초록

학술지의 인용빈도를 특정하여 산출된 지수로 단일 논문의 영향력을 평가하는 것에 대한 비판으로 인해 단일 논문의 인용 영향력을 측정하는 인용지수에 대한 연구가 다양하게 시도되었다. 이 연구에서는 8개의 단일 논문 인용영향력 평가 지수를 살펴보고 KCI 논문 데이터베이스를 대상으로 각 인용지수의 분야별 편향성을 조사하여 보았다. 대상 지수는 단순 인용빈도, 페이지랭크, f-값, CCI, c-지수, 단일문헌 h-지수, 단일문헌 hs-지수, cl-지수였다. 분석결과 페이지랭크가 학문 분야별 균등성, 학문 분야 내에서 학술지별 균등성 영역에서 가장 편향성이 없는 것으로 나타났다. 반면에 단순 인용빈도는 특정 학문분야나 특정 학술지에 편향된 결과를 산출할 가능성이 높은 것으로 나타났다. KCI 데이터베이스에서는 논문의 단순 인용빈도만 제공하고 있는데, 분야별 균등성을 가장 잘 유지하는 지수인 논문 페이지랭크를 함께 제공할 필요가 있다. 아울러 인용한 문헌의 인용빈도만으로 산출이 가능해서 이용자의 검색 결과로부터 바로 산출할 수 있는 지역 네크워크 지수 중에서는 cl-지수가 가장 균등성을 잘 유지하므로 계산 과정과 서비스가 손쉬운 지수로 함께 제공하는 것도 검토해야 한다.

Abstract

The impact of a journal is commonly used as the impact of an individual paper within that journal. It is problematic to interpret a journal’s impact as a single paper’s impact of the journal, so there are several researches to measure a single paper’s impact with its own citation counts. This study applied 8 impact indicators to Korean Citation Index database and examined discipline bias of each indicator. Analyzed indicators are simple citation counts, PageRank, f-value, CCI, c-index, single publication h-index, single publication hs-index, and cl-index. PageRank has the least discipline bias at highly ranked papers and journal bias in a discipline. On the contrary, simple citation counts showed strongly biased results toward a certain discipline or a journal. KCI database provides only simple citation counts. It needs to show PageRank (global indicator) to discover influential papers in diverse areas. Furthermore it needs to consider to provide the best of local indicators. Local indicators can be calculated only with papers in users’ search results because they uses citation counts of citing papers and the number of references. They are more efficient than global indicators which explore the whole database. KCI should also consider to provide Cl-index (local indicator).

초록

Abstract

Titles have been regarded as having effective clustering features, but they sometimes fail to represent the topic of a document and result in poorly generated document clusters. This study aims to improve the performance of document clustering with titles by suggesting titles in the citation bibliography as a clustering feature. Titles of original literature, titles in the citation bibliography, and an aggregation of both titles were adapted to measure the performance of clustering. Each feature was combined with three hierarchical clustering methods, within group average linkage, complete linkage, and Ward's method in the clustering experiment. The best practice case of this experiment was clustering document with features from both titles by within-groups average method.

초록

대학소속 연구자들의 연구 분야가 다변화되면서 대학도서관에서는 서비스 운영을 위하여 학과별 주제 분야를 파악하는 것이 중요한 과제로 인식되고 있다. 이 연구는 대학 학과 소속구성원들의 학술지 논문 서지사항을 분석하여 학과별 주제특성을 다차원적으로 분석하고자 하였다. 게재한 학술논문을 분석하여 1차적으로 해당 학과의 주제영역을 파악하고자 하였으며 심층적으로 주제영역을 분석하기 위하여 해당 논문들이 인용한 학술지를 조사하여 확장된 주제영역을 조사하였다. 또한 상위 인용된 학술지를 대상으로 네트워크 분석을 하여 학술지간 관계를 분석하였다. 분석 결과 학과별 주제 분야별 학술지 이용현황에 차이가 있는 것으로 조사되었으며 특정 주제 분야의 경우 학술지 종수와 논문 수에 따라 주제 분야의 중요도가 비례하지 않는 것으로 나타났다. 즉, 특정분야의 경우 소수의 학술지에서 많은 논문이 인용되고 있는 현상이 있으며 게재하는 주제 분야와 인용하는 주제 분야의 중요도가 일치하지 않는 것으로 나타났다.

Abstract

As topics of researchers become diverse horizontally or vertically, academic libraries have difficulties to identify the dynamic change of researchers' needs for academic publications. This research aims to illustrate the topic areas of researchers in a department of university by analyzing bibliographies of their publications. First, researchers' publications were used to discover the topic areas where the researchers had published. Second, the cited publications in those papers were analysed to identify the expanded topic areas of these researchers. Finally, highly cited journals were analyzed by network analysis method. The major finding is that the importance of topic areas by the number of journals was not necessarily proportional to that by the number of papers. Researchers have a tendency to use many papers in a small number of journals in a certain topic area. Furthermore, the importance of topic areas discovered by researchers' publications was not the same as that discovered by researchers' citations.

초록

Abstract

Since information scientists have begun trying to quantify significant research trends in scientific publications, ‘-metrics’ research such as ‘bibliometrics’, ‘scientometrics’, ‘informetrics’, ‘webometrics’, and ‘citation analysis’ have been identified as crucial areas of information science. To illustrate the dynamic research activities in these areas, this study investigated the major contributors of ‘-metrics’ research for the last decade at three levels: nations, institutions, and documents. ‘-metrics’ literature of this study was obtained from the Science Citation Index for the years 2001-2011. In this analysis, we used Pathfinder network, PNNC algorithm, PageRank and several indicators based on h-index. In terms of international collaborations, USA and England were identified as major countries. At the institutional level, Katholieke University, Leuven and the University of Amsterdam in Europe and Indiana University and the Office of Naval Research in the USA have led co-research projects in informetrics areas. At the document level, Hirsch’s h-index paper and Ingwersen’s web impact factor paper were identified as the most influential work by two methods: PageRank and single paper h-index.

초록

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to identify topic areas of academic library research using two informetric methods; word clustering and Pathfinder network. For the data analysis, 139 articles published in major library and information science journals from 2005 to 2009 were collected from the Korean Science Citation Index database. The keywords that represent research topics were gathered from two sections: an abstract and titles in references. Results showed that reference titles usefully represent topics in detail, and combining abstracts and reference titles can produce an expanded topic map.

초록

Abstract

Since the 1990s, informetrics has grown in popularity among information scientists. Today it is a general discipline that comprises all kinds of metrics, including bibliometrics and scientometrics. To illustrate the dynamic progress of this field, this study aims to identify the structure and infrastructure of the informetrics literature using statistical and profiling methods. Informetrics literature was obtained from the Web of Knowledge for the years 2001-2010. The selected articles contain least one of these keywords: ‘informetrics’, ‘bibliometrics’, ‘scientometrics’, ‘webometrics’, and ‘citation analysis.’ Noteworthy publication patterns of major countries were identified by a statistical method. Intellectual structure analysis shows major research areas, authors, and journals.