Loading...
|
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/49865
|
| Title: | 人文與社會科學期刊與圖書被引用分析
Citation Analysis of Journal and Monograph in Humanity and Social Science |
| Authors: | 吳姵瑩
Wu, Pei Ying |
| Contributors: | 蔡明月
Tsay, Ming Yueh
吳姵瑩
Wu, Pei Ying |
| Keywords: | 人文與社會科學
文獻老化
引文分析
Humanities and social sciences
Literature Obsolescence
Citation analysis |
| Date: | 2009 |
| Issue Date: | 2010-12-09 11:07:34 (UTC+8) |
| Abstract: | 人文與社會科學引用資料類型反映了人文社會科學研究者的資料使用行為，進而突顯其出版作品之資料類型的重要性。學術研究之發展會隨著時間的進展而發生變化，因此，本研究以2000年與2009年為主要研究範圍，以二個年代加以比較各學科引用資料類型之差異。探討各學科引用文獻之資料類型、各學科引用圖書與期刊之變化及其是否因期刊性質與年代不同而有差異。所以，本研究亦將探討各學科期刊引用文獻老化現象，並進一步以期刊性質與年代加以比較，期能幫助研究人員與專家學者對於人文社會科學領域使用資料之行為更加了解，並協助圖書館館藏發展與管理的工作。
研究結果如下：1.人文與社會科學引用參考文獻分析(1)人文學以圖書為主要引用資源，社會科學以期刊為主；(2)評述型期刊的引用文獻數量較高；(3)人文學科的研究型期刊與評述型期刊多引用圖書資源，社會科學中多引用期刊資源；(4)不同年代的人文學評述型期刊與研究型期刊主要引用資料為圖書、期刊；社會科學不同年代的研究型期刊主要引用圖書及期刊資源，評述型期刊引用較多的是圖書與電子資源。2.人文與社會科學引用文獻老化現象呈現出(1)被引用圖書的文獻老化時間較長，其中又以人文學的圖書文獻老化所需時間比較多；(2)人文學的引用圖書資源的出版年份久遠，近期與過去出版的文獻皆有引用，文獻老化程度較不顯著；(3)人文學各學科的被引用期刊半衰期可達13年至19年；另一方面，社會科學各學科被引用期刊半衰期可達7年至19年間；(4)研究型期刊之文獻老化現象中，人文學科的引用年代偏向年代較早的文獻，傾向引用6年至22年的參考文獻作研究，而社會科學者經常引用出版6至11年的文獻；(5)評述型期刊之人文學科的引用年代傾向於引用12年間的參考文獻作研究，而社會學科學者經常引用出版8至10年的文獻；(6)研究表現出研究型和評述型期刊的類型並不完全影響該學科的文獻老化程度。
本研究結果可應用於規畫重要的期刊文獻類型，有助於圖書館或相關研究單位評估人文與社會科學的相關館藏是否足以支援研究，並且藉由與其他領域的老化速度之比較，作為為採購資料之時效性以及期刊裝訂時的必要考量。同時可將研究分析應用於人文社會科學學者的學術資訊需求與特性，藉以提供研究人員完善的資訊服務，由文獻老化速度可以知道學科的發展情形，可作為人文與社會科學學者館藏研究規劃之參考。
The Humanities and Social Sciences reference categories reflect the use of information of the researchers and highlight the importance of the publication categories. The development of academic research changes over time. Therefore, taking 2000 and 2009 as the major research areas, the study compares the difference between each discipline referring categories. The study also researches the references patterns of different disciplines, the change of referring monographs and journals in different disciplines, and whether they change the pattern due to the transformation and aging of these reference books and journals. Consequently, this study will also probe into the Literature Obsolescence in various references categories of different disciplines, and furthermore to compare the nature and years of journals, hoping to help researchers and experts in humanities and social sciences to understand the information research behavior better and to assist the Library collection development and management.
