초록

전체 학술지 논문 가운데 오픈액세스(Open Access, OA)가 차지하는 비중은 현재 20%-30%에 이르고 있고, 최근에는 출판 즉시 오픈액세스가 가능한 골드 OA에 대한 관심이 높다. 이 연구는 골드 OA를 출판하기 위한 선결 조건인 ‘논문 처리 수수료(Article Processing Charges, APC)’ 지원에 관한 것으로 연구후원기관과 저자의 재직대학에서 어떠한 정책을 수립하여 실천하고 있는지를 알아보았다. 영국을 비롯한 유럽에서는 수년 동안 연구후원기관의 APC 부담에 관한 타당성 검토와 시범사업을 진행하여 왔고, 현재 본격적으로 시행하고 있는 단계이다. 미국을 비롯한 북미에서는 주요 대학도서관을 중심으로 OA 펀드를 조성하여 APC를 지원하고 있다. 반면에 한국은 연구후원기관과 대학에서 논문의 그린 OA를 추진할 뿐, APC를 지원하여 골드 OA를 출판하는 단계에 이르지 못하고 있다. 주제 분야에 따라 다르지만 국제 학술지에 논문을 출판하는 국내 연구자도 적지 않아 이들의 논문이 골드 OA로 출판된다면 국제적인 파급력은 크게 증진될 전망이다. 이에 국내 연구후원기관과 대학도 골드 OA에 관심을 갖고 OA 전문 학술지와 하이브리드 학술지에서 요구하는 APC를 지원하는 방향으로 정책의 기본 틀을 세우려는 노력을 경주해야 할 것으로 보인다.

Abstract

OA journal publishing has steadily increased its relative share of all scholarly journal articles by about 20%-30%. The ‘Gold’ OA, often preferred by readers, refers to journal articles which are more widely available through the journal’s web site immediately. This study analyzed funder and university’s policy for paying APCs in implementing a Gold OA. In recent years there have been a number of attempts in the UK and Europe to stimulate more systematic arrangements for paying APCs, leading funders have clearly established arrangements in place. Also OA fund made by major universities in North America provides publisher with APCs. On the other hand, it is still in early stages in paying with gold OA requirements from Korean funders and universities. The funders have a ‘Green’ OA policy, such as upload the article accepted version to their online platform. Although it varies by field, many Korean authors are publishing in international journals. Their articles’ impacts would rise when they are published as gold OA. Therefore, funders and universities need to pay attention to gold OA　publishing and set up subsidies for APCs which are required by OA or hybrid journal publishers.

초록

이 연구는 국내외 정보학 분야 학회지 동향을 파악하기 위하여 1990년부터 2013년까지 국내 정보관리학회지와 국외 JASIST의 논문 제목과 초록을 대상으로 텍스트 마이닝 기법을 통한 명사, 명사구 동시출현 분석을 수행하였다. 전 기간을 5구간으로 나누고 전체적인 동향을 살펴보기 위해 고빈도 동시출현단어를 분석하였으며, 세부 주제를 파악하기 위해 상위 키워드와 동시에 출현하는 단어를 분석하였다. 마지막으로 과거와 다르게 새로운 키워드가 등장하는 2010년 이후 동향을 중점적으로 네트워크 분석을 수행하였다. 분석 결과 전반적으로 국내의 경우 정보관리학회지는 도서관, 정보 서비스, 정보 이용자, 정보 자료 조직 주제 분야가 많이 차지하고 있었고 JASIST는 정보 검색, 정보 이용자, 웹 관련 정보학, 계량 정보학 중심으로 연구가 진행되었다.

Abstract

This paper carried out co-word analysis of noun and noun phrase using text-mining technique in order to grasp the research trends on domestic and international information science articles. It was conducted based on collected titles and articles of the papers published in the Journal of the Korean Society for Information Management (KOSIM) and Journal of American Society for Information Science and Technology (JASIST) from 1990 to 2013. By dividing whole period into five publication window, this paper was organized into the following processes: 1) analysis of high frequency co-word pair to examine the overall trends of both information science articles 2) analysis of each word appearing with high frequency keyword to grasp the detailed subject 3) focused network analysis of trend after 2010 when distinctively new keyword appeared. The result of the analysis shows that KOSIM has considerable portion of studies conducted regarding topics such as library, information service, information user and information organization. Whereas, JASIST has focused on studies regarding information retrieval, information user, web information, and bibliometrics.

초록

Abstract

As co-authorship has been prevalent within science communities, counting the credit of co-authors appropriately is an important consideration, particularly in the context of identifying the knowledge structure of fields with author-based analysis. The purpose of this study is to compare the characteristics of co-author credit counting methods by utilizing correlations, multidimensional scaling, and pathfinder networks. To achieve this purpose, this study analyzed a dataset of 2,014 journal articles and 3,892 cited authors from the Journal of the Architectural Institute of Korea: Planning & Design from 2003 to 2008 in the field of Architecture in Korea. In this study, six different methods of crediting co-authors are selected for comparative analyses. These methods are first-author counting (m1), straight full counting (m2), and fractional counting (m3), proportional counting with a total score of 1 (m4), proportional counting with a total score between 1 and 2 (m5), and first-author-weighted fractional counting (m6). As shown in the data analysis, m1 and m2 are found as extreme opposites, since m1 counts only first authors and m2 assigns all co-authors equally with a credit score of 1. With correlation and multidimensional scaling analyses, among five counting methods (from m2 to m6), a group of counting methods including m3, m4, and m5 are found to be relatively similar. When the knowledge structure is visualized with pathfinder network, the knowledge structure networks from different counting methods are differently presented due to the connections of individual links. In addition, the internal validity shows that first-author-weighted fractional counting (m6) might be considered a better method to author clustering. Findings demonstrate that different co-author counting methods influence the network results of knowledge structure and a better counting method is revealed for author clustering.