学科交叉视角下的学科区分能力测度方法及分析研究

doi:10.3772/j.issn.1000-0135.2022.04.005

情报学报

2022, Vol. 41

Issue (4): 375-387 DOI: 10.3772/j.issn.1000-0135.2022.04.005

情报理论与方法

本期目录 | 过刊浏览 | 高级检索

学科交叉视角下的学科区分能力测度方法及分析研究

张宝隆^1,3, 王昊^1,2, 张卫^1,2

1.南京大学信息管理学院,南京 210023
2.江苏省数据工程与知识服务重点实验室,南京 210023
3.郑州航空工业管理学院信息管理学院,郑州 450046

Measurement and Analysis of Disciplinary Discriminative Capacity from an Interdisciplinary Perspective

Zhang Baolong^1,3, Wang Hao^1,2, Zhang Wei^1,2

1.School of Information Management, Nanjing University, Nanjing 210023
2.Jiangsu Key Laboratory of Data Engineering and Knowledge Service, Nanjing 210023
3.School of Information Management, Zhengzhou University of Aeronautics, Zhengzhou 450046

摘要
图/表
参考文献
相关文章 (6)

全文: PDF (2414 KB) HTML (1 KB)
输出: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

摘要学科交叉融合的不断发展使学科自身独特性逐渐被弱化，而独特性是体现学科本质和内涵的重要特征，这对于学科守正拓展创新具有重要意义。本研究提出一种新的指标学科区分能力来对学科内容的差异性进行测度，以分析学科的独特性和交叉性特征。以人文社会学科为例，采用2019年23个学科的题录数据对学科区分能力进行测度，并结合基于PCA（principal component analysis）和ADV（angle-distance based visualization）的空间可视化对学科之间的差异性进行分析。基于此，对比分析学科区分能力与交叉指标的优劣性及相关性，并采用学科互引网络对其区分能力进行验证，探讨学科交叉程度对区分能力的影响。本研究表明，学科区分能力能够很好地测度学科内容差异性；所提出的ADV可视化方法能够准确刻画学科差异性特征；学科区分能力与交叉指标具有相关性，可以互为补充；学科交叉程度对学科区分能力具有消极影响，交叉程度越深，其区分能力就越弱，反之越强。

	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
	张宝隆
	王昊
	张卫

关键词 ：学科区分能力, 内容差异性, 空间可视化, 学科交叉, 学科互引网络

收稿日期: 2021-01-31

基金资助:国家自然科学基金项目“面向学术资源的TSD与TDC测度及分析研究”（71503121）；江苏省“六大人才高峰”高层次人才项目“多粒度学术对象区分性测度和分析研究”（JY-001）。

作者简介: 张宝隆，男，1991年生，博士，主要研究领域为信息分析与科学计量；王昊，男，1981年生，教授，博士生导师，主要研究领域为自然语言处理、信息分析与科学计量，E-mail：ywhaowang@nju.edu.cn；张卫，男，1994年生，博士研究生，主要研究领域为文本挖掘与自然语言处；

引用本文:

张宝隆, 王昊, 张卫. 学科交叉视角下的学科区分能力测度方法及分析研究[J]. 情报学报, 2022, 41(4): 375-387.
Zhang Baolong, Wang Hao, Zhang Wei. Measurement and Analysis of Disciplinary Discriminative Capacity from an Interdisciplinary Perspective. 情报学报, 2022, 41(4): 375-387.

链接本文:

https://qbxb.istic.ac.cn/CN/10.3772/j.issn.1000-0135.2022.04.005 或 https://qbxb.istic.ac.cn/CN/Y2022/V41/I4/375

