试用h指数评价科技期刊

2005年,Hirsch提出了用h指数评价科学工作者的个人成就。文章对2003年被中国科技引文数据库收录的化学和土木建筑领域类期刊按h指数和相对h指数排名情况进行分析,目的在于说明h指数、相对h指数与影响因子排名的不同,及h指数和相对h指数用于评价期刊的现实意义。最后指出在使用h指数和相对h指数评价期刊时,应该全面、综合性地考虑。     

推荐一种新方法 强化期刊社会效益

提出了质量功能扩展方法与编辑系统相结合的方法,即质量功能扩展系统方法,并给出强化系统功能的简单表达式。表达式中以“效益”作为功能强化因子,而因子为系统接受系统外部环境的信息,即用“读者要求”协调和强化编辑系统功能。通过逐层和逐级系统功能的扩展,使刊物社会功能尽量与实际情形相符合。     

h指数批量统计法及其应用研究

h指数研究在全世界引起了广泛的兴趣,已成为国际情报学界最为关注的热点领域,但实证研究手段的落后严重阻碍了相关研究的快速发展.为解决以作者为检索单位的传统h指数统计方法不适于领域层次大范围作者h指数研究等缺陷,提出以期刊为检索单位的h指数批量统计法,它一次可自动提取某领域全部作者的h指数,具有适合程序处理、精确、快速等特点.以国内图书情报界为例进行了实证对比研究,证明其可行性和有效性,并用该方法和WOS数据得到国际图书情报界高影响力作者名单及其h指数.最后指出该方法的潜在应用价值和局限性.     

社会化网络软件与图书馆信息服务

本文通过对社会化软件在图书馆信息服务领域应用的初步探索和研究,试图发现社会化软件在图书馆信息服务领域应用中一些轨迹和路径,使图书馆网络信息服务更好的适应web2．0背景下的技术环境,以满足读者和用户的需求。     

Peer review and the h-index: Two studies

Research was undertaken that examined what, if any, correlation there was between the h-index and rankings by peer assessment, and what correlation there was between the 2008 UK RAE rankings and the collective h-index of submitting departments. About 100 international scholars in Library and Information Science were ranked by their peers on the quality of their work. These rankings were correlated with the h and g scores the scholars had achieved. The results showed that there was a correlation between their median rankings and the indexes. The 2008 RAE grade point averages (GPA) achieved by departments from three UoAs – Anthropology, Library and Information Management and Pharmacy were compared with each of their collective h and g index scores. Results were mixed, with a strong correlation between pharmacy departments and index scores, followed by library and information management to anthropology where negative and non-significant results were found. Taken together, the findings from the research indicate that individual ranking by peer assessment and their h-index or variants was generally good. Results for the RAE 2008 gave correlations between GPA and successive versions of the h-index which varied in strength, except for anthropology where, it is suggested detailed cited reference searches must be undertaken to maximise citation counts.     

Real and rational variants of the h-index and the g-index

The definitions of the rational and real-valued variants of the h-index and g-index are reviewed. It is shown how they can be obtained both graphically and by calculation. Formulae are derived expressing the exact relations between the h-variants and between the g-variants. Subsequently these relations are examined. In a citation context the real h-index is often, but not always, smaller than the rational h-index. It is also shown that the relation between the real and the rational g-index depends on the number of citations of the article ranked g + 1. Maximum differences between h, h_r and h_rat on the one hand and between g, g_r and g_rat on the other are determined.     

高校档案馆社会化服务存在的问题及对策分析

高校档案馆不仅是高校信息资源存储的平台,也是高校联系社会的窗口,但在社会化服务中存在馆藏门类不齐全、管理模式缺现代、社会服务少主动等问题,因此高校档案馆需要转变观念,促进档案服务工作社会化;丰富馆藏,建立档案信息特色数据库;优化资源,促使档案服务形式多样化;广泛宣传,提高档案信息资源利用率。     

h指数和h型指数研究进展

本文从改进指数、实证分析、数学模型三方面,概述了国内外h指数和h型指数的研究进展,总结了h指数的优点与缺点,并将其与论文总数、引文总数和篇均引文数等传统文献计量学指标进行比较,认为h指数和h型指数可能发展成为重要评价工具和核心评价参数.     

