바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

logo

  • P-ISSN1013-0799
  • E-ISSN2586-2073

학술지 영향력 측정을 위한 h-지수의 응용에 관한 연구

A Study on Journal Impact Measurement with Hirsch-type Indices

정보관리학회지, (P)1013-0799; (E)2586-2073
2010, v.27 no.1, pp.269-287
https://doi.org/10.3743/KOSIM.2010.27.1.269
김판준 (경제․인문사회연구회)
이재윤 (경기대학교)

  • 다운로드 수
  • 조회수

초록

최근까지 학술지의 영향력을 측정하기 위하여 Thomson Reuters(ISI)의 영향력지수(JIF: Journal Impact Factor)가 널리 사용되어왔다. 그러나, 이러한 JIF는 학술지 단위가 아니라 수록 논문의 평균 영향력을 측정하는 지표라는 근본적인 한계를 가지고 있으며, 이외에도 다양한 측면에서 많은 문제점들이 지적되었다. 특히 국내 인용색인은 국제적인 인용색인 데이터베이스에 비해서 인용 데이터의 규모가 상당히 제한적이므로, 이를 고려하여 국내 학술지 인용 환경에 적합한 지수의 적용이 필요하다. 따라서 이 연구는 최근 급속히 확산되고 있는 Hirsch 유형 지수(h-type indices)를 적용하여 국내 학술지의 영향력을 보다 더 상세하게 측정할 수 있는 실제적인 방안을 모색하였다. 결과적으로, h-지수의 변형지수(hs-지수, fs-지수)를 사용하거나 호 단위 합산(호 기반 h-지수, 호 기반 f-지수) 방법을 통하여, 기존 Hirsch 유형 지수들의 변별력을 향상시킬 수 있음은 물론 국내 학술지의 영향력을 더욱 정밀하게 측정할 수 있는 것으로 나타났다.

Abstract

The journal impact factor(JIF) of the Thomson Reuters(ISI) has been widely used to assess the impact of journal as well as its quality. However, the JIF contains its critical limitation, in which it does not measure the impact of journal but the average impact of articles in journal. Besides significant number of problems of the JIF has been noticed. Furthermore, given the limited coverage of domestic citation index database in comparison to those of international citation index, it is necessary to apply a more appropriate index with a high level of discriminating power. This study, therefore, aims to introduce some practical methods to measure the impact of domestic journals by using the Hirsch-type indices. As the Hirsch-type indices has been often used for overcoming the limitations of the JIF in worldwide, we hope that our research outcome offers an effective alternative to gauge the impact of journals more accurately. Consequently, using the variations of the h-index(hs-index, fs-index) or the sum of issue level(issue based h-index, issue based f-index), we argue that it would improve the discrimination capacity of the Hirsch-type indices significantly and that we can measure the impact of domestic journals more clearly.

참고문헌

1

이재윤. (2006). 연구성과 측정을 위한 h-지수의 개량에 관한 연구. 정보관리학회지, 23(3), 167-186.

2

이정연. (2010). 인용정보를 활용한 학술정보서비스 고도화 전략. 정보관리연구, 41(1), 43-67.

3

이춘실. (2002). 한국 의학학술지 인용지표 개발 연구. 한국비블리아학회지, 13(1), 27-41.

4

최광남. (2004). 국내학술지 영향력 지표 분석을 위한 한국과학기술인용색인(KSCI) 연구. 한국문헌정보학회지, 38(4), 271-289.

5

홍종선. (2007). KCI 기반 Kor-Factor(Korea Factor) 평가지표 개발 및 시범적용. 정책연구-2007-023-지식확산, 한국학술진흥재단 정책보고서.

6

Adler, R., John Ewing, and Peter Taylor. (2008). Citation statistics. http://www.mathunion.org/fileadmin/IMU/Report/CitationStatistics.pdf.

7

Alonso, S.. (2010). hg-index: A new index to characterize the scientific output of researchers based on the hand g-indices. Scientometrics, 82(2), 391-400.

8

Anderson, T. R.. (2008). Beyond the Durfee square: Enhancing the h-index to score total publication output. Scientometrics, 76(3), 577-588.

9

Bar-Ilan, Judit. (2008). Which h-index?-A comparison of WOS, Scopus and Google Scholar. Scientometrics, 74(2), 257-271.

10

Batista, P. D.. (2006). Is it poossible to compare researchers with different scientific interests?. Scientometrics, 68, 179-189.

11

Bador, P.. Comparative analysis between impact factor and h-index for pharmacology and psychiatry journals. Scientometrics, , -.

12

Bornmann, L.. (2007). What do we know about the h index?. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(9), 1381-1385.

13

Bornmann, L.. (2009). Hirsch-type index values for organic chemistry journals: A comparison of new metrics with the Journal Impact Factor. European Journal of Organic Chemistry, 10, 1471-1476.

