[Purpose/significance] The external translation of excellent books in the humanities and social sciences is an important way for Chinese culture to go abroad. Establishing an external translation book evaluation system can demonstrate the influence of books and provide guidance for the selection of content types of external translation books. [Method/process] From the 10 dimensions that reflect the academic influence and social influence of the external translation books, the evaluation indicators are refined. Using the entropy weight method to calculate the weights of each index, the comprehensive scores of academic influence and social influence are calculated by weighted averaging, and then an empirical analysis is performed on the external translation books which are funded by Chinese academic translation project. [Result/conclusion] The absolute value of the difference between domestic and foreign impact rankings of 40.84% books is greater than 10; the external translation of books with high domestic academic influence have not attracted the attention of foreign scholars; the social influence of external translation books is generally lower. When selecting the content type of an external translation book, it is necessary to examine the academic influence and social influence of the book both at home and abroad.
Wang Wei
,
Yang Jianlin
. Research on the Evaluation Index System of External Translation Books in Humanities and Social Sciences[J]. Library and Information Service, 2019
, 63(4)
: 61
-69
.
DOI: 10.13266/j.issn.0252-3116.2019.04.008
[1] 中央全面深化改革领导小组审议通过《关于进一步加强和改进中华文化走出去工作的指导意见》[J]. 中外文化交流, 2016(12):10.
[2] 王兰敬,叶继元.中文人文社会科学学术图书评价的瓶颈因素及对策研究[J].图书与情报,2014(6):82-87.
[3] HICKS D. Performance-based university research funding systems[J]. Research policy, 2012, 41(2):251-261.
[4] FRANCESCHET M,COSTANTINI A. The first Italian research assessment exercise:a biblioetric perspective[J]. Journal of informetrics, 2011, 5(2):275-291.
[5] 何峻.我国图书评价现状分析[J].大学图书馆学报,2012,30(3):106-110.
[6] KOUSHA K,THELWALL M,ABDOLI M. Goodreads reviews to assess the wider impacts of books[J]. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 2017, 68(8):2004-2016.
[7] KOUSHA K,THELWALL M. Can Amazon. com reviews help to assess the wider impacts of books?[J]. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 2016, 67(3):566-581.
[8] 陈芳芳.一个用于评价图书馆图书使用效益的数学模型[J].科技信息(学术研究),2008(6):92-94.
[9] 严彬,石凤,吴小琴.基于效用管理的图书利用效果测度方法[J].图书馆论坛,2012,32(4):21-26,143.
[10] 张海营.基于RFM模型的图书馆图书评价系统研究[J].图书馆,2012(3):60-62.
[11] PRIEM J, HEMMINGER B H. Scientometrics 2.0:new metrics of scholarly impact on the social Web[J]. First monday, 2010, 15(7):71-74.
[12] HALEVI G, NICOLAS B, BAR-ILAN J. The complexity of measuring the impact of books[J]. Publishing research quarterly, 2016, 32(3):187-200.
[13] 杨毓丽,丁媛,张苏.基于ESI单本外文图书质量评价体系实证研究——以计算机学科为例[J].图书馆杂志,2015,34(7):11-18.
[14] 林晓华.基于Altmetrics工具的电子图书学术影响力评价体系构建——以Springer电子图书为例[J].出版发行研究,2016(4):85-89.
[15] ERDT M, NAGARAJAN A,SIN S J, et al. Altmetrics:an analysis of the state-of-the-art in measuring research impact on social media[J]. Scientometrics, 2016, 109(2):1117-1166.
[16] 苏新宁.我国人文社会科学图书被引概况分析——基于CSSCI数据库[J].东岳论丛,2009,30(7):5-13.
[17] 北京世纪读秀技术有限公司. 图书被引用情况报告(2017)[R]. 北京:北京世纪读秀技术有限公司, 2017.
[18] 吴楠,李凌霄."中文学术图书引文索引"成果正式发布[J].吉首大学学报(社会科学版),2018,39(1):6.
[19] 何峻,蔡蓉华.中文图书评价体系研究[J].大学图书馆学报,2016,34(3):51-58,15.
[20] 李雁翎,孙晓慧,陈玖冰.五维图书评价体系及分析模型的建构[J].情报科学,2013,31(8):77-80,140.
[21] 张玉,潘云涛,袁军鹏,等.论多维视角下中文科技图书学术影响力评价体系的构建[J].图书情报工作,2015,59(7):69-76.
[22] 高科. 构建网络时代的社科图书评价体系[N]. 中国社会科学报,2015-04-22(A05).
[23] 刘晓娟,宋婉姿.基于PLOS ALM的altmetrics指标可用性分析[J].图书情报工作,2016,60(4):93-101.
[24] SCHUBERT A. Using the H-index for assessing single publications[J]. Scientometrics, 2009, 78(3):559-565.
[25] 杨建林, 严明. 单篇期刊论文h指数的实证研究——以图书情报学为例[J]. 图书情报工作, 2010, 54(12):145-148.
[26] 叶鹰. h指数与h型指数研究[M]. 北京:科学出版社, 2011.
[27] 雷淑义,吕先竞.我国人文社会科学学术图书Altmetrics评价:挑战及应用[J].图书情报工作,2017,61(11):133-139.
