基于地理科研主导网络的关键节点识别研究

doi:10.3772/j.issn.1000-0135.2021.12.009

情报学报

2021, Vol. 40

Issue (12): 1312-1324 DOI: 10.3772/j.issn.1000-0135.2021.12.009

情报分析方法与技术

本期目录 | 过刊浏览 | 高级检索

基于地理科研主导网络的关键节点识别研究

贺超城^1,2, 吴江^1,2, 刘福珍³, 王春迎⁴

1.武汉大学信息管理学院，武汉 430072
2.武汉大学信息资源研究中心，武汉 430072
3.香港理工大学商学院，香港 999077
4.郑州大学信息管理学院，郑州 450001

Identifying Key Nodes via a Geographical Research Dominance Network: A Case Study of the Pharmaceutical Field

He Chaocheng^1,2, Wu Jiang^1,2, Liu Fuzhen³, Wang Chunying⁴

1.School of Information Management, Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072
2.Center for Studies of Information Resources, Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072
3.School of Business, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong 999077
4.School of Information Management, Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450001

摘要
图/表
参考文献
相关文章 (8)

全文: PDF (4746 KB) HTML (1 KB)
输出: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

摘要科研全球化实现了空间分布不均匀的科研学术资源在全球尺度的流动与优化配置，而科研合作起到了不可或缺的作用。尤其是远距离和跨国的科研合作，极大地促进了知识和技能的创造与传播。然而，现有研究有以下两方面局限：第一，忽略了合作网络中科研主体的空间特征，而空间特征对合作效率、合作质量等多个方面都有重要影响；第二，没有充分考虑科研合作中的主导作用，而科研主导对科研合作的发起、推进、产出等各个阶段都有着举足轻重的意义。为此，本文以Web of Science上2010—2018年药学领域的科研合作论文作为数据源，对科研合作中的科研主导进行了全面的空间分析，并进一步提出地理科研主导排名（GeoLeaderRank）以识别关键科研机构，用学术影响力指标（被引频次、hg指数等）进行对比验证。通过空间分析发现，在药学领域，全球科研主导量分布的空间聚集加剧，亚洲国家的科研主导量增长明显，远距离和跨国的科研主导格局并无明显改变。通过与传统指标的对比分析，发现地理科研主导排名能更好地识别具有顶尖学术影响力的科研机构。虽然在传统指标下，一些中国的科研机构可以比肩欧美顶尖科研机构；但是在被引频次、hg指数以及地理科研主导排名等指标下，中国的科研机构与欧美顶尖科研机构还存在差距。本文为全面认识科研合作中科研主导的空间特征以及解决其空间偏差提供了一个全新的视角。

	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
	贺超城
	吴江
	刘福珍
	王春迎

关键词 ：空间科学计量, 科研主导, 社会网络分析, 科学合作, 地理科研主导排名

收稿日期: 2020-05-30

基金资助:国家自然科学基金项目“信息不对称驱动的共享经济去中心化机制与风险的复杂性研究”（71874131）。

作者简介: 贺超城，男，1993年生，博士，讲师，研究方向为科学计量、数据挖掘与数据分析；吴江，男，1978年生，博士，教授，博士生导师，珞珈特聘教授，研究方向为社会网络计算、网络信息计量，E-mail：jiangw@whu.edu.cn；刘福珍，女，1994年生，博士研究生，研究方向为社会网络计算和数据分析；王春迎，女，1992年生，讲师，研究方向为科学计量、政府数据开；

引用本文:

贺超城, 吴江, 刘福珍, 王春迎. 基于地理科研主导网络的关键节点识别研究[J]. 情报学报, 2021, 40(12): 1312-1324.
He Chaocheng, Wu Jiang, Liu Fuzhen, Wang Chunying. Identifying Key Nodes via a Geographical Research Dominance Network: A Case Study of the Pharmaceutical Field. 情报学报, 2021, 40(12): 1312-1324.

链接本文:

https://qbxb.istic.ac.cn/CN/10.3772/j.issn.1000-0135.2021.12.009 或 https://qbxb.istic.ac.cn/CN/Y2021/V40/I12/1312