Hirsch-type characteristics of the tail of distributions. The generalised h-index

In this paper a generalisation of the h-index and g-index is given on the basis of non-negative real-valued functionals defined on subspaces of the vector space generated by the ordered samples. Several Hirsch-type measures are defined and their basic properties are analysed. Empirical properties are illustrated using examples from the micro- and meso-level. Among these measures, the h-index proved the most, the arithmetic and geometric g-indices, the least robust measures. The μ-index and the harmonic g-index provide more balanced results and are still robust enough.     

The h-index Debate: An Introduction for Librarians

This article reviews the debate within bibliometrics regarding the h-index. Despite its popularity as a decision-making tool within higher education, the h-index has become increasingly controversial among specialists. Fundamental questions remain regarding the extent to which the h-index actually measures what it sets out to measure. Unfortunately, many aspects of this debate are confined to highly technical discussions in specialised journals. This article explains in simple terms exactly why a growing number of bibliometricians are sceptical that the h-index is a useful tool for evaluating researchers. It concludes that librarians should be cautious in their recommendations regarding this metric, at least until better evidence becomes available.     

Comparison of the citation distribution and h-index between groups of different sizes

Evaluating the performance of institutions with different resources is not easy, any citation distribution comparisons are strongly affected by the differences in the number of articles published. The paper introduces a method for comparing citation distributions of research groups that differ in size. The citation distribution of a larger group is reduced by a certain factor and compared with the original distribution of a smaller group. Expected values and tolerance intervals of the reduced set of citations are calculated. A comparison of both distributions can be conveniently viewed in a graph. The size-independent reduced Hirsch index – a function of reducing factor that allows the comparison of groups within a scientific field – is calculated in the same way. The method can be used for comparing groups or units differing in full-time equivalent, funding or the number of researchers, for comparing countries by population, gross domestic product, etc. It is shown that for the calculation of the reduced Hirsch index, the upper part of the original citation distribution is sufficient. The method is illustrated through several case comparisons.     

论高校图书馆社会化信息服务成本补偿

本文从新旧《普通高等学校图书馆规程》的比较入手,分析了高校图书馆信息服务的成本,探讨了社会化信息服务成本补偿的意义、必要性和实现形式,并指出了成本补偿对于信息公平和信息服务公平的促进作用。     

开放科学环境下负责任评价实现路径研究

开放科学的发展正在改变学术交流生态,同时对传统科研评价产生挑战,对于科研评价创新的呼声也日益高涨。负责任评价(RRA)应时而生并成为开放科学政策框架的重要组成部分,而如何实现RRA成为关键问题。本文解析开放科学环境下的RRA内涵,总结国内外相关理论与实践进展,在此基础上尝试探索RRA的实现路径,以期为“破四唯”指导下的我国科研评价提供借鉴与参考。以典型内容文本为数据源,通过关键词提取和共现分析得出结论,即以研究质量和影响力为主维度,以知情同行评议为主基调,构成国际RRA改革的主要思路。在分析开放科学背景下我国学术交流新业态与RRA的基础上,提出我国RRA的三层结构框架。其中以识别科研新范式为情境,以改善宏观政策为支撑,以改革评价方式为实操,以评价主体多元化、评价内容多维化、评价对象精准化、评价方法循证化为路径,建立有利于潜心研究和创新的我国科研评价制度,并回答科研评价改革的必答题：“谁来评”“评什么”“如何评”“怎么用”。研究认为,建立质量意识、培育“影响素养”、达成评价系统变革的国际共识,从而提高RRA的互操作性和可移植性,避免相关理论与实践的碎片化是保证RRA顺利实施的关键;将负责...     

No citation advantage for monograph-based collaborations?

It is widely believed that collaboration is advantageous in science, for example, with collaboratively written articles tending to attract more citations than solo articles and strong arguments for the value of interdisciplinary collaboration. Nevertheless, it is not known whether the same is true for research that produces books. This article tests whether co-authored scholarly monographs attract more citations than solo monographs using books published before 2011 from 30 categories in the Web of Science. The results show that solo monographs numerically dominate collaborative monographs, but give no evidence of a citation advantage for collaboration on monographs. In contrast, for nearly all these subjects (28 out of 30) there was a citation advantage for collaboratively produced journal articles. As a result, research managers and funders should not incentivise collaborative research in book-based subjects or in research that aims to produce monographs, but should allow the researchers themselves to freely decide whether to collaborate or not.     

