期刊文献+

学者学术影响力评价指标的优选与学术行为特点的国内外比较 被引量:32

Optimization of the Evaluation Indicators of Scholars' Research Impact and Comparative Analysis Between National and International Academic Behaviors of Researchers
原文传递
导出
摘要 以中国医学科学院73位从事临床科研的博士生导师为样本,分析不同学术年龄组在各学术影响力指标上的表现差异,并采用方差分析和相关性分析辅助优选指标。得到的优选指标包括发文量、总被引次数、篇均被引次数、h指数、A指数g、指数和累计影响因子,其中与"平均量"相关的篇均被引次数、A指数更适合于评价中国高水平学者的学术表现;而m熵指数不太适合于评价中国学者的国际影响力;中国科研人员的评价应该注意学术年龄这一因素。 Taking 73 doctoral supervisors devoted to clinical research in Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences as the samples, the paper analyzes the difference of research performances on several indicators, and tries to assist in optimizing the evaluation indicators by using the statistical methods of ANOVA and correlation analysis. The optimized evaluation indicators include number of articles, total cited times, cited times per paper, h-index, A-index, g-index and accumulated impact factor of journals. Average counts related indi- cators ( e. g. cited times per paper and A-index) are more suitable for assessing Chinese high-level scholar. The indicator of m quotient is not suitable for evaluating international impact of Chinese scholars. The evaluation of Chinaese researchers should pay attention to the factor of scientific age.
出处 《图书情报工作》 CSSCI 北大核心 2011年第10期98-102,143,共6页 Library and Information Service
基金 中国医学科学院医学信息研究所中央级公益性科研院所基本科研业务费资助项目"基于引证分析的学术影响力理论与实践研究"(项目编号:09R0216)研究成果之一
关键词 学者 学术影响力 学术行为 学术年龄 评价指标 引证分析 scholars research impact academic behaviors scientific age evaluation indicators citation analysis
  • 相关文献

参考文献16

  • 1Costas R, Bordons M. Bibliometric indicators at the microlevel: Some results in the area of natural resources at the Spanish CSIC. Research Evaluation, 2005,14 ( 2 ) : 110 - 120.
  • 2Sandstrom U, Sandstrom E. Meeting the micro-level challenges: Bibliometrics at the individual level//12th International Conference on Scientometrics and Informetrics,Rio de Janeiro, Brazil,2009.
  • 3Costas R, Bordons M. Is g-index better than h-index? An exploratory study at the individual level. Scientometrics, 2008,77 ( 2 ) :267-288.
  • 4Van Leeuwen T N, Visser M S, Moed H F, et al. The holy grail of science policy: Exploring and combining bibliometrics in search of scientific excellence. Scientometrics,2003,57(2) :257 -280.
  • 5张玢,杜建,王敏,张燕舞,阿丽塔,刘晓婷,李海存,许培扬.评价学术影响力的引证分析指标研究综述[J].医学信息学杂志,2010,31(12):41-46. 被引量:24
  • 6Hirsch J E. An index to quantify an individual' s scientific research outputn Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2005,102 (46) : 16569 - 16572.
  • 7丁楠,潘有能.h指数和g指数评价实证研究——基于CSSCI的统计分析[J].图书与情报,2008(2):001-004. 被引量:32
  • 8Egghe L. Theory and practise of the g-index. Scientometrics ,2006, 69(1) :131 -152.
  • 9金碧辉,Rousseau Ronald.R指数、AR指数:h指数功能扩展的补充指标[J].科学观察,2007,2(3):1-8. 被引量:177
  • 10朱平.应用H指数对研究所高层科研人员科研成就评价的适用性分析//第八届全国科技评价学术研讨会论文集.天津:中国科学学与科技政策研究会,2008:159-164.

二级参考文献52

共引文献230

同被引文献421

引证文献32

二级引证文献144

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