期刊文献+

基于合著网络的学术人才评价方法研究 被引量:13

Study on Scholars' Evaluation Method Based on Co-author Network
下载PDF
导出
摘要 现有学术评价方法体系存在着许多的不足之处一直被人们所诟病,如,同行评议的主观性、引文评价的自引、马太效应、引用偏见、引用曲解等等。从社会网络的视角,基于合著网络的中心度指标提出了一种新的学术人才评价方法,这种方法一定程度上弥补了传统评价方法的不足,为学术人才评价方法体系提供了新的视角。最后,我们提出了该方法的不足之处和改善方向,将基于合著网络的学术人才评价方法与传统的发文、引文评价方法结合起来,可以得到更为全面和客观的评价结果。 In order to make up the disadvantages of existing measures of scholar evaluation, for instance, subjectivity of peer view and self-citation, Matthew effect, citation bias, citing distortion etc in citation analysis, this paper presents a new method to scholars’ impact e-valuation from social network perspective based on the centrality index and co-author network. Finally, the deficiencies and improvements of the method are proposed. Evaluating scholars by peer review, papers productivity, citation analysis, co-network analysis, and other va-rious methods together will get more comprehensive and objective result.
出处 《情报杂志》 CSSCI 北大核心 2014年第12期77-82,共6页 Journal of Intelligence
基金 中国科技信息研究所委托课题"国际科技人才成长规律探究" 江苏省研究生培养创新工程项目"虚拟社会网络中用户信任建模与改善机制研究"(编号:CXLX12_0065)研究成果之一
关键词 学术人才评价 合著网络 社会网络 社会网络分析 中心度指标 评价指标体系 Scholars evaluation Co-author network Social network Social network analysis Centrality indicator Evaluation index
  • 相关文献

参考文献37

  • 1Milan Randic. Citations Versus Limitations of Citations: Beyond Hirsch Index [ J ]. Scientometrics, 2009,80 ( 3 ) :809-818.
  • 2Giovanni Abramo, Ciriaco Andrea, D' Angelo, Fulvio Viel. Peer Review Research Assessment:a Sensitivity Analysis of Perform- ance Ranks to the Share of Research Product Evaluated[ J]. Sci- entometrics ,2010,85 ( 3 ) :705-720.
  • 3Svider P F,Choudhry Z A,Choudhry O Jet al. The Use of the h -index in Academic Otolaryngology [ J]. The Laryngoscope, 2013, 123 ( 1 ) : 103-106.
  • 4Waltman L, Van Eck N J. The Inconsistency of the H-index [ J ]. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology ,2012,63 ( 2 ) :406-415.
  • 5Cole S, Cole J R, Simon G A. Chance and Consensus in Peer Re- view[ J]. Science, 1981,214:881-886.
  • 6Primoz, Juznic, et al. Scientometric Indicators: Peer-review, Bib- liometric Methods and Conflict of Interests [ J] Scientometrics, 2010,85(2) :429-441.
  • 7Sandstr6m,Martin HSllsten. Persistent Nepotism in Peer-review [ J ]. Scientometrics, 2008,74 ( 2 ) : 175 - 189.
  • 8WADE. Citation analysis : A New Tool for Science Administrators [ J]. Science, 1975,188:429-432.
  • 9M H Macroberts, Barbara R, Macroberts. Problems of Citation A- nalysis [ J]. Scientometrics, 1996,36 ( 3 ) :435-444.
  • 10M H MacRoberts, B R MacRoberts. Problems of citation analy- sis:A Study of Uncited and Seldom-cited Influences[ J]. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technolo- gy ,2010,61 ( 1 ) :1-12.

同被引文献198

引证文献13

二级引证文献58

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