期刊文献+

科学评价体系中同行评议与文献计量的实证分析

Empirical Study on the Association between Expert Review and Bibliometrics in Research Assessment
下载PDF
导出
摘要 通过对比F1000因子与被引频次、F1000因子与期刊评价指标,并对主要指标进行相关性分析,来验证同行评议与引文分析间的相关性。结果表明,F1000因子与被引频次呈正相关性,即专家打分与被引频次变动方向相同;但也存在专家打分高的论文被引频次低,而专家打分低的论文被引频次高的事实。相关性分析的结果表明:在特征因子、SNIP等主要指标中,SJR、IF与专家评议值相关度最大。 In order to verify the association between expert assessment and bibliometric indicators, this paper compares the F1000 factor with cited times of articles. The result shows that there is a significant positive correlation between expert assessment of importance and impact as measured by number of citations overal . However, analysis indicates that there are some exceptions that some papers highly rated by experts were not highly cited, and vice versa. Meanwhile, the correlations analysis shows that the SJR and IF factor are more relevant with peer review.
作者 邓荔萍
出处 《数字图书馆论坛》 CSSCI 2014年第6期43-47,共5页 Digital Library Forum
关键词 科学评价 同行评议 文献计量 Research performance assessment Peer review Bibliometrics
  • 相关文献

参考文献6

  • 1SAAD G. Convergent validity between metrics of journal prestige:the Eigen factor, article influence, and h-index scores.Preprint. 被引量:1
  • 2Ronald Rousseau, the Stimulate 8 Group. On the relationbetween the Wos impact factor, the Eigen factor, the SCImagoJournal Rank, the Article Influence Score and the journalh-index. Preprint. 被引量:1
  • 3宋丽萍,王建芳,孙斌.相关性视角下的WoS与Scopus之比较[J].图书情报工作,2012,56(4):22-26. 被引量:10
  • 4LANE J. Let's make science metrics more scientific [J].Nature,2010, 464(25): 488-489. 被引量:1
  • 5Report on the pilot exercise to develop bibliometric indicatorsfor the Research Excellence Framework [EB/OL]. [2013-10-02].http://www.hefce.ac.uk/pubs/hefce/2009/09_39/09_39.pdf. 被引量:1
  • 6HARNAD S. Validating research performance metrics againstpeer rankings [J]. Ethics in Science and EnvironmentalPolitics, 2008, 8(11): 103-107. 被引量:1

二级参考文献6

  • 1Leydesdorff L. Scopus' s source normalized impact per paper (SNIP) versus a journal impact factor based on fractional counting of citations[ J] . Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology ,2010,61 ( 11 ) :2365 -2369. 被引量:1
  • 2Gorraiz J, Schlogl C. A bibliometfic analysis of pharmacology and pharmacy journals : Seopus versus Web of Science [ J] . Journal of Inforamtion Science, 2008,34(5 ) :715 -725. 被引量:1
  • 3Leydesdorff L. How are new citation-based journal indicators adding to the bibliometric toolbox? [ J] . Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 2009,60 ( 7 ) : 1327 - 1336. 被引量:1
  • 4Bollen J, Van de Sompel H. A principal component analysis of 39 scientific impact measures[EB/OL ]. [ 2011 - 07 - 12 ]. http :// scieng, library, ubc. ca/blog/category/news/podcasts/. 被引量:1
  • 5MoedHF.新的期刊计量指标:SNIP与SJR[EB/OL].[2011-07 -12 ] . http://chinal, elsevier, com/ElsevierDNN/Portals/7/ China/File/% E6% 96% BO% E7% 9A% 84% E6% 9C% 9F% E5 % 88%8A% E8% AE% Al% E9% 87% 8F% E6% 8C% 87% E6% A0% 87 -Henk. pdf. 被引量:1
  • 6Archambauh E, Campbell D. Comparing bibliometric statistics ob- tained from the web of science and scopus [ EB/OL]. [ 2011 -07 - 12 ] . http://arxiv, org/abs/0903. 5254. 被引量:1

共引文献9

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部