基于Altmetrics指标识别的研究热点对比分析——以生物学领域为例
|
摘要
研究热点通常采用高被引论文的聚类来识别,但被引次数需要时间积累。Altmetrics指标具有良好的即时性,采用相关指标识别研究热点有可能提高时效性。本文重点分析基于Altmetrics指标与高被引论文识别的研究热点之间的异同以及背后的原因,以探究基于Altmetrics指标识别的研究热点是否适合作为前沿趋势探测和科技政策制定的辅助依据。本文选取生物学领域2013年7月1日—2014年6月30日发表的论文,分析基于Altmetrics分数、Twitter指标、Mendeley指标、被引次数4个指标识别的研究热点之间的关系。分析发现:基于Altmetrics分数和Twitter指标识别的研究热点较为接近,主要反映公众热门话题;基于高被引论文识别的研究热点更加反映科研人员的关注点,更大程度上代表了学术界的研究前沿;基于Mendeley指标识别的研究热点综合了上述两类热点,既有公众较为关心的科普主题,也有学术界关注的研究前沿。
Research hotspots are usually identified by clustering of highly cited papers, but the number of citations takes time to accumulate. Altmetrics indicators have good immediacy, and it is possible to identify research hotspots with relevant indicators quickly. This paper aims to analyze the research hotspots based on Altmetrics indicators and citation indicators. The papers published in the field of biology from July 1, 2013 to June 30, 2014 were selected to analyze the relationship between the research hotspots identified by the Altmetrics score, the Twitter index, the Mendeley index, and the number of cited times. The research hotspots based on Altmetrics scores and Twitter indicators are relatively close, mainly reflecting the interest of public. The research hotspots based on high-cited papers reflect the focus of research experts and represent research fronts. The research hotspots based on the Mendeley indicator identification include the above two types of hotspots, which are not only the popular science topics that the general public care about, but also the research fronts of research academic concern. The research hotspots identified based on the above three Altmetrics indicators are not suitable for direct use as a supplementary basis for frontier trend detection and technology policy formulation.
Research hotspots are usually identified by clustering of highly cited papers, but the number of citations takes time to accumulate. Altmetrics indicators have good immediacy, and it is possible to identify research hotspots with relevant indicators quickly. This paper aims to analyze the research hotspots based on Altmetrics indicators and citation indicators. The papers published in the field of biology from July 1, 2013 to June 30, 2014 were selected to analyze the relationship between the research hotspots identified by the Altmetrics score, the Twitter index, the Mendeley index, and the number of cited times. The research hotspots based on Altmetrics scores and Twitter indicators are relatively close, mainly reflecting the interest of public. The research hotspots based on high-cited papers reflect the focus of research experts and represent research fronts. The research hotspots based on the Mendeley indicator identification include the above two types of hotspots, which are not only the popular science topics that the general public care about, but also the research fronts of research academic concern. The research hotspots identified based on the above three Altmetrics indicators are not suitable for direct use as a supplementary basis for frontier trend detection and technology policy formulation.
引文
[1]王海燕.未来高影响力科技论文的识别理论与方法研究[D].北京:中国科学院大学,2013.
[2]龚放,叶波.2000-2004年中国教育研究热点与关键词——基于CSSCI的统计分析[J].高等教育研究,2006(9):1-9.
[3]国防.多模态话语分析研究热点及趋势分析——基于文献计量学方法[J].外语与外语教学,2016(3):58-66,146.
[4]王绍卜.基于复杂网络的港口物流领域研究热点实证分析[J].计算机系统应用,2014(7):246-251.
[5]宗乾进,袁勤俭,沈洪洲.国外社交网络研究热点与前沿[J].图书情报知识,2012(6):68-75.
[6]KESSLER M M.Bibliographic coupling between scientific papers[J].American Documentation,1963,14(1):10-25.
[7]SMALL H.Co-citation in the scientific literature:A new measure of the relationship between two documents[J].Journal of the American Society for Information Science,1973,24(4):265-269.
[8]中国科学院文献情报中心,汤森路透.2015研究前沿及分析解读[M].北京:科学出版社,2015.
[9]ROEMER R C,BORCHARDT R.From bibliometrics to altmetrics:A changing scholarly landscape[J].College&Research Library News,2012,39:8-9.
[10]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.
[11]LIN J,FENNER M.Altmetrics in evolution:Defining and redefining the ontology of article-level metrics[J].Information Standards Quarterly,2013,25(2):20.
[12]BORNMANN L.Alternative metrics in scientometrics:A met a-a nalysis of resea rch i nto t h ree alt met r ics[J].Scientometrics,2015,103(3):1123-1144.
[13]HADAS S,JUDIT B I,MIKE T.Do blog citations correlate with a higher number of future citations?Research blogs as a potential source for alternative metrics[J].Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology,2014,65(5):1018-1027.
[14]EYSENBACH G.Can tweets predict citations?Metrics of social impact based on Twitter and correlation with traditional metrics of scientific impact[J].Journal of Medical Internet ResearchInternational Scientific Journal for Medical Research,2011,13:123.
[15]PEOPLES B K,MIDWAY S R,SACKETT D,et al.Twitter predicts citation rates of ecological research[J].PLoS ONE,2016,11(11):e0166570.
[16]ALHOORI H,FURUTA R.Do altmetrics follow the crowd or does the crowd follow altmetrics?[C]//Proceedings of the14th ACM/IEEE-CS Joint Conference on Digital Libraries.London:IEEE Press,2014:375-378.
[17]LI X,THELWALL M,GIUSTINI D.Validating online reference managers for scholarly impact measurement[J].Scientometrics,2012,91(2):461-471.
[18]王睿,胡文静,郭玮.常用Altmetrics工具比较[J].现代图书情报技术,2014(12):18-26.
