Evidence-based Nomenclature and Taxonomy of Research Impact Indicators

Purpose: This study aims to classify research impact indicators based on their characteristics and scope. A concept of evidence-based nomenclature of research impact(RI) indicator has been introduced for generalization and transformation of scope. Design/methodology/approch: Literature was collected related to the research impact assessment. It was categorized in conceptual and applied case studies. One hundred and nineteen indicators were selected to prepare classification and nomenclature. The nomenclature was developed based on the principle—"every indicator is a contextual-function to explain the impact". Every indicator was disintegrated into three parts, i.e. Function, Domain, and Target Areas.Findings: The main functions of research impact indicators express improvement(63%), recognition(23%), and creation/development(14%). The focus of research impact indicators in literature is more towards the academic domain(59%) whereas the environment/sustainability domain is least considered(4%). As a result, research impact related to the research aspects is felt the most(29%). Other target areas include system and services, methods and procedures, networking, planning, policy development, economic aspects and commercialisation, etc. Research limitations: This research applied to 119 research impact indicators. However, the inclusion of additional indicators may change the result. Practical implications: The plausible effect of nomenclature is a better organization of indicators with appropriate tags of functions, domains, and target areas. This approach also provides a framework of indicator generalization and transformation. Therefore, similar indicators can be applied in other fields and target areas with modifications. Originality/value: The development of nomenclature for research impact indicators is a novel approach in scientometrics. It is developed on the same line as presented in other scientific disciplines, where fundamental objects need to classify on common standards such as biology and chemistry.

W-Index: A Weighted Index for Evaluating Research Impact

Academic evaluations such as tenure/promotion applications and society fellowship nominations rely heavily on bibliometric measures of each candidate’s research impact, including their research citations. This article first reviews existing evaluation criteria such as the h-index and q-most-citations, and then proposes a weighted w-index which minimizes shortcomings in existing single-number measures. The w-index consists of three factors—3 most cited first-author publications, 3 most cited publications as the corresponding/last author, and 3 additional most cited publications as a co-author, but does not allow double counting of these publications.

Bibliometrics： tracking research impact by selecting Lhe appropriate metrics

Traditionally, the success of a researcher is assessed by the number of publications he or she publishes in peer-reviewed, indexed, high impact journals. This essential yardstick, often referred to as the impact of a specific researcher, is assessed through the use of various metrics. While researchers may be acquainted with such matrices, many do not know how to use them to enhance their careers. In addition to these metrics, a number of other factors should be taken into consideration to objectively evaluate a scientist＇s profile as a researcher and academician. Moreover, each metric has its own limitations that need to be considered when selecting an appropriate metric for evaluation. This paper provides a broad overview of the wide array of metrics currently in use in academia and research. Popular metrics are discussed and defined, including traditional metrics and article-level metrics, some of which are applied to researchers for a greater understanding of a particular concept, including varicocete that is the thematic area of this Special Issue of Asian Journal of Andrology. We recommend the combined use of quantitative and qualitative evaluation using judiciously selected metrics for a more objective assessment of scholarly output and research impact.

Limitations of citation analysis on the measurement of research impact:A summary

Although citation analysis is broadly used to design and develop bibliometric indicators or methods measuring the research impact,some limitations of citation analysis regarding citing motivation and behavior,database coverage and bias,as well as the analytical methods may threaten the validity and reliability of the measurement.This paper reviews the literature on the limitations of citation analysis in the measurement of research impact,which is not addressed by many bibliometric studies introducing new indicators or methods for research evaluation,to remind researchers of the possible inappropriate use of citation-based indicators or methods on research evaluation.

A Framework for the Assessment of Research and Its Impacts

This paper proposes a holistic framework for the development of models for the assessment of research activities and their impacts. It distinguishes three dimensions, including in an original way, data as a main dimension, together with theory and methodology. Each dimension of the framework is further characterized by three main building blocks： education, research, and innovation （theory）; efficiency, effectiveness, and impact （methodology）; and availability, interoperability, and ＂unit-free＂ property （data）. The different dimensions and their nine constituent building blocks are attributes of an overarching concept, denoted as ＂quality.＂ Three additional quality attributes are identified as implementation factors （tailorability, transparency, and openness） and three ＂enabling＂ conditions （convergence, mixed methods, and knowledge infrastructures） complete the fi-amework. A framework is required to develop models of metrics. Models of metrics are necessary to assess the meaning, validity, and robustness of metrics. The proposed framework can be a useful reference for the development of the ethics of research evaluation. It can act as a common denominator for different analytical levels and relevant aspects and is able to embrace many different and heterogeneous streams of literature. Directions for future research are provided.

