我国生物医学院士CSCD论文被引次数和合作关系研究
|
摘要
运用文献计量学和社会网络分析方法,对59位中科院院士的CSCD论文被引次数和合作关系进行分析,以及与其SCI论文相关指标的对比。结果表明,院士CSCD论文在数量上和质量上均不及其SCI论文;CSCD论文被引次数普遍较低,且增幅较小,增长缓慢;论文合著已成主流,形成了多个以著名院士为核心的稳定合作团体,高水平科研机构在合作网络中发挥了主要作用;生物医学学科网络呈现出传统主流学科依旧活跃,中介桥梁学科多样化趋势。提示我国生物医学院士科研合作已经常态化,合作稳定但有局限,高水平论文发表的SCI期刊选择偏好明显。
By using bibliometrics and social network analysis methods,this paper makes a study on the citation frequency and collaboration of CSCD papers written by 59 Chinese biomedical academicians,and then makes a comparison of some relevant indicators of their CSCD and SCI papers. The results show that CSCD papers are in quantity and quality far below SCI papers,while the paper citations are generally lower and grow slowly in small size. Paper coauthor has been mainstream and mostly form multiple stable cooperatives with famous academicians at the core,high level scientific research institutions play a main role among cooperation,the subject network presents that traditional mainstream disciplines stay alive,and inter-subjects tend to be diversified. It prompts that scientific research cooperation tends to be normal and stable,yet with some limitations,and the literal expression of high-level academic papers has become a dilemma for research personnel.
By using bibliometrics and social network analysis methods,this paper makes a study on the citation frequency and collaboration of CSCD papers written by 59 Chinese biomedical academicians,and then makes a comparison of some relevant indicators of their CSCD and SCI papers. The results show that CSCD papers are in quantity and quality far below SCI papers,while the paper citations are generally lower and grow slowly in small size. Paper coauthor has been mainstream and mostly form multiple stable cooperatives with famous academicians at the core,high level scientific research institutions play a main role among cooperation,the subject network presents that traditional mainstream disciplines stay alive,and inter-subjects tend to be diversified. It prompts that scientific research cooperation tends to be normal and stable,yet with some limitations,and the literal expression of high-level academic papers has become a dilemma for research personnel.
引文
[1]梁立明,武夷山.科学计量学:理论探索与案例研究[M].北京:科学出版社,2006:104.
[2]段志光,李文丽,于琦,等.我国生物医学院士SCI论文被引次数和影响因子分析[J].医学与哲学:人文社会科学版,2015,36(5A):66-69.
[3]马骁,寸淑梅.对高校教师合作关系的隐喻及其模式构建[J].南工科技,2012(10):84.
[4]段志光,卢祖洵.诺贝尔生理学或医学奖成因研究[D].武汉:华中科技大学,2005:152.
[5]徐晓艺,杨立英.科研合作视角下的学科知识流动分析方法研究—以药物化学学科为例[J].图书情报工作,2014,58(19):83-91.
[6]高罕翔,于光.中国SCI科技论文科学计量分析[D].哈尔滨:哈尔滨工业大学,2009:2-3.
[2]段志光,李文丽,于琦,等.我国生物医学院士SCI论文被引次数和影响因子分析[J].医学与哲学:人文社会科学版,2015,36(5A):66-69.
[3]马骁,寸淑梅.对高校教师合作关系的隐喻及其模式构建[J].南工科技,2012(10):84.
[4]段志光,卢祖洵.诺贝尔生理学或医学奖成因研究[D].武汉:华中科技大学,2005:152.
[5]徐晓艺,杨立英.科研合作视角下的学科知识流动分析方法研究—以药物化学学科为例[J].图书情报工作,2014,58(19):83-91.
[6]高罕翔,于光.中国SCI科技论文科学计量分析[D].哈尔滨:哈尔滨工业大学,2009:2-3.