收稿日期: 2014-07-07
修回日期: 2014-09-01
网络出版日期: 2014-10-30
基金资助
本文系浙江省自然科学基金项目“省际基础研究绩效的差距与形成机制研究”(项目编号:LY14G030005)和宁波大学人文社会科学培育项目“推进创新驱动发展的关键问题、影响机理与对策研究”(项目编号:XPYA13002)研究成果之一。
Laterally Comparative Research on Multiple Attributes Evaluation for Different Disciplines: Taking Academic Periodicals as an Example
Received date: 2014-07-07
Revised date: 2014-09-01
Online published: 2014-10-30
俞立平 , 张全 , 刘爱军 . 不同学科多属性评价横向比较研究——以数学、物理学、生物学期刊为例[J]. 图书情报工作, 2014 , 58(20) : 100 -105 . DOI: 10.13266/j.issn.0252-3116.2014.20.015
It is difficult to compare cross-disciplinary research, three principles of integration comparison, Combined with data analysis and laterally comparative principles are provided. Taking TOPSIS method for example, on the basis of the optimization, a cross-disciplinary comparative idea for adopting standard score of multiple attributes evaluation outcomes is put forward. What's more, taking periodicals of CJR2012 math,physics, biology for examples, this paper conducts a positive analysis. The results show that cross-disciplinary evaluation based on standard score is feasible, and it can be even applied to laterally comparison for different evaluation indexes and different evaluation methods. The number of interdisciplinary evaluation sample size should not be too little, and it's hard to compare the overall level of different disciplines.
[1] Zitt M, Rahary S R,Coulard E B. Relativity of citation performance and excellence measures: From cross-field to cross-scale effects of field-normalization[J]. Scientometrics,2005,63 (2): 373-401.
[2] Hirsch J E. An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output[J]. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, 2005,102(46):16569-16572.
[3] 花芳. 学科基准化的科研绩效定量评价方法及指标研究[J]. 图书情报工作,2014,58(3):78-84.
[4] Schubert A, Glanzel W, Braun T. A new methodology for ranking scientific institutions[J]. Scientometrics,1987,12(5-6): 267-292.
[5] Van Raan A F J. The use of bibliometric analysis in research performance assessment and monitoring of interdisciplinary scientific developments[J]. Assessment Theory and Practice, 2003, 1(12):20-29.
[6] Radicchia F, Fortunato S, Castellano C. Universality of citation distributions: Toward an objective measure of scientific impact[J]. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United Statesof America,2008,105 (45):17268-17272.
[7] Bornmann L, Daniel H. Universality of citation distributions-A validation of Radicchi et al. 's relative indicator Cf=C/Co at the micro level using data from chemistry[J]. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology,2009,60(8):1664-1670.
[8] 蒋旭纯, 吴强. 基于hα指数的不同学科领域科研水平评价研究[J]. 科学学与科学技术管理,2014,35(2):46-54.
[9] 王卓青, 王丽萍, 卢姗,等. 基于影响因子对不同学科间论文评价方法的探索[J]. 科技与出版,2011(7):88-90.
[10] 金晶, 何苗, 王孝宁,等. 不同学科领域自然科学论文学术影响力评价与比较的可行性研究[J]. 科技管理研究,2010(14):279-284.
[11] 俞立平,武夷山. 学术期刊评价中标准分与原始分的比较研究——科技评价方法必须进行革命性改良[J]. 情报学报,2011,30(11): 1187-1193.
[12] 苏新宁. 客观全面评价期刊促进学术繁荣发展[J]. 情报资料工作,2009(4):25.
[13] Seglen P O. The skewness of science[J]. Journal of the American Society for Information Science,1992,43(9): 628-638.
[14] Vinkler P. Introducing the current contribution index for characterizing the recent, relevant impact of journals [J].Scientometrics,2008,79(2): 409-420.
[15] Adler R, Ewing J,Taylor P. Citation statistics[J]. Statistical Science, 2009,24(1): 1-26.
[16] Huang Chinglai,Yoon K. Multiattribute decision making: Methods and applications[M]. New York:Springer-Verlag,1981: 12-34.
[17] 俞立平, 潘云涛, 武夷山. 学术期刊综合评价数据标准化方法研究[J]. 图书情报工作,2009,53(12):136-139.
/
| 〈 |
|
〉 |
