基于期刊编委指数的科研机构学术影响力评价研究：以地质学为例

doi:10.3772/j.issn.1000-0135.2018.01.002

情报学报

2018, Vol. 37

Issue (1): 14-24 DOI: 10.3772/j.issn.1000-0135.2018.01.002

情报理论与应用

本期目录 | 过刊浏览 | 高级检索

基于期刊编委指数的科研机构学术影响力评价研究：以地质学为例

卢小莉^1,2,3, 李晶^1,4, 吴登生¹

1. 中国科学院科技战略咨询研究院,北京 100190;
2. 中国科学院大学公共政策与管理学院,北京 100049;
3. 中国地质图书馆,北京 100083;
4. 安徽大学管理学院,合肥 230039

Evaluating the Scholarly Impact of Institutes Based on the Journal Editorship Index: Empirical Analysis in Geology

Lu Xiaoli^1,2,3, Li Jing^1,4, Wu Dengsheng¹

1. Institutes of Science and Development, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100190;
2. School of Public Policy and Management, University of Chinese Academy of Science, Beijing 100049;
3. National Geological Library of China, Beijing 100083;
4. School of Management, Anhui University, Hefei 230039

摘要
图/表
参考文献
相关文章 (5)

全文: PDF (496 KB) HTML (1 KB)
输出: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

摘要针对科研机构学术影响力评价研究中多维数据难以获取、定量定性结合不强等问题,提出运用期刊编委数据来度量科研机构的学术影响力,既采用了文献数据这一客观信息源,同时也兼顾同行专家的意见。构建期刊编委指数（Journal Editorship Index）,综合考虑了期刊等级,编委等级和编委规模的影响,从多个维度来反映科研机构的学术影响力。以地质学为应用对象,在选取的在111种地质学期刊中,共收集整理期刊编委3811名作为研究数据。研究结果表明,期刊编委指数能很好地的刻画科研机构的学术影响力,地质学领域科研机构的编委人数和期刊编委指数得分都呈现出明显的分布不均衡态势。JEI得分与期刊论文数、总被引次数和H指数等指标均有着积极显著的相关关系。评价结果鲁棒性分析表明,考虑编委等级、期刊等级和编委规模等因素的影响,设置相应的权重一定程度会改变原有基于期刊编委数量的评价结果,但是不同权重区分度对评价结果的影响不大。通过计算JEI指数与衍生的指数JEI/JT、JEI/JR和JEI/JE之间的相关性,发现考虑期刊等级后,对机构的编委指数得分以及排序影响最大。

	服务

	把本文推荐给朋友
	加入我的书架
	加入引用管理器
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	作者相关文章
	卢小莉
	李晶
	吴登生

关键词 ：机构评价, 学术影响力, 期刊编委指数, 地质学

收稿日期: 2017-06-14

基金资助:国家自然科学基金应急管理项目“管理科学领域学术机构影响力度量与国际比较研究”（71640007）; 中国博士后基金“数据驱动的学科结构识别与演化研究：以管理科学为例”（2016M591264）; 中国地质调查项目“地学文献数据采集整合与服务”（121201015000150003）

作者简介: 卢小莉,女,1984年生,博士研究生,馆员,研究领域为科学计量学;李晶,女,1985年生,博士,副教授,研究领域为信息资源管理;吴登生,男,1984年生,博士,副研究员,研究领域为科技大数据管理与决策,E-mail: wds@casipm.ac.cn。

引用本文:

卢小莉, 李晶, 吴登生. 基于期刊编委指数的科研机构学术影响力评价研究：以地质学为例[J]. 情报学报, 2018, 37(1): 14-24.
Lu Xiaoli, Li Jing, Wu Dengsheng. Evaluating the Scholarly Impact of Institutes Based on the Journal Editorship Index: Empirical Analysis in Geology. 情报学报, 2018, 37(1): 14-24.

链接本文:

https://qbxb.istic.ac.cn/CN/10.3772/j.issn.1000-0135.2018.01.002 或 https://qbxb.istic.ac.cn/CN/Y2018/V37/I1/14

