面向学术图书的Altmetrics指标分析

[目的/意义] 探讨Altmetrics指标对学术图书影响力进行评价的有效性,为学术图书评价工作提出合理建议。[方法/过程] 获取Twitter提及量、Mendeley阅读量、在线书评数量以及馆藏量指标数据,对数据集的覆盖率、分位数等统计量分析后,将被引频数与Altmetrics指标进行了指标间相关系数检验,再对高Altmetrics指标值的学术图书进行年份分布、学科差异及图书主题等实证分析,探究各指标在学术图书影响力评价中的应用。[结果/结论] 传统计量指标被引频数与Altmetrics指标之间的相关性较低,说明Altmetrics可以作为学术图书评价的一个新视角,不同Altmetrics指标反映了学术图书影响力的不同维度。未来的学术图书影响力评价建议结合学术图书的年份、学科等特征,将传统的引文与Altmetrics指标相结合,探索更全面有效的评价机制。     

The Changing Research Data Landscape and the Experiences of Ethics Review Board Chairs: Implications for Library Practice and Partnerships

Academic libraries have to a large extent taken the lead in facilitating new approaches to research data management, but changes to the research data landscape have had an impact on numerous areas of academic work, including ethics review. Using interpretive phenomenological analysis of interviews with chairs of Canadian research ethics boards, this study explores how ethics review boards have experienced changes to data policy and related technologies in order to describe the ethical implications of new approaches to data management and to explore ways in which the library, ethics review boards, and other campus partners might harmonize efforts to support emerging data practices. While ethics review boards in Canada are keenly aware of open data policies, data publishing in practice is still nascent. There is uncertainty about the adoption of changing technologies for research and their impacts on privacy protection. Where responsibility lies for addressing these uncertainties is often unclear. Academic libraries and research ethics boards are well-suited to engage in mutual knowledge transfer and to integrate data management planning and ethics review processes. Institutional-level oversight that includes all campus departments impacted by changes to the research data landscape may facilitate improved communication and reduce role ambiguity.     

Sampling Methods and Sample Populations in Quantitative Mass Communication Research Studies: A 15-Year Census of Six Journals

This study evaluated the sampling methods and sample populations used in all U.S.-based survey and experimental mass communication studies published between 2000 and 2014 in six major journals (N = 1,173). Most studies used nonprobability samples, and more than half used student samples. Experiments used more nonprobability and student samples than surveys. Funded studies used more probability and nonstudent samples than nonfunded studies. Implications of results pertaining to population validity and interpretations of findings for mass communication research are discussed.     

生存分析法在学术期刊评价上的应用初探

期刊评价中文献老化理论视角的研究相对薄弱。本文探究生存分析法在学术期刊评价上的应用,在理论上 克服了因领域差异导致的壁垒,并选取CSTPCD中30家中文物理学科期刊作为样本数据集进行实证研究。通过对论文 被引时序数据进行分析,研究物理学科文献老化规律,并选取样本期刊进行对比分析,以探究期刊评价的新思路。     

Research universities on the ResearchGate social networking site: An examination of institutional differences,research activity level,and social networks formed

As one of the largest active academic social networking sites, ResearchGate (RG) has been utilized by scholars to share publications, seek collaborators, communicate work in progress, and build scholarly reputation. This study collects data from RG users from 61 U.S. research universities at different research activity levels, as categorized by the Carnegie Classification of Institutions of Higher Education, to examine the impact of institutional differences on RG reputational metrics. The results confirm that RG is a research-oriented academic social networking site that closely and realistically mirrors the research activity level of institutions. With an increase in the research activity level of a university, its affiliated RG users tend to have higher RG scores, more publications and citations, and more profile views and followers, while the average number of reads of their publications and followees tend to be lower and fluctuant. In addition, RG users primarily follow others from institutions of a higher research activity level, forming virtual social networks centered around esteemed institutions. The study suggests academic social networks can serve as indicators in evaluation of research activities among research institutions, and such sites can be helpful and credible for acquiring resources, keeping informed about research, and promoting academic influence.     

