|
|
|
| Quantitative Evaluation Model for Humanities and Social Sciences Journals Based on Association Tautology |
| Han Songtao1, Li Jie1, Jin Jiali1,2, Huang Chen1,2 |
1.Zhejiang University Library, Hangzhou 310027
2.Center for Information Resources Analysis and Application of Zhejiang University (CIRAA), Hangzhou 310027 |
|
|
|
|
Abstract Grounded in the studies on “association tautology”, this article aims to develop an academic evaluation model by evaluating published papers from scholars of universities with first-class disciplines. Through a quantitative analysis of 500,000 papers from more than 5,000 journals in Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI) and Arts & Humanities Citation Index (A&HCI) over the past five years, a data-based evaluation model for humanities and social sciences journals is proposed—an evaluation model for first-class disciplines. This evaluation model can effectively avoid subjective uncertainty and is empirically proved available. Using scholars’ submission behaviors as a starting point, this sustainable dynamic evaluation model has unparalleled advantages over current citation analysis models, and can be improved in application.
|
|
Received: 27 June 2022
|
|
|
|
1 Garfield E. Citation indexing: its theory and application in science, technology, and humanities[M]. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1979.
2 叶鹰. 国际学术评价指标研究现状及发展综述[J]. 情报学报, 2014, 33(2): 215-224.
3 Gump S E. The discourse of peer review: reviewing submissions to academic journals by Brian Paltridge | Getting published in academic journals: navigating the publication process by Brian Paltridge and Sue Starfield[J]. Journal of Scholarly Publishing, 2018, 49(2): 267-273.
4 Norris M, Oppenheim C. Peer review and the h-index: two studies[J]. Journal of Informetrics, 2010, 4(3): 221-232.
5 万昊, 谭宗颖, 朱相丽. 同行评议与文献计量在科研评价中的作用分析比较[J]. 图书情报工作, 2017, 61(1): 134-152.
6 诸静英, 谢明, 程杰, 等. 结合多种方法评价科技期刊的发展[J]. 中国科技期刊研究, 2018, 29(2): 179-183.
7 赵丹群. 集成化学术评价模型的构建分析[J]. 情报理论与实践, 2014, 37(2): 45-49.
8 叶鹰. 图书情报学的学术思想与技术方法及其开新[J]. 中国图书馆学报, 2019, 45(2): 15-25.
9 胡绍君, 郑彦宁, 成颖. 学术期刊评价方法研究进展[J]. 情报杂志, 2020, 39(2): 169-175.
10 刘雪立, 郭佳. 中文科技期刊评价: 现状·问题·建议[J]. 编辑学报, 2020, 32(1): 5-9.
11 张慧玲, 董坤, 许海云. 学术期刊影响力评价方法研究进展[J]. 图书情报工作, 2018, 62(16): 132-143.
12 杨惠, 骆筱秋, 王晴, 等. 特征因子在期刊评价中的作用[J]. 科技与出版, 2018(6): 55-61.
13 Nicholas D, Watkinson A, Jamali H R, et al. Peer review: still king in the digital age[J]. Learned Publishing, 2015, 28(1): 15-21.
14 Rodríguez-Bravo B, Nicholas D, Herman E, et al. Peer review: the experience and views of early career researchers[J]. Learned Publishing, 2017, 30(4): 269-277.
15 Gorman M F, Kanet J J. Note—“OM forum: evaluating operations management-related journals via the author affiliation index”—do professors at top U.S. business schools do what they say?[J]. Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, 2007, 9(1): 51-53.
16 Harless D, Reilly R. Revision of the journal list for doctoral designation[R]. Richmond: Virginia Commonwealth University, 1998.
17 邵松, 乔监松. 期刊的学科分类对期刊评价的影响[J]. 科技与出版, 2017(3): 119-125.
18 李明, 柯青, 石进, 等. 学术期刊作者机构指数AAI排名实证探索——以中文高等教育学期刊为例[J]. 西南民族大学学报(人文社科版), 2019, 40(9): 236-240.
19 陈仕吉, 邱均平. 一流学科与学科排名的对比研究——基于教育部学科评估、ESI和QS学科排名的一流学科对比分析[J]. 评价与管理, 2019, 17(4): 27-32.
20 黄晨, 徐海燕, 韩松涛. 基于计算机系统的核心期刊量化评价系统和方法: CN112989070B[P]. 2022-07-19.
21 刘永涛. 诺贝尔经济学奖获得者文献计量特征研究[D]. 杭州: 浙江大学, 2011: 31-32.
22 QS World University Rankings by subject: methodology[EB/OL]. (2017-02-01) https://www.qschina.cn/en/subject-rankings/methodology. |
|
|
|