1 Wagner C S, Roessner J D, Bobb K, et al. Approaches to understanding and measuring interdisciplinary scientific research (IDR): a review of the literature[J]. Journal of Informetrics, 2011, 5(1): 14-26.
2 黄英杰. 理解和把握新学科建设的内涵[N]. 中国社会科学报, 2019-12-19(004).
3 Xu H Y, Guo T, Yue Z H, et al. Interdisciplinary topics of information science: a study based on the terms interdisciplinarity index series[J]. Scientometrics, 2016, 106(2): 583-601.
4 Salton G, Yang C S. On the specification of term values in automatic indexing[J]. Journal of Documentation, 1973, 29(4): 351-372.
5 Salton G, Yang C S, Yu C T. A theory of term importance in automatic text analysis[J]. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 1975, 26(1): 33-44.
6 王昊, 唐慧慧, 张海潮, 等. 面向学术资源的术语区分能力的测度方法研究[J]. 情报学报, 2019, 38(10): 1078-1091.
7 张宝隆, 王昊, 邓三鸿, 等. 基于差异性视角的期刊区分性测度及分析研究[J]. 情报学报, 2020, 39(3): 284-296.
8 曹玲静, 陈云伟. 学科交叉评价研究进展综述[J]. 情报杂志, 2020, 39(7): 173-180.
9 许海云, 尹春晓, 郭婷, 等. 学科交叉研究综述[J]. 图书情报工作, 2015, 59(5): 119-127.
10 Porter A L, Rafols I. Is science becoming more interdisciplinary? Measuring and mapping six research fields over time[J]. Scientometrics, 2009, 81(3): 719-745.
11 Shannon C E. A mathematical theory of communication[J]. The Bell System Technical Journal, 1948, 27(3): 379-423.
12 Brillouin L. Science and information theory[M]. New York: Academic Press, 1956.
13 Stirling A. On the economics and analysis of diversity[R]. SPRU Electronic Working Papers Series. Brighton: University of Sussex, 1998: No.28.
14 Stirling A. A general framework for analysing diversity in science, technology and society[J]. Journal of the Royal Society Interface, 2007, 4(15): 707-719.
15 Rao C R. Diversity and dissimilarity coefficients: a unified approach[J]. Theoretical Population Biology, 1982, 21(1): 24-43.
16 Zhou Q J, Rousseau R, Yang L Y, et al. A general framework for describing diversity within systems and similarity between systems with applications in informetrics[J]. Scientometrics, 2012, 93(3): 787-812.
17 Leinster T, Cobbold C A. Measuring diversity: the importance of species similarity[J]. Ecology, 2012, 93(3): 477-489.
18 Mugabushaka A M, Kyriakou A, Papazoglou T. Bibliometric indicators of interdisciplinarity: the potential of the Leinster-Cobbold diversity indices to study disciplinary diversity[J]. Scientometrics, 2016, 107(2): 593-607.
19 陈赛君, 陈智高. 领域交叉性分析指标与方法新探及其实证研究[J]. 情报学报, 2013, 32(11): 1184-1195.
20 Zhang L, Rousseau R, Gl?nzel W. Diversity of references as an indicator of the interdisciplinarity of journals: taking similarity between subject fields into account[J]. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 2016, 67(5): 1257-1265.
21 张琳, 刘冬东, 吕琦, 等. 论文学科交叉测度研究: 从全部引文到章节引文[J]. 情报学报, 2020, 39(5): 492-499.
22 Nijssen D, Rousseau R, Van Hecke P. The Lorenz curve: a graphical representation of evenness[J]. Coenoses, 1998, 13(1): 33-38.
23 Buchan I. Calculating the Gini coefficient of inequality[R/OL]. Northwest Institute for BioHealth Informatics, 2002. https://www.nibhi.org.uk/Training/Forms/AllItems.aspx.
24 Leydesdorff L, Rafols I. Indicators of the interdisciplinarity of journals: diversity, centrality, and citations[J]. Journal of Informetrics, 2011, 5(1): 87-100.
25 Rousseau R. The repeat rate: from Hirschman to Stirling[J]. Scientometrics, 2018, 116(1): 645-653.
26 Leydesdorff L, Wagner C S, Bornmann L. Interdisciplinarity as diversity in citation patterns among journals: Rao-Stirling diversity, relative variety, and the Gini coefficient[J]. Journal of Informetrics, 2019, 13(1): 255-269.
27 Leydesdorff L, Ivanova I. The measurement of “interdisciplinarity” and “synergy” in scientific and extra-scientific collaborations[J]. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 2021, 72(4): 387-402.
28 Porter A L, Cohen A S, David Roessner J, et al. Measuring researcher interdisciplinarity[J]. Scientometrics, 2007, 72(1): 117-147.
29 Bromham L, Dinnage R, Hua X. Interdisciplinary research has consistently lower funding success[J]. Nature, 2016, 534(7609): 684-687.
30 Hernández J M, Dorta-González P. Interdisciplinarity metric based on the co-citation network[J]. Mathematics, 2020, 8(4): 544.
31 章成志, 徐庶睿, 卢超. 利用引文内容监测多学科交叉现象的方法与实证[J]. 图书情报工作, 2016, 60(19): 108-115.
32 徐庶睿, 卢超, 章成志. 术语引用视角下的学科交叉测度——以PLOS ONE上六个学科为例[J]. 情报学报, 2017, 36(8): 809- 820.
33 徐庶睿, 章成志, 卢超. 利用引文内容进行主题级学科交叉类型分析[J]. 图书情报工作, 2017, 61(23): 15-24.
34 徐庶睿, 卢超, 章成志. 学科交叉度的点面关系研究[J]. 图书馆论坛, 2017, 37(10): 64-70.
35 陈红丽, 张自然, 叶佳鑫, 等. 基于ESI数据的学科交叉宏观态势测度研究[J]. 情报科学, 2021, 39(1): 96-103.
36 马瑞敏, 闫晓慧, 申楠. 学科交叉直接测度研究[J]. 情报学报, 2019, 38(7): 688-696.
37 曹嘉君, 王曰芬, 陈盛之, 等. 多学科交叉综合的研究领域内学科间分布状态与演化研究[J]. 情报学报, 2020, 39(5): 459-468.
38 Karlov?ec M, Mladeni? D. Interdisciplinarity of scientific fields and its evolution based on graph of project collaboration and co-authoring[J]. Scientometrics, 2015, 102(1): 433-454.
39 Zhang L, Sun B B, Chinchilla-Rodríguez Z, et al. Interdisciplinarity and collaboration: on the relationship between disciplinary diversity in departmental affiliations and reference lists[J]. Scientometrics, 2018, 117(1): 271-291.
40 Pessoa Junior G J, Dias T M R, Silva T H P, et al. On interdisciplinary collaborations in scientific coauthorship networks: the case of the Brazilian community[J]. Scientometrics, 2020, 124(3): 2341-2360.
41 中华人民共和国国家质量监督检验检疫总局, 中国国家标准化管理委员会. 中华人民共和国国家标准: 学科分类与代码GB/T 13745-2009[S]. 北京: 中国标准出版社, 2009.
42 Zhang J, Korfhage R R. DARE: Distance and angle retrieval environment: a tale of the two measures[J]. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 1999, 50(9): 779-787.
43 Zhang J, Wolfram D. Visualization of term discrimination analysis[J]. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 2001, 52(8): 615-627.
44 Zhang J. An experimental investigation on the distance angle integrated similarity measure[J]. Canadian Journal of Information and Library Science, 2008, 32(3): 141-168.
45 Steele T W, Stier J C. The impact of interdisciplinary research in the environmental sciences: a forestry case study[J]. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 2000, 51(5): 476-484.
46 Rafols I, Meyer M. Diversity and network coherence as indicators of interdisciplinarity: case studies in bionanoscience[J]. Scientometrics, 2010, 82(2): 263-287.