14

Braun, T.. (2005). A Hirsch-type index for journals. The Scientist, 19(22), 8-.

15

Egghe, L.. (2006). Theory and practise of the g-index. Scientometrics, 69(1), 131-152.

16

Egghe, L.. (2010). The Hirsh-index and related impact measures. in: Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 44.

17

Franceschet, Massimo. (2010). A comparison of bibliometric indicators for computer science scholars and journals on Web of Science and Google Scholar. Scientometrics, 83(1), 243-258.

18

Harzing, Anne-Wil. (2009). A Google Scholar h-index for journals: An alternative metric to measure journal impact in economics and business. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60(1), 41-46.

19

Hirsch, J. E.. (2005). An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output (16569-16572). Proceedings of the National Academy of Science.

20

Jin, B.. (2007). The AR-index: complementing the h-index. ISSI Newsletter, 3, 6-.

21

Jin, B.. (2007). The R-and AR-indices: complementing the h-index. Chinese Science Bulletin, 52(6), 855-863.

22

Kosmulski, M.. (2006). A new Hirsch-type index saves time and works equally well as the original h-index. ISSI Newsletter, 2(3), 4-6.

23

Kosmulski, M.. (2007). MAXPROD: A new index for assessment of the scientific output of an individual, and a comparison with the h-index. International Journal of Scientometrics, Informetrics and Bibliometrics, 11(1), 1-5.

24

Lindsey, D.. (1978). The Scientific Publication System in Social Science:Jossey-Bass.

25

Liu, Y.. (2009). Empirical series of journal h-indices: The JCR category Horticulture as a case study. Scientometrics, 80(1), 59-74.

26

Meho, L. I.. (2007). The rise and rise of citation analysis. Physics World, 29(1), 32-36.

27

Meho, L. I.. (2007). Impact of data sources on citation counts and rankings of LIS faculty: Web of Science vs. Scopus and Google Scholar. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(13), 2105-2125.

28

Moussa, Salim. (2010). Ranking marketing journals using the Google Scholar-based hg-index. Journal of Informetrics, 4(1), 107-117.

29

Orbay, M.. (2007). What does Hirsch index evolution explain us?: A case study: Turkish Journal of Chemistry. Biblios, 8(2), 1-5.

30

The PLoS Medicine Editors. (2006). The impact factor game: it is time to find a better way to assess the scientific literature. PLoS Med, 3(6), e291-.

31

Podlubny, I.. (2005). Comparison of scientific impact expressed by the number of citations in different fields of science. Scientometrics, 64(1), 95-99.

32

Prathap, G.. (2009). Going much beyond the Durfee square: Enhancing the hT index. Scientometrics, 79(2), 235-248.

33

Rousseau, R.. (2006). A case study: evolution of JASIS' h-index. Science Focus, 1(1), 16-17.

34

Rousseau, R.. (2008). Reflections on recent developments of the h-index and htype indices. COLLNET Journal of Scientometrics and Information Management, 2(1), 1-8.

35

Rousseau, R.. (2008). The agedependent h-type AR2-index: Basic properties and a case study. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(14), 2305-2311.

36

Saad, G.. (2006). Exploring the h-index at the author and journal levels using bibliometric data of productive consumer scholars and business-related journals respectively. Scientometrics, 69(1), 117-120.

37

Schreiber, M.. (2007). Self-citation corrections for the Hirsch index. Europhysics Letter, 78(30002), 1-6.

38

Schreiber, M.. (2009). A case study of the modified Hirsch index hm accounting for multiple coauthors. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60(6), 1274-1282.

39

Schreiber, M.. (2010). Revisitiing the g-index: The average number of citations in the g-core. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 61(1), 169-174.

40

Schubert, A.. (2007). A systematic analysis of Hirsch-type indices for journals. Journal of Informetrics, 1, 179-184.

41

Sidiropoulos, A.. (2007). Generalized Hirsch h-index for disclosing latent facts in citations networks. Scientometrics, 72(2), 253-280.

42

Simons, K.. (2008). The misused impact factor. Science, 322, 165-.

43

Tol, R. S. J.. (2009). The h-index and its alternatives: An application to the 100 most prolific economists. Scientometrics, 80(2), 317-324.

44

van Raan, A. F. J.. (2006). Comparison of the Hirsch-index with standard bibliometric indicators and with peer judgment for 147 chemistry research groups. Scientometrics, 67(3), 491-502.

45

Vanclay, J. K.. (2007). On the robustness of the h-index. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(10), 1547-1550.

46

Vanclay, J. K.. (2008). Gauging the impact of journals. Forest Ecology and Management, 256(4), 507-509.

47

Vanclay, J. K.. (2008). Ranking forestry journals using the h-index. Journal of Informetrics, 2(4), 326-334.

48

Vinkler, P.. (2007). Eminence of Scientists in the Light of the h-index and other Scientometric Indicators. Journal of Information Science, 33(4), 481-491.

정보관리학회지