초록

본 연구에서는 지구적 환경문제의 해결 방식으로서 환경과학 분야의 학술활동과 같은 학문적 접근 방식과 환경 NGO 중심의 환경운동과 같은 실천적 접근 방식을 두 가지 주요 흐름이라 보고, 이들 각각의 특성을 계량정보학적 분석을 통해 파악하고 비교하였다. 지난 10년 간 환경과학 분야에서 인용된 저널의 주제범주 간 동시인용 관계를 분석함으로써 이 분야의 지식 구조를 파악하였고, 환경 NGO의 웹 사이트에서 수집된 외부링크 데이터를 이용하여 이들의 관심 분야를 확인하였다. 또한 저널 논문과 NGO 뉴스에서 추출된 핵심어를 이용한 동시출현단어 분석을 통해 하위 주제를 파악하여 이들 간의 주제적 유사성과 상이성을 구체화하였다.

Abstract

This study aims to understand and compare the characteristics of two major approaches to solving global environmental problems-an academic approach including scholarly activities of environmental sciences and a practical approach of environmental movements led by NGOs-by employing informetric analysis methods. Knowledge structure of environmental sciences is depicted through co-citation networks of subject categories assigned to the cited journals in the discipline of environmental sciences for the 10-year period from 2000 to 2009. Furthermore, major interests of environmental NGOs are identified on the basis of external link data collected from web sites of the NGOs. Co-word analyses are also performed using the texts of journal papers in environmental sciences as well as news articles provided by NGO sites. Through the analyses, dominant subject areas of environmental sciences and environmental movements are identified demonstrating similarities and differences between the two approaches.

초록

Abstract

Authoritative as well as objective information on ranking or dominant research areas of academic departments/schools in a certain discipline is essential for the graduate school applicants. In this study, we performed an informetric analysis to identify dominant research areas in the top 10 U.S. LIS schools. We used two different datasets of research productivity and research interests of the LIS faculty. The correspondence analysis method was employed to graphically display the association between research areas and the LIS schools. We found that the research productivity data collected from SSCI database generated a very informative map presenting which research areas were dominant in which LIS schools. We also found that for the two most productive subject areas in LIS over the past 10-year period, the proportion of research articles in information retrieval decreased to a great extent in the recent 5-year period, whereas that of information seeking behavior showed an almost same degree of increase.