[1] Meho L I, Sugimoto C R.Assessing the scholarly impact of information studies: A tale of two citation databases—Scopus and Web of Science[J]. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 2009, 60(12): 2499-2508.
[2] Kaur J, Radicchi F, Menczer F.Universality of scholarly impact metrics[J]. Journal of Informetrics, 2013, 7(4): 924-932.
[3] 王菲菲, 杨辰毓妍. 多维信息计量学视角下的学术影响力综合评价研究现状及展望[J]. 情报资料工作, 2016(2): 23-28.
[4] 周建中, 徐芳. 国立科研机构同行评议方法的模式比较研究[J]. 科学学研究, 2013, 31(11): 1642-1648.
[5] 俞立平, 潘云涛, 武夷山. 科技评价中同行评议与指标体系关系的研究——以《泰晤士报》世界大学排名为例[J]. 科学学研究, 2008, 26(5): 927-931, 912.
[6] 龚旭. 同行评议公正性的影响因素分析[J]. 科学学研究, 2004, 22(6): 613-618.
[7] Torres-Salinas D, Moreno-Torres J G, Delgado-López-Cózar E, et al. A methodology for Institution-Field ranking based on a bidimensional analysis: the IFQ² A index[J]. Scientometrics, 2011, 88(3): 771-786.
[8] Beaulier S, Elder R, Han C, et al.An ordinal ranking of economic institutions[J]. Applied Economics, 2016, 48(26): 2482-2490.
[9] Wu D S, Li M L, Zhu X Q, et al.Ranking the research productivity of business and management institutions in Asia-Pacific region: empirical research in leading ABS journals[J]. Scientometrics, 2015, 105(2): 1253-1272.
[10] Wu D S, Xie Y J, Dai Q Z, et al.A systematic overview of operations research/management science research in Mainland China: Bibliometric analysis of the period 2001-2013[J]. Asia-Pacific Journal of Operational Research, 2016, 33(6): 1650044.
[11] Kuan C H, Huang M H, Chen D Z.Cross-field evaluation of publications of research institutes using their contributions to the fields’ MVPs determined by h-index[J]. Journal of Informetrics, 2013, 7(2): 455-468.
[12] Moed H F, Halevi G.Multidimensional assessment of scholarly research impact[J]. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 2015, 66(10): 1988-2002.
[13] 蒋世银, 李春旺. 基于关联数据科研机构综合评价模型研究[J]. 情报理论与实践, 2015, 38(11): 71-75, 114.
[14] Bornmann L.Do altmetrics point to the broader impact of research? An overview of benefits and disadvantages of altmetrics[J]. Journal of Informetrics, 2014, 8(4): 895-903.
[15] 朱卫东, 刘芳, 王东鹏, 等. 科学基金项目立项评估:综合评价信息可靠性的多指标证据推理规则研究[J]. 中国管理科学, 2016, 24(10): 141-148.
[16] Brinn T, Jones M J.The composition of editorial boards in accounting: A UK perspective[J]. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 2008, 21(1): 5-35.
[17] Kaufman G G.Rankings of finance departments by faculty representation on editorial boards of professional journals: A note[J]. The Journal of Finance, 1984, 39(4): 1189-1197.
[18] Kurtz D L, Boone L E.Rating marketing faculties on the basis of editorial review board memberships[J]. Journal of Marketing Education, 1988, 10(1): 64-68.
[19] Gibbons J D, Fish M.Rankings of economics faculties and representation on editorial boards of top journals[J]. The Journal of Economic Education, 1991, 22(4): 361-372.
[20] Chan K C, Fung H G, Lai P.Membership of editorial boards and rankings of schools with international business orientation[J]. Journal of International Business Studies, 2005, 36(4): 452-469.
[21] Braun T, Dióspatonyi I, Zsindely S, et al.Gatekeeper index versus impact factor of science journals[J]. Scientometrics, 2007, 71(3): 541-543.
[22] Lahiri S, Kumar V.Ranking international business institutions and faculty members using research publication as the measure[J]. Management International Review, 2012, 52(3): 317-340.
[23] Frey B S, Rost K.Do rankings reflect research quality?[J]. Journal of Applied Economics, 2010, 13(1): 1-38.
[24] Haslam N, Koval P.Possible research area bias in the Excellence in Research for Australia (ERA) draft journal rankings[J]. Australian Journal of Psychology, 2010, 62(2): 112-114.
[25] Franceschini F, Maisano D, Mastrogiacomo L, et al.Empirical analysis and classification of database errors in Scopus and Web of Science[J]. Journal of Informetrics, 2016, 10(4): 933-953.
[26] Dorta-González P, Dorta-González M I. Comparing journals from different fields of science and social science through a JCR subject categories normalized impact factor[J]. Scientometrics, 2013, 95(2): 645-672.
[27] Moed H F.Comprehensive indicator comparisons intelligible to non-experts: the case of two SNIP versions[J]. Scientometrics, 2015, 106(1): 51-65.
[28] 吴登生, 李若筠. 中国管理科学领域机构合作的网络结构与演化规律研究[J]. 中国管理科学, 2017, 25(9): 168-177.
[29] Chan K C, Fok R C W. Membership on editorial boards and finance department rankings[J]. The Journal of Financial Research, 2003, 26(3): 405-420.
[30] Vanclay J K.An evaluation of the Australian Research Council’s journal ranking[J]. Journal of Informetrics, 2011, 5(2): 265-274.
[31] Morris H, Harvey C, Kelly A.Journal rankings and the ABS journal quality guide[J]. Management Decision, 2009, 47(9): 1441-1451.
[32] Bedeian A G, Van Fleet D D, Hyman III H H. Scientific achievement and editorial board membership[J]. Organizational Research Methods, 2008, 12(2): 211-238.
[33] 李万伦, 段怡春, 王海华, 等. 从文献计量看中国科学院、高等院校和中国地质调查局三大系统地质学科的分布现状[J]. 地质通报, 2009, 28(2-3): 397-402.
[34] 史静, 肖仙桃, 王鑫, 等. 2000~2014年国外部分地质调查机构科研态势分析——基于文献计量学方法研究[J]. 地质学报, 2015, 89(12): 2433-2442.
[35] Hardin III W G, Liano K, Chan K C, et al. Finance editorial board membership and research productivity[J]. Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, 2008, 31(3): 225-240.