The results are as follows: 1.The analysis of Citation and Reference in Humanities and Social Sciences (1)the humanities mostly refer to monograph, and the social sciences mostly journal; (2)Review journal is in a higher number of citations; (3) research and review journals of Humanities cites more monograph resources, and social science journals resources; (4)Reference materials of review and research Journals of Humanities in different generations are mainly monographs and periodicals; research journals if social sciences in different years more cites in monographs and periodicals, while review periodicals prefer to reference more monograph and electronic resources. 2. Humanities and Social Sciences Citation Literature Obsolescence reveals that (1)the cited monographs take longer for obsolescence, among which monographs in Humanities take more time; (2) the cited monographs in humanities has published from long time ago. Cited recent and past literature, citation literature of aging are less significant. (3) The half-life of the cited journal of each discipline in the humanities is up to 13-19 years. On the other hand, the half-life of Journal reference in social sciences disciplines are up to 7-19 years; (4) About the Literature Obsolescence of research journals, the humanities tend to the refer literatures in earlier years, from past 6 to 22 years, while the Social Sciences often cited published literature published from 6 to 11 years ago; (5) Review journals in the humanities tend to quote the reference materials of past 12 years for research, and social science scholars frequently cited literatures published from 8 to 10 years ago; (6) The study demonstrated the research and the review types of periodicals are not completely affect the academic literature aging.
The results can be applied to planning an important type of journal, contributing to the libraries or related research units to assess if the humanities and social sciences collection sufficient to support. Furthermore, by the comparison of other areas in speed of aging, this study also can be a necessary measurement for the timeliness of procurement and for the periodicals binding. Meanwhile, the analysis can be applied to the behavior and characteristics of academic information requirement of humanities and social sciences scholars, in order to provide researchers a complete information services. From the speed of Literature Obsolescence, scholars can acknowledge the development of a subject. It can be used as the reference in humanities and social sciences collection planning. |
| Reference: | 一、中文
1. 丁學東。文獻計量學基礎。北京：北京大學出版社，民82。
2.「人文學科」，大美百科全書。台北市：光復書局，民84。
3. 中國大百科智慧藏
<http://library1.lib.nccu.edu.tw/cpedia/Content.asp?ID=50673&
Query=1>(檢索日期:2009年11月7日)
4. 行政院國家科學委員會。中華民國人文社會科學白皮書。台北市：行政院國家科學委員會，民89。
5. 王宏鑫。「文獻老化研究的現狀的分析」。情報理論與實踐26(3)(民92):
232-234。
6. 王崇德。文獻計量學教程。天津市：南開大學出版社，民79。
7. 「社會科學」。雲五社會科學大辭典十二冊。台北：台灣商務，民60。
8. 冉伯恭。政治學概論。台北市：五南，民89。
9. 朱堅章等。社會科學概論。台北縣：國立空中大學，民81。
10. 何光國。文獻計量學導論。台北市：三民書局，民83。
11. 「人類學」。人類學辭典。上海，上海辭書出版社，民80。
12. 李慕如。人文學。高雄市：高雄復文，民90。
13. 沈時傑。社會工作Q&A。台北市：風雲論壇，民89。
14. 俞培果。「文獻老化現象研究的歷史總評」。中國圖書館學報4期(民87)，頁44-49。
15. 俞培果。「論引文分析方法的發展」。圖書情報工作4(民84)，頁9-13。
16. 施孟雅。從專業期刊文獻分析我國台灣地區的圖書館學研究。台北市：漢美，民81。
17. 洪鎌德。人文思想與現代社會。台北市：揚智文化，民88。
18. 洪鎌德。人文主義與人文學科。台北市：五南，民98。
19. 洪鎌德。社會科學與現代社會。台北市：牧童，民65。
20. 馬起華。社會科學概論。台北市：大中國，民85。
21. 崔燕慧。「臺灣地區文史哲研究者文獻使用特性調查分析」。國家圖書館館訊，86(2)，43-67。
22. 張永宏。論人文科學的學科定位。雲南社會科學5(民94):頁54-57。
23. 張雙英。文學概論。台北市：文史哲，民91。
24. 郭育珠。經濟學導論。台北市：三民，民76。
25. 「人類學」。簡明文化人類學辭典。杭州：浙江人民出版社，民79。
26. 黃慕萱。「引用文獻初探」。當代圖書館事業論集：慶祝王振鵠教授七秩榮慶論文集台北市：正中，民83。
27. 黃慕萱，張郁蔚。「從研究產出探討人文社會學者學術評鑑之特性」。圖書資訊學刊2(3)(民94):頁1-19。
28. 葉志誠。社會學概論。台北市：揚智文化，民90。
29. 「專書」。圖書館學百科全書。北京市：中國大百科全書出版社，民82。
30. 「政治學」。大不列顛百科全書。台北市：丹青，民76。
31. 蔡明月。資訊計量學與文獻特性。台北市：華泰，民92。
32. 「人文主義」。簡明大英百科全書第19冊。台北市：台灣中華書局，民77。
33. 魏鏞。社會科學的性質及發展趨勢。台北市：台灣商務，民60。
34. 羅思嘉。「引用文獻分析與學術傳播研究」。中國圖書館學會會報66(民90)，頁73-85。
二、英文
1. Bernal, J.D. “The Transmission of scientific Information: A User’s Analysis” in: Proceedings of the International Conference on Scientific Information vol.l, (1959): 85-95.
2. Bolles, C.A. “Characteristics of the Literature of American Studies as Indicated by Bibliographic Citation.”Ph.D. dissertation, University of Minnesota, August 1975.
3. Bourke, P. and L. Bulter. “Publication types, citation rates and evaluation” Scientometrics37 (3) (1996): 473-494.
4. Budd, J. M. “Characteristics of Research Materials Used by American Literature Scholars: A Citation Studies.” Ph.D dissertation, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 1985
5. Budd, J. M. “Research in the Two Cultures: The Nature of Scholarship in Science and the Humanities.” Collection Management11 (3/4) (1989): 1-21.
6. Burton, R.E. and R.W. Kebler. “‘Half-life’ of Some Scientific and Technical Literature.” Journal of Doucumentation11 (1960): 18-22.
7. Carlin, A. “Some bibliographic practices in interdisciplinary work: Accounting for citations in library and information sciences.” Accountability in Research: Policies & Quality Assurance 10(1) (2003): 27–45.
8. Choi, J. M. “Citation analysis of intra and interdisciplinary communication patterns of anthropology.” U.S.A. Behavioral & Social Sciences Librarian 6(3/4) (1988): 85-67.
9. Coffman, J. W. “A Bibliometric Analysis of a Selected Literature Dealing with the Humanities from ‘ the dictionary of the History of ideas’” Ph.D dissertation, Case Western Reserve University,1985.
10.Decker, Oliver, Beutel, E. Mnfred , & E. Brahler. “ Deep impact: evaluation in the sciences” Soz.-Praventivmed 49(2004): 10-14.
11. Dewey, M. Dewey Decimal Classification .New York: Forest Press Inc, 1971
12. Edwin, R.A. Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences. Seligman, New York: Macmillan, 1954.
13. Egghe, L. “The Influence of Growth on obsolescence.” Scientometrics 27 (1993): 195.
14. Federal Funds for Research, Development and other Scientific Activities, Vol. XXVI. Washington D.C.: National Science Foundation, 1979.
15. Fletcher, J. “A view of the literature of economics. “Journal of Documentation 28(4) (1972): 283-295.
16.Gardield, E. “ Journal Citation Studies.38.Art and Humanities Journals differ from Natural and Social Sciences Journals—But Their Similarities are Surprising.” Current Contents47 (1982): 761-767.
17. Garfield, E. and I. Sher. “New Factors in the Evaluation of Scientific Literature through Citation Indexing.” American Documentation 14(1963):195-201.
18. Garfield, E. “ The articles most cited in the SCI from 1961 to 1982. 7. Another 100 citation-classics – the Watson-Crick double helix has its turn.” Current Contents20 (1985A): 3–12.
19. Garfield, E. “The articles most cited in the SCI from 1961 to 1982. 8. Ninety-eight more classic papