期刊文献+
任意字段
题名或关键词
题名
关键词
文摘
作者
第一作者
机构
刊名
分类号
参考文献
作者简介
基金资助
栏目信息

基于百分位数的文献计量指标研究综述 被引量：12

Review on Percentile-based Bibliometric Indicator
原文传递
导出
摘要 基于百分位数的文献计量指标是在关于相对引用指标的讨论中提出,随后被逐渐应用于研究绩效评价。在说明百分位数指标提出背景的基础上,对其概念和类型进行简要总结和比较。详细阐述百分位数指标在计算过程中论文百分位等级确定和论文百分数归类的问题,并进一步分析百分位数指标的应用现状和存在的问题。 Percentile is established in bibliometrics as an important alternative to Relative Citation Rate, and then applied to the evaluation of research performance. This paper introduces the background of percentile - based bibliometrie indicator and describes the concept and types and advantages of using percentiles in bibliometric. It also elaborates the problems in the calculation of percentiles and further assignment of percentile rank, and further analyzes the application of percentile- based bibliometrie indicator.
作者 周群 左文革 陈仕吉
机构地区 中国农业大学图书馆
出处 《现代图书情报技术》 CSSCI 北大核心 2013年第7期82-88,共7页 New Technology of Library and Information Service
关键词 文献计量学 百分位数 研究绩效 被引频次 Bibliometric Percentile Research performance Citation counts
分类号 G353.1 [文化科学—情报学]
  • 相关文献

参考文献45

  • 1Opthof T, Leydesdorff L. Caveats for theJournal and Field Normal?izations in the CWTS (" Leiden") Evaluations of Research Per?formance[J].Journal of Informetrics ,2010,4 (3) :423 - 430.
  • 2Bornmann L, Mutz R. Further Steps Towards an Ideal Method of Measuring Citation Performance , The Avoidance of Citation (Ratio) Averages in Field - normalization[J].Journal of lnformetrics , 2011 ,5 (1 ) :228 - 230.
  • 3Schubert A, Braun T. Cross - field Normalization of Scientometric Indicators[J] . Scientometrics, 1996, 36 ( 3 ) : 311 - 324.
  • 4Schubert A, Braun T. Relative Indicators and Relational Charts for Comparative Assessment of Publication Output and Citation Impact[J]. Scientometrics, 1986,9 (5 - 6) :281 - 291.
  • 5Glanzel W, Thijs B, Schubert A, et al. Subfield - specific Nor?malized Relative Indicators and a New Generation of Relational Charts: Methodological Foundations Illustrated on the Assessment of Institutional Research Performance[J] . Scientometrics, 2009 , 78 (1 ) : 165 -188.
  • 6Moed H F, De Bruin R E, Van Leeuwen TN. New Bibliometric Tools for the Assessment of National Research Performance- Data?base Description, Overview of Indicators and First Applications[J]. Scientometrics, 1995, 33 (3) :381 -422.
  • 7Van Raan A F 1. Measuring Science: Capita Selecta of Current Main Issues[AJ . / / Moed H F, Glanzel W, Schmoch U. Hand?book of Quantitative Science and Technology Research[MJ . Springer,2oo5 : 19 - 50.
  • 8Leydesdorff L, Bommann L, Mutz R, et al. Turning the Tables on Citation Analysis One More Time: Principles for Comparing Sets of Documents[J].Journal of the American Society for Information Sci?ence and Technology, 2011 ,62(7) :1370 -1381.
  • 9Waltman L, Van Eck NJ, Van Leeuwen TN, et al. Towards a New Crown Indicator: An Empirical Analysis[J]. Scientometrics, 2011 ,87(3) :467 -481.
  • 10Waltman L, Van Eck NJ, Van Leeuwen T N, et al. Towards a New Crown Indicator: Some Theoretical Considerations[J].Jour?nal of Informetrics ,2011,5 ( 1) :37 - 47.

二级参考文献23

  • 1Schubert A, Braun T. Cross-field normalization of scientometric indicators[J]. Scientometrics, 1996, 36(3) : 311 -324.
  • 2Schubert A, Braun T. Reference standards for citation based assessments[J]. Scientometrics, 1993, 26(1) : 21 -35.
  • 3Schubert A, Braun T. Relative indicators and relational charts for comparative assessment of publication output and citation impact [J]. Scientometrics, 1986, 9(5) : 281 -291.
  • 4Vinkler P. Model for quantitative selection of relative scientometric impact indicators[J]. Scientometrics, 1996, 36 (2) : 223 - 236.
  • 5Vinkler P. Evaluation of some methods for the relative assessment of scientific publications[ J ]. Scientometrics, 1986, 10 (3) : 157 - 177.
  • 6Glanzel W, Thijs B, Schubert A, et al. Subfield-specific normalized relative indicators and a new generation of relational charts: Methodological foundations illustrated on the assessment of institutional research performance [ J ]. Scientometries, 2009, 78 (1): 165-188.
  • 7van Raan A F J. The use of bibliometric analysis in research performance assessment and monitoring of interdisciplinary scientific developments [ J ]. Assessment Theory and Practice, 2003, 1(12) : 20-29.
  • 8Seglen P O. The skewness of science[J]. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 1992, 43 (9) : 628 - 638.
  • 9Bornmann L. Towards an ideal method of measuring research performance: Some comments to the opthof and leydesdorff (2010) paper [J]. Journal of Informetries, 2010, 4(3): 441 -443.
  • 10Bornmann L, Mutz R, Neuhans C, et al. Citation counts for research evaluation: Standards of good practice for analyzing bibliometric data and presenting and interpreting results [ J ].Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics, 2008, 8 : 93 - 102.

共引文献46

同被引文献187

引证文献12

二级引证文献60

现代图书情报技术
2013年 第7期

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