A comparison of two approaches for measuring interdisciplinary research output: The disciplinary diversity of authors vs the disciplinary diversity of the reference list

This study investigates the convergence of two bibliometric approaches to the measurement of interdisciplinary research: one based on analyzing disciplinary diversity in the reference list of publications, the other based on the disciplinary diversity of authors of publications. In particular we measure the variety, balance, disparity and integrated diversity index of, respectively, single-author, multi-author single-field, and multi-author multi-field publications. We find that, in general, the diversity of the reference list grows with the number of fields reflected in a paper’s authors’ list and, to a lesser extent, with the number of authors being equal the number of fields. Further, we find that when fields belonging to different disciplines are reflected in the authors’ list, the disparity in the reference list is higher than in the case of fields belonging to the same discipline. However, this general tendency varies across disciplines, and noticeable exceptions are found at individual paper level.     

Technological research in the EU is less efficient than the world average. EU research policy risks Europeans’ future

We have studied the efficiency of research in the EU by a percentile-based citation approach that analyzes the distribution of country papers among the world papers. Going up in the citation scale, the frequency of papers from efficient countries increases while the frequency from inefficient countries decreases. In the percentile-based approach, this trend, which is uniform at any citation level, is measured by the e_p index that equals the P_{top 1%}/P_{top 10%} ratio. By using the e_p index we demonstrate that EU research on fast-evolving technological topics is less efficient than the world average and that the EU is far from being able to compete with the most advanced countries. The e_p index also shows that the USA is well ahead of the EU in both fast- and slow-evolving technologies, which suggests that the advantage of the USA over the EU in innovation is due to low research efficiency in the EU. In accord with some previous studies, our results show that the European Commission’s ongoing claims about the excellence of EU research are based on a wrong diagnosis. The EU must focus its research policy on the improvement of its inefficient research. Otherwise, the future of Europeans is at risk.     

美国一流研究型大学教师晋升的评价标准及过程保障

通过对10所美国一流研究型大学的案例分析,发现其教师晋升评价坚持“不以数量定质量”的整体性原则,在评价标准上强调教师一流学者的身份定位、重视多元形式的创造性学术成果、关注教师潜力等能力发展,以及注重学术成果的影响和贡献。在过程保障上,构建了自下而上的校内审查制度和基于比较的同行评议制度,并以校内主体的分权制衡、严格的同行专家准入、完备的申诉、回避和保密制度保障了评价过程的规范性和专业性。这启示我国高校应发挥教师晋升评价的发展性功能,推动同行评议制度的理性回归,加强评价过程中的教师权益保障。     

家园共育视域下的智能化幼儿发展评价

在家园共育视域下,研究发现家长参与的幼儿发展评价存在评价观念偏颇、评价参与表浅以及评价沟通不足等现实困境。以幼儿发展评价在智能技术驱动下所面临的智能化升级为契机,构筑智能化幼儿发展评价双向驱动模型。该模型围绕“一个中心、双向驱动、三个阶段以及多次迭代”的内容要旨,依托智能评价系统落实三阶段幼儿发展评价实施流程,具有权责分明、精准施测以及交互充分的应用优势,有助于发挥家园共育的协同育人价值。     

教育评价改革如何应对AI快速发展的挑战？

继ChatGPT之后,文生视频Sora横空出世。为了应对人工智能快速发展带来的挑战,我国学校教育正在加快推进 AI+教育,但是 AI+教育受唯分数、唯升学、唯学历的教育评价体系的影响,存在知识化、应试化倾向,人工智能在教育领域的应用还主要服务于应试,这既不符合教育改革方向,也难以培养适应人工智能时代的创新人才。应对人工智能快速发展的挑战,关键在推进教育评价改革,要坚定破除唯分数、唯升学的教育评价顽瘴痼疾,要在推进教育评价改革过程中,利用人工智能技术提高评价的效率与公信力。