Author-level metrics in the new academic profile platforms: The online behaviour of the Bibliometrics community

The new web-based academic communication platforms do not only enable researchers to better advertise their academic outputs, making them more visible than ever before, but they also provide a wide supply of metrics to help authors better understand the impact their work is making. This study has three objectives: a) to analyse the uptake of some of the most popular platforms (Google Scholar Citations, ResearcherID, ResearchGate, Mendeley and Twitter) by a specific scientific community (bibliometrics, scientometrics, informetrics, webometrics, and altmetrics); b) to compare the metrics available from each platform; and c) to determine the meaning of all these new metrics. To do this, the data available in these platforms about a sample of 811 authors (researchers in bibliometrics for whom a public profile Google Scholar Citations was found) were extracted. A total of 31 metrics were analysed. The results show that a high number of the analysed researchers only had a profile in Google Scholar Citations (159), or only in Google Scholar Citations and ResearchGate (142). Lastly, we find two kinds of metrics of online impact. First, metrics related to connectivity (followers), and second, all metrics associated to academic impact. This second group can further be divided into usage metrics (reads, views), and citation metrics. The results suggest that Google Scholar Citations is the source that provides more comprehensive citation-related data, whereas Twitter stands out in connectivity-related metrics.     

论社会意识对阅读的影响

社会意识是社会的精神生产过程,可分为社会心理、社会意识形式和社会思潮等层次.分别从这三个层次论述了社会意识对阅读活动的深刻影响.     

Modifying h-index by allocating credit of multi-authored papers whose author names rank based on contribution

In the present work we introduce a modification of the h-index for multi-authored papers with contribution based author name ranking. The modified h-index is denoted by h_mc-index. It employs the framework of the h_m-index, which in turn is a straightforward modification of the Hirsch index, proposed by Schreiber. To retain the merit of requiring no additional rearrangement of papers in the h_m-index and in order to overcome its shortage of benefiting secondary authors at the expense of primary authors, h_mc-index uses combined credit allocation (CCA) to replace fractionalized counting in the h_m-index. The h_m-index is a special form of h_mc-index and fits for papers with equally important authors or alphabetically ordered authorship. There is a possibility of an author of lower contribution to the whole scientific community obtaining a higher h_mc-index. Rational h_mc-index, denoted by h_mcr-index, can avoid it. A fictitious example as a model case and two empirical cases are analyzed. The correlations of the h_mcr-index with the h-index and its several variants considering multiple co-authorship are inspected with 30 researchers’ citation data. The results show that the h_mcr-index is more reasonable for authors with different contributions. A researcher playing more important roles in significant work will obtain higher h_mcr-index.     

An assessment of social sciences coverage by four prominent full-text online aggregated journal packages

The cost effectiveness and quality of full-text journals are analyzed for four prominent online aggregated journal packages: EBSCOhost Academic Search FullTEXT, UMI Proquest Direct Periodicals Research II, IAC’s Expanded Academic ASAP, and H.W. Wilson’s OmniFile. Price data from EBSCO’s Librarians’ Handbook are used to assess the total and average value of social sciences journals in each package. Quality of social sciences journals coverage is compared based on citation impact factors as recorded in Journal Citation Reports—Social Sciences Edition.     

Bi-directional h-index: A new measure of node centrality in weighted and directed networks

This paper builds an index family, named bi-directional h-index, to measure node centrality in weighted directed networks. Bi-directional h-index takes the directed degree centrality as the initial value and iteratively uses more network information to update the node’s importance. We prove the convergence of the iterative process after finite iterations and introduce an asynchronous updating process that provides a decentralized, local method to calculate the bi-directional h-index in large-scale networks and dynamic networks. The theoretical analysis manifests that the bi-directional h-index is feasible and significant for establishing a greater conceptual framework that includes some existing index concepts, such as lobby index, node’s h-index, c-index and iterative c-index. An example using journal citation networks indicates that the bi-directional h-index is different from directed degree centrality, directed node strength, directed h-degree and the HITS algorithm in ranking node importance. It is irreplaceable and can reflect these measures of node’s importance.