Unequal Distribution of Innovation Efforts for Neglected Tropical Diseases: The Role of Funding Evaluation Criteria

Background: International research and innovation efforts for neglected tropical diseases have increased in recent decades due to disparities in overall health research funding in relation to global burden of disease. However, within the field of neglected tropical diseases some seem far more neglected than others. In this research the aim is to investigate the distribution of resources and efforts, as well as the mechanisms that underpin funding allocation for neglected tropical diseases. Methodology: A systematic literature review was conducted to establish a comprehensive overview of known indicators for innovation efforts related to a wide range of neglected tropical diseases. Articles were selected based on a subjective evaluation of their relevance, the presence of original data, and the breadth of their scope. This was followed by thirteen in-depth open-ended interviews with representatives of private, public and philanthropic funding organizations, concerning evaluation criteria for funding research proposals. Results: The findings reveal a large difference in the extent to which the individual diseases are neglected with notable differences between absolute and relative efforts. Criteria used in the evaluation of research proposals relate to potential impact, the probability of success and strategic fit. Private organizations prioritize strategic fit and economic impact;philanthropic organizations prioritize short-term societal impact;and public generally prioritize the probability of success by accounting for follow-up funding and involvement of industry. Funding decisions of different types of organizations are highly interrelated. Conclusions: This study shows that the evaluation of funding proposals introduces and retains unequal funding distribution, reinforcing the relative neglect of diseases. Societal impact is the primary rationale for funding but application of it as a funding criterion is associated with significant challenges. Furthermore, current application of evaluation criteria leads to a primary focus on short-term impact. Through current practice, the relatively most neglected diseases will remain so, and a long-term strategy is needed to resolve this.

开放科学环境下负责任评价实现路径研究

开放科学的发展正在改变学术交流生态,同时对传统科研评价产生挑战,对于科研评价创新的呼声也日益高涨。负责任评价(RRA)应时而生并成为开放科学政策框架的重要组成部分,而如何实现RRA成为关键问题。本文解析开放科学环境下的RRA内涵,总结国内外相关理论与实践进展,在此基础上尝试探索RRA的实现路径,以期为“破四唯”指导下的我国科研评价提供借鉴与参考。以典型内容文本为数据源,通过关键词提取和共现分析得出结论,即以研究质量和影响力为主维度,以知情同行评议为主基调,构成国际RRA改革的主要思路。在分析开放科学背景下我国学术交流新业态与RRA的基础上,提出我国RRA的三层结构框架。其中以识别科研新范式为情境,以改善宏观政策为支撑,以改革评价方式为实操,以评价主体多元化、评价内容多维化、评价对象精准化、评价方法循证化为路径,建立有利于潜心研究和创新的我国科研评价制度,并回答科研评价改革的必答题:“谁来评”“评什么”“如何评”“怎么用”。研究认为,建立质量意识、培育“影响素养”、达成评价系统变革的国际共识,从而提高RRA的互操作性和可移植性,避免相关理论与实践的碎片化是保证RRA顺利实施的关键;将负责任评价理念与实现路径本土化,营造有利于开放科学发展的学术交流环境,将成为我国图书情报工作的新使命。

基于文献计量的建筑类高校科研产出及学科影响力分析——安徽建筑大学与对标高校的比较分析

高校科研产出是体现高校教学科研能力的重要指标,是衡量高校学科发展水平内涵式发展的核心要素。文章利用ESI和InCites数据库,从Web of Science论文数、被引频次、引文影响力、H指数、Q1论文、国际国内合作论文、潜力值(被引频次/阈值)等指标体系,对比分析安徽建筑大学的科研论文产出及影响力,预测优势及潜力学科,提出优化学科发展布局、拓展深层次的国际合作与交流等建议,为新一轮高水平建筑类大学学科建设提供基础支撑和要素保障。

基于因果链的国家自然科学基金长周期影响评估逻辑框架构建研究

对国家自然科学基金探索开展长周期、学术性与社会影响的全面系统的影响评估,有助于全面总结基金资助的广泛经济社会影响,并提出更为有效的资助方式。本文基于变革理论和因果链分析,首先清晰界定了基础研究计划影响和影响评估的概念;然后从变革的发展阶段综合考虑科学基金的学术与社会影响,构建出“科研产出、科研影响、科研环境”的多维影响评估逻辑,由此设计了国家自然科学基金影响评估的逻辑框架;进一步以国家自然科学基金的一个资助计划为典型案例,从该计划的定位、目标、成效出发,依据影响评估的逻辑框架设计出具体评估内容,并提出了开展基础研究计划影响评估的政策建议。

