Scientometrics
Borko (1968) 將資訊科學定義為「研究資訊的特性與行為、管理資訊流的力量以及使資訊能最佳化的取得與可用性的處理方法」本研究探討與比較JASIST (Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology)、IPM (Information Processing and Management)和JOD (Journal of Documentation)三種資訊科學相關期刊在1998到2008年間論文的參考文獻具有的書目計量特性 (bibliometric characteristics) 以及與其他學科的主題關係 (subject relationship)。
研究結果呈現三種期刊都是資訊科學導向，但JOD更傾向於圖書館學，而JASIST和IPM有更多的共同性以及比JOD更深入地擴散到其他學科。若干結果如下：
1. JASIST出版的文章數量為IPM和JOD的兩倍，後兩者出版的文章數量約略相當。但JOD以書評(book reviews)為主(54%)。
2. JASIST和JOD上每一篇論文平均有38和40筆參考文獻，明顯比IPM的32筆多。JOD、JASIST和IPM的參考文獻分別有9.3、7.8和4.1為書籍。
3. 期刊的自我引用情形以JASIST的17.46%最高，IPM和JOD分別為14.11%和10.19%。
4. 三種期刊引用最高的前五種期刊中有四種是相同的，包含JASIST、IPM、Scientometrics和JOD。JOD引用最高的書籍與其他兩者明顯不同，但JASIST和IPM引用最高的前三名則是一樣的，包含Salton 和 McGill的 Introduction to Modern Information Retrieval、 Van Rijsbergen的 Information Retrieval 以及 Salton的 The SMART Retrieval System: Experiments in Automatic Document Processing。
5. 三種期刊引用最高的前十種期刊有40到50%為資訊科學相關期刊，表示這個領域的研究人員引用較多自己領域的研究結果。
6. 引用期刊的前三大類別為‘‘Bibliography. Library Science. Information Resources (General)’’ 、 ‘‘Science’’ 和 ‘‘Social Sciences (General)’’。針對引用書籍而言，JASIST和IPM最大的類別都是science，但JOD則是‘‘Bibliography. Library Science. Information Resources (General)’’。以主題來說，三種期刊的前三大都是一樣的，包括‘‘searching’’、‘‘online information retrieval’’ 和 ‘‘information work’’。
Employing a citation analysis, this study explored and compared the bibliometric characteristics and the subject relationship with other disciplines of and among the three leading information science journals, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology (JASIST), Information Processing and Management and Journal of Documentation. The citation data were drawn from references of each article of the three journals during 1998 and 2008.
Comparison on the characteristics of cited journals and books confirmed that all the three journals under study are information science oriented, except JOD which is library science orientation. JASIST and IPM are very much in common and diffuse to other disciplines more deeply than JOD.
Borko (1968) defined that information science is ‘‘a discipline that investigates the properties and behavior of information, the forces governing the flow of information, and the means of processing information for optimum accessibility and usability.
JASIST published more than twice of articles of IPM and JOD, both published approximately the same number of articles. Interestingly, JOD published more book reviews (54%) than journal articles.
The average number of references cited per paper for JASIST and JOD is 38 and 40. It is significantly higher than that of IPM of 32. There is no significant difference between JASIST and JOD in terms of average number of references cited.
In average, 9.3, 7.8, 4.1 books were cited per paper by JOD, JASIST and IPM, respectively. JOD cites books per paper most, while IPM cites least.
JASIST has the highest self-citation rate of 17.46%, next by IPM of 14.11% and JOD
has the least self-citation rate of 10.19%.
Four of the top five highly cited journals are in common, i.e., Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Information Processing and Management, Scientometrics, and Journal of Documentation.
On the other hand, the most cited three books in common for JASIST and IPM are Salton and McGill’s Introduction to Modern Information Retrieval, Van Rijsbergen’s Information Retrieval and Salton’s The SMART Retrieval System: Experiments in Automatic Document Processing.
For the three journals under study, most of the top ten highly cited journals, contributing about 40–50% of cited journals, are information science journals indicating that the researchers in the information science field cite more research results in their own field.
The top three main classes of cited journals in papers of the three journals under study are in common and in the same order, i.e., ‘‘Bibliography. Library Science. Information Resources (General)’’, ‘‘Science’’ and ‘‘Social Sciences (General)’’.
As for the books cited, the most cited main class in JASIST and IPM papers is science, while the most cited main class for JOD is ‘‘Bibliography. Library Science. Information Resources (General)’’.
The top three highly cited subjects of library and information science journals are in common and encompass ‘‘searching’’, ‘‘online information retrieval’’, and ‘‘information work’’.
Papers in JOD are less computer-related than JASIST and IPM and JOD is more traditional library science oriented than JASIST and IPM are. On the other hand, ‘‘Information Storage and Retrieval Systems’’ and ‘‘Information Retrieval’’ are two of the three most cited subjects of books cited by the three journals under study.
Comparison on the characteristics of cited journals and books confirmed that all the three journals under study are information science oriented, except JOD which is library science orientation. JASIST and IPM are very much in common and diffuse to other disciplines more deeply than JOD.
Borko (1968) defined that information science is ‘‘a discipline that investigates the properties and behavior of information, the forces governing the flow of information, and the means of processing information for optimum accessibility and usability.
JASIST published more than twice of articles of IPM and JOD, both published approximately the same number of articles. Interestingly, JOD published more book reviews (54%) than journal articles.
The average number of references cited per paper for JASIST and JOD is 38 and 40. It is significantly higher than that of IPM of 32. There is no significant difference between JASIST and JOD in terms of average number of references cited.
In average, 9.3, 7.8, 4.1 books were cited per paper by JOD, JASIST and IPM, respectively. JOD cites books per paper most, while IPM cites least.
JASIST has the highest self-citation rate of 17.46%, next by IPM of 14.11% and JOD
has the least self-citation rate of 10.19%.
Four of the top five highly cited journals are in common, i.e., Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Information Processing and Management, Scientometrics, and Journal of Documentation.
On the other hand, the most cited three books in common for JASIST and IPM are Salton and McGill’s Introduction to Modern Information Retrieval, Van Rijsbergen’s Information Retrieval and Salton’s The SMART Retrieval System: Experiments in Automatic Document Processing.
For the three journals under study, most of the top ten highly cited journals, contributing about 40–50% of cited journals, are information science journals indicating that the researchers in the information science field cite more research results in their own field.
The top three main classes of cited journals in papers of the three journals under study are in common and in the same order, i.e., ‘‘Bibliography. Library Science. Information Resources (General)’’, ‘‘Science’’ and ‘‘Social Sciences (General)’’.
As for the books cited, the most cited main class in JASIST and IPM papers is science, while the most cited main class for JOD is ‘‘Bibliography. Library Science. Information Resources (General)’’.
The top three highly cited subjects of library and information science journals are in common and encompass ‘‘searching’’, ‘‘online information retrieval’’, and ‘‘information work’’.
Papers in JOD are less computer-related than JASIST and IPM and JOD is more traditional library science oriented than JASIST and IPM are. On the other hand, ‘‘Information Storage and Retrieval Systems’’ and ‘‘Information Retrieval’’ are two of the three most cited subjects of books cited by the three journals under study.
沒有留言:
張貼留言