[19]HAUSTEIN S,BOWMAN T D,COSTAS R.Interpreting“altmetrics”:viewing acts on social media through the lens of citation and social theories[M]//SUGIMOTO C R.Theories of Informetrics and Scholarly Communication.Bloomington:De Gruyter,2016:372-405.
[20]王贤文,方志超,王虹茵.连续、动态和复合的单篇论文评价体系构建研究[J].科学学与科学技术管理,2015(8):37-48.
[21]赵雅馨,杨志萍.研究热点探测的替代计量学方法和应用——以信息与计算科学为例[J].情报杂志,2016,35(11):39-44.
[22]方志超.基于多元数据对象的科学计量学热点主题识别研究[D].大连:大连理工大学,2017.
[23]Altmetrics about our data[EB/OL].[2019-03-01].https://www.altmetric.com/about-our-data/.
[24]BOYACK K,KLAVANS R.Co-citation analysis,bibliographic coupli ng,a nd di rect cit at ion:W h ich cit at ion approach represents the research front most accurately?[J].Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology,2010,61(12):2389-2404.
[25]Breakthrough of The Year 2013[EB/OL].[2019-03-18].https://www.sciencemag.org/breakthrough-of-the-year-2013.
[26]舒非,HAUSTEIN S,全薇.推特(Twitter)对中国论文的国际关注度影响研究[J].图书馆论坛,2017,37(6):55-60.
[27]王睿,胡文静,郭玮.高Altmetrics指标科技论文学术影响力研究[J].图书情报工作,2014,58(21):92-98.
[2]龚放,叶波.2000-2004年中国教育研究热点与关键词——基于CSSCI的统计分析[J].高等教育研究,2006(9):1-9.
[3]国防.多模态话语分析研究热点及趋势分析——基于文献计量学方法[J].外语与外语教学,2016(3):58-66,146.
[4]王绍卜.基于复杂网络的港口物流领域研究热点实证分析[J].计算机系统应用,2014(7):246-251.
[5]宗乾进,袁勤俭,沈洪洲.国外社交网络研究热点与前沿[J].图书情报知识,2012(6):68-75.
[6]KESSLER M M.Bibliographic coupling between scientific papers[J].American Documentation,1963,14(1):10-25.
[7]SMALL H.Co-citation in the scientific literature:A new measure of the relationship between two documents[J].Journal of the American Society for Information Science,1973,24(4):265-269.
[8]中国科学院文献情报中心,汤森路透.2015研究前沿及分析解读[M].北京:科学出版社,2015.
[9]ROEMER R C,BORCHARDT R.From bibliometrics to altmetrics:A changing scholarly landscape[J].College&Research Library News,2012,39:8-9.
[10]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.
[11]LIN J,FENNER M.Altmetrics in evolution:Defining and redefining the ontology of article-level metrics[J].Information Standards Quarterly,2013,25(2):20.
[12]BORNMANN L.Alternative metrics in scientometrics:A met a-a nalysis of resea rch i nto t h ree alt met r ics[J].Scientometrics,2015,103(3):1123-1144.
[13]HADAS S,JUDIT B I,MIKE T.Do blog citations correlate with a higher number of future citations?Research blogs as a potential source for alternative metrics[J].Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology,2014,65(5):1018-1027.
[14]EYSENBACH G.Can tweets predict citations?Metrics of social impact based on Twitter and correlation with traditional metrics of scientific impact[J].Journal of Medical Internet ResearchInternational Scientific Journal for Medical Research,2011,13:123.
[15]PEOPLES B K,MIDWAY S R,SACKETT D,et al.Twitter predicts citation rates of ecological research[J].PLoS ONE,2016,11(11):e0166570.
[16]ALHOORI H,FURUTA R.Do altmetrics follow the crowd or does the crowd follow altmetrics?[C]//Proceedings of the14th ACM/IEEE-CS Joint Conference on Digital Libraries.London:IEEE Press,2014:375-378.
[17]LI X,THELWALL M,GIUSTINI D.Validating online reference managers for scholarly impact measurement[J].Scientometrics,2012,91(2):461-471.
[18]王睿,胡文静,郭玮.常用Altmetrics工具比较[J].现代图书情报技术,2014(12):18-26.
[19]HAUSTEIN S,BOWMAN T D,COSTAS R.Interpreting“altmetrics”:viewing acts on social media through the lens of citation and social theories[M]//SUGIMOTO C R.Theories of Informetrics and Scholarly Communication.Bloomington:De Gruyter,2016:372-405.
[20]王贤文,方志超,王虹茵.连续、动态和复合的单篇论文评价体系构建研究[J].科学学与科学技术管理,2015(8):37-48.
[21]赵雅馨,杨志萍.研究热点探测的替代计量学方法和应用——以信息与计算科学为例[J].情报杂志,2016,35(11):39-44.
[22]方志超.基于多元数据对象的科学计量学热点主题识别研究[D].大连:大连理工大学,2017.
[23]Altmetrics about our data[EB/OL].[2019-03-01].https://www.altmetric.com/about-our-data/.
[24]BOYACK K,KLAVANS R.Co-citation analysis,bibliographic coupli ng,a nd di rect cit at ion:W h ich cit at ion approach represents the research front most accurately?[J].Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology,2010,61(12):2389-2404.
[25]Breakthrough of The Year 2013[EB/OL].[2019-03-18].https://www.sciencemag.org/breakthrough-of-the-year-2013.
[26]舒非,HAUSTEIN S,全薇.推特(Twitter)对中国论文的国际关注度影响研究[J].图书馆论坛,2017,37(6):55-60.
[27]王睿,胡文静,郭玮.高Altmetrics指标科技论文学术影响力研究[J].图书情报工作,2014,58(21):92-98.