跨介质航行器入水流固耦合特性研究综述

本文综述了跨介质航行器入水问题的研究进展,特别关注了入水流固耦合特性、弹性体结构入水冲击以及高速入水现象。入水过程涉及复杂的流体动力学现象,包括空泡形成、冲击载荷以及与航行体动力学特性的相互作用,这些因素都对航行器的设计和性能产生重大影响。本文讨论了跨介质航行器的基本概念,其具有独特的战略应用价值。入水过程中的关键挑战包括处理巨大的冲击载荷和复杂的流体动力学特性,这要求对航行器的形状、入水速度和入水姿态进行精密控制以优化性能。针对不同形状的航行体如何影响冲击响应和空泡动态,详细介绍了通过高速摄影和传感器技术在不同条件下进行的入水试验,这些试验帮助研究学者观察并分析了入水过程中的空泡形成、流体喷射以及随后的空泡闭合等现象。随着计算技术的进步,人们开始使用仿真技术研究多相流动和航行体结构的相互作用。总之,跨介质航行器的入水研究是一个多学科交叉的研究。通过深入理解入水过程中的物理现象和力学响应,可以为未来航行器的设计和操作提供科学依据,推动海空一体化航行器技术的发展。

油藏水驱中注水水质对驱替效果的影响研究

本文通过深入探讨油藏水驱中注水水质对驱替效果的影响,分析了水的物理性质、化学性质以及与原油的相容性对水驱效果的重要性,随后从水质优化和源头水质处理的角度,探讨了提升水驱效果的关键策略。综合考虑注水方案的优化、水质的控制和优化、地层渗透率的提高以及加强监测和调控等多个方面,本文旨在为油藏水驱的实际应用提供科学的指导和决策支持。

青藏高原气候变化及其对水资源影响的研究进展

回顾总结了近20年、特别是近10年来青藏高原气候变化的特征、变化的原因及其对高原水资源的影响方面的最新研究进展。1960年以来青藏高原地区总体气温显著升高,升温趋势存在明显的海拔依赖性,温室气体、冰雪反照率反馈、云-水汽-辐射反馈、局地强迫等是影响高原气温上升具有海拔依赖性的重要因素。总体上青藏高原降水呈现增加趋势,变化的区域性和季节性差异比气温变化的时空差异更强;降水空间变化主要分为南北偶极型、东西偶极型、中部和边缘差异型和多元型;夏季降水增加最为显著。受气候变化和人为气溶胶排放等影响,青藏高原水资源特别是冰冻圈水资源发生剧烈的变化,大部分冰川加速退缩、冰川径流增加、湖泊严重扩张,导致青藏高原上水循环加强和气候偏暖湿化;青藏高原积雪的变化具有明显的年代际特征。最后提出未来需要进一步开展的研究方向和政策建议。

研究堆用铝合金辐照性能研究

铝合金由于其较好的力学性能和优良的抗中子辐照性能,常被选作研究堆关键部位的结构材料。随着研究堆运行寿命的增加,该结构材料经过高中子注量的辐照后,其力学性能是否能满足堆芯结构完整性要求值得关注,本文基于上述问题对铝合金的辐照性能开展研究,获取了研究堆辐照孔道及堆芯支撑结构材料(LT-21型铝合金)拉伸试验及冲击试验数据。

自媒体对大学生身体活动参与度的影响研究

该文采用文献资料法、问卷调查法和数理统计法,对在校大学生身体活动情况以及自媒体参与情况进行调查与分析,提升在校大学生身体活动参与度,帮助大学生提高体质健康水平。研究发现,近年来在校大学生BMI指数有所增加,大学生体质下滑仍是需要关注的重要问题;在校大学生身体活动参与度仍有不足,女生更为突出。在网络信息高度发达的今天,自媒体传播信息有着极强的影响力和发展空间,对人们的影响也在日益增强。在校大学生接触自媒体、参与自媒体程度高。通过接触自媒体,提升在校大学生身体活动参与度存在较大的可能性,对男生的影响效果较为显著,而对女生的影响效果并不显著。通过接触自媒体,提升在校大学生的身体活动参与度具有两面性,需要自媒体发布人、自媒体平台、学校和社会的不断努力,才能降低消极影响,提升积极影响。学校应将自媒体这一传播手段进行筛选,并应用于在校大学生体育课程和课余时间中,以提高其参与不同类型、不同形式的身体活动的积极性和参与度。