1 左丽华, 祝清松, 肖仙桃. 空间科学计量学的概念及应用研究进展[J]. 情报理论与实践, 2014, 37(2): 141-144, 140.
2 Fernández A, Ferrándiz E, León M D. Proximity dimensions and scientific collaboration among academic institutions in Europe: the closer, the better?[J]. Scientometrics, 2016, 106(3): 1073-1092.
3 Hoekman J, Frenken K, Tijssen R J W. Research collaboration at a distance: changing spatial patterns of scientific collaboration within Europe[J]. Research Policy, 2010, 39(5): 662-673.
4 Paji? D. Globalization of the social sciences in Eastern Europe: genuine breakthrough or a slippery slope of the research evaluation practice?[J]. Scientometrics, 2015, 102(3): 2131-2150.
5 Wang L L, Wang X W. Who sets up the bridge? Tracking scientific collaborations between China and the European Union[J]. Research Evaluation, 2017, 26(2): 124-131.
6 王双, 陈毓芬, 袁烨城, 等. 科学合作地域倾向性研究——以中国雾霾研究为例[J]. 地球信息科学学报, 2017, 19(2): 248-255.
7 苏金燕. 我国人文社会科学合作的地域倾向研究——基于经济学期刊论文的计量分析[J]. 现代图书情报技术, 2013(10): 43-52.
8 梁立明, 沙德春. 985高校校际科学合作的强地域倾向[J]. 科学学与科学技术管理, 2008, 29(11): 112-116.
9 Ponds R, Van Oort F, Frenken K. The geographical and institutional proximity of research collaboration[J]. Papers in Regional Science, 2007, 86(3): 423-443.
10 Jiang L A, Zhu N B, Yang Z L, et al. The relationships between distance factors and international collaborative research outcomes: a bibliometric examination[J]. Journal of Informetrics, 2018, 12(3): 618-630.
11 González-Alcaide G, Park J, Huamaní C, et al. Dominance and leadership in research activities: collaboration between countries of differing human development is reflected through authorship order and designation as corresponding authors in scientific publications[J]. PLoS One, 2017, 12(8): e0182513.
12 贺超城, 吴江, 魏子瑶, 等. 科研合作中机构间科研主导力及邻近性机理——以中国生物医学领域为例[J]. 情报学报, 2020, 39(2): 148-157.
13 Wang W C, Wu Y S, Pan Y T. An investigation of collaborations between top Chinese universities: a new quantitative approach[J]. Scientometrics, 2014, 98(2): 1535-1545.
14 He C C, Wu J, Zhang Q P. Research leadership flow determinants and the role of proximity in research collaborations[J]. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 2020, 71(11): 1341-1356.
15 Plotnikova T, Rake B. Collaboration in pharmaceutical research: exploration of country-level determinants[J]. Scientometrics, 2014, 98(2): 1173-1202.
16 Frenken K, Hardeman S, Hoekman J. Spatial scientometrics: towards a cumulative research program[J]. Journal of Informetrics, 2009, 3(3): 222-232.
17 Gui Q C, Liu C L, Du D B. International knowledge flows and the role of proximity[J]. Growth and Change, 2018, 49(3): 532-547.
18 Nita A, Rozylowicz L, Manolache S, et al. Collaboration networks in applied conservation projects across Europe[J]. PLoS One, 2016, 11(10): e0164503.
19 Scherngell T, Hu Y J. Collaborative knowledge production in China: regional evidence from a gravity model approach[J]. Regional Studies, 2011, 45(6): 755-772.
20 Hoekman J, Frenken K, van Oort F. The geography of collaborative knowledge production in Europe[J]. The Annals of Regional Science, 2009, 43(3): 721-738.
21 Sidone O J G, Haddad E A, Mena-Chalco J P. Scholarly publication and collaboration in Brazil: the role of geography[J]. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 2017, 68(1): 243-258.
22 Chakkol M, Selviaridis K, Finne M. The governance of collaboration in complex projects[J]. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 2018, 38(4): 997-1019.
23 Sekara V, Deville P, Ahnert S E, et al. The chaperone effect in scientific publishing[J]. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2018, 115(50): 12603-12607.
24 Wu J. Geographical knowledge diffusion and spatial diversity citation rank[J]. Scientometrics, 2013, 94(1): 181-201.
25 Boschma R. Proximity and innovation: a critical assessment[J]. Regional Studies, 2005, 39(1): 61-74.
26 Zhang C, Guo J. China’s international research collaboration: evidence from a panel gravity model[J]. Scientometrics, 2017, 113(2): 1129-1139.
27 Liu X M, Bollen J, Nelson M L, et al. Co-authorship networks in the digital library research community[J]. Information Processing & Management, 2005, 41(6): 1462-1480.
28 Ma N, Guan J C, Zhao Y. Bringing PageRank to the citation analysis[J]. Information Processing & Management, 2008, 44(2): 800-810.
29 Su C, Pan Y T, Zhen Y N, et al. PrestigeRank: a new evaluation method for papers and journals[J]. Journal of Informetrics, 2011, 5(1): 1-13.
30 Brin S, Page L. The anatomy of a large-scale hypertextual Web search engine[J]. Computer Networks and ISDN Systems, 1998, 30(1-7): 107-117.
31 Anselin L, Kelejian H H. Testing for spatial error autocorrelation in the presence of endogenous regressors[J]. International Regional Science Review, 1997, 20(1-2): 153-182.
32 赵良仕, 孙才志, 郑德凤. 中国省际水资源利用效率与空间溢出效应测度[J]. 地理学报, 2014, 69(1): 121-133.
33 Kim J, Diesner J. Coauthorship networks: a directed network approach considering the order and number of coauthors[J]. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 2015, 66(12): 2685-2696.
34 Hirsch J E. An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output[J]. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2005, 102(46): 16569-16572.
35 王炼. 科学计量学应用于科研人员绩效评价的挑战[J]. 科学学与科学技术管理, 2007, 28(4): 165-168.
36 Zeng A, Shen Z S, Zhou J L, et al. The science of science: from the perspective of complex systems[J]. Physics Reports, 2017, 714-715: 1-73.
37 Egghe L. Theory and practise of the g-index[J]. Scientometrics, 2006, 69(1): 131-152.
38 Alonso S, Cabrerizo F J, Herrera-Viedma E, et al. hg-index: a new index to characterize the scientific output of researchers based on the h- and g-indices[J]. Scientometrics, 2010, 82(2): 391-400.
39 Haveliwala T H. Topic-sensitive PageRank: a context-sensitive ranking algorithm for Web search[J]. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, 2003, 15(4): 784-796.
40 Zhou H M, Zeng D, Zhang C L. Finding leaders from opinion networks[C]// Proceedings of the 2009 IEEE International Conference on Intelligence and Security Informatics. IEEE, 2009: 266-268.