of E-journal impact: Approaches, problems, and issues
This study1 assesses the ways in which citation searching of scholarly print journals is and is not analogous to backlink searching of scholarly e‐journal articles on the WWW, and identifies problems and issues related to conducting and interpreting such searches. Backlink searches are defined here as searches for Web pages that link to a given URL. Backlink searches were conducted on a sample of 39 scholarly electronic journals. Search results were processed to determine the number of backlinking pages, total backlinks, and external backlinks made to the e‐journals and to their articles. The results were compared to findings from a citation study performed on the same e‐journals in 1996. A content analysis of a sample of the files backlinked to e‐journal articles was also undertaken. The authors identify a number of reliability issues associated with the use of “raw” search engine data to evaluate the impact of electronic journals and articles. No correlation was found between backlink measures and ISI citation measures of e‐journal impact, suggesting that the two measures may be assessing something quite different. Major differences were found between the types of entities that cite, and those that backlink, e‐journal articles, with scholarly works comprising a very small percentage of backlinking files. These findings call into question the legitimacy of using backlink searches to evaluate the scholarly impact of e‐journals and e‐journal articles (and by extension, e‐journal authors).
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
3.5 months
×
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