第二次青藏高原综合科学考察学术产出及影响研究

文章基于文献计量方法,定量分析了第二次青藏高原综合科学考察研究专项近5年来的学术产出、学术影响和社会影响情况,以期对我国青藏高原科研布局以及科技评估提供有益的参考。从产出规模来看,第二次青藏科考专项在同期为我国青藏高原研究贡献了24.94%的论文产出、60.93%的NSP期刊论文和41.90%的高影响力期刊论文。从学术影响来看,专项在同期为我国青藏高原研究贡献了25.17%的论文被引用次数和45%的学科前1%高引用论文。从社会影响来看,专项在同期为我国青藏高原研究贡献了27.89%的国际合作论文,其中近四分之一为“一带一路”国家,促进了我国的国际合作交流和“一带一路”倡议的实施。专项的近三分之一论文引用为国际引用,对我国在青藏高原研究领域的国际影响力和引领地位起到了增强和促进作用。

近40余年中国生态补偿研究进展与实践探索综述

生态补偿为生态系统服务提供者和受益者之间构建了一种公正有效的社会经济联系,日益成为调节社会经济发展与生态环境保护两者关系的重要政策工具,特别是改革开放后的近40余年,我国生态补偿在理论研究与实践探索两个层面取得较大进展。基于文献、资料梳理与分析可知,国内外生态补偿研究与实践特征在研究内容、补偿模式、融资方式、标准核定等方面存在显著差异。国内以生态补偿机制研究为重点,以流域生态补偿、生态补偿标准核算、生态补偿影响因素分析、生态补偿政策措施制定、生态补偿效益评估等为主要内容的理论研究丰富。实践层面,我国生态补偿政策制度探索大致经历了初始、形成、快速发展和全面推进四个阶段的纵深发展过程,总体上形成了以政府补偿为主、市场补偿为辅,独具“中国特色”的生态补偿实践体系与框架。区域生态补偿实践受到生态补偿政策顶层设计、区域社会经济发展水平、区域地理环境特征与生态资源禀赋、区域突出生态环境问题、区域外部社会环境、公众感知能力及参与度六大因素的协同影响,呈现横纵贯穿、内外结合结构下发挥约束—引导—需求—激励作用的四维生态补偿实践影响机制。未来有待进一步深化生态补偿机制研究,建立健全生态补偿管理体制及市场机制,推进区域协调发展与美丽中国建设。

社会影响力评价:高校有组织科研评价的新方向

相对于学术影响力评价而言,社会影响力评价的本质是以科研成果的创新质量与社会贡献为核心,对促进高校有组织科研的导向性、交叉性和协同性具有重要意义。构建基于社会影响力的科研评价体系应坚持社会逻辑的评价理念、强调评价内容的跨界整合、促进多元主体协同创新和指向评价方法的综合集成。社会影响力评价带来高校有组织科研评价理念引领度、社会贡献度、主体参与度、方法集成度等评价要素的多重创新。对此,高校有组织科研社会影响力评价应秉持系统科学思想,迈向复杂科学评价范式;立足质量创新导向,完善科研评价体制机制;引入循证科研评价,创新数据信息采集方法。

新能源汽车技术发展对汽车检修行业的影响研究

新能源汽车以其环保、节能、高效的优势,在全球范围内得到快速推广和应用。与传统燃油汽车相比,新能源汽车在动力系统、电控系统等方面具有显著差异,对汽车检修行业提出了新的要求和挑战。本文在分析新能源汽车技术特点及其发展现状的基础上,重点探讨了新能源汽车技术对汽车检修工艺、设备和人员技能等方面的影响。本文提出汽车检修行业应加强新能源汽车技术培训、加大检修设备投入、优化检修流程、建立产学研合作机制等应对策略,以适应新能源汽车技术发展的需要,实现行业转型升级和可持续发展。

未竟的影响:澳大利亚高校“双科研评价机制”的设计与争议

随着影响议程在学术领域的兴起,非学术影响评价作为一种新的实践,正成为世界各国科研评价改革的重心。2018年澳大利亚在“科研卓越评估”(ERA)基础上,引入“社会互动与影响力评价”(EI),形成“学术影响”与“非学术影响”并举的“双科研评价机制”。前者立足于发挥知识生产创新的核心功能,实现重大原始创新突破;在此基础上后者致力于促进科研成果转化和应用,二者联合构建出科研内在质量和外在效益相得益彰的创新型制度设计。相较于其他国家的单一制度设计,澳大利亚统筹多重制度的运作逻辑,以谋求科技创新和学术研究的突破性变革,重拾了历史上因政治因素而被搁置的非学术影响评价,构筑出科研发展的战略合力,但同时也面临功能定位、要素构造、实践指向等方面的争议。值我国开展有组织科研之际,上述经验思路对如何深化高校科研体制机制改革和建设可以提供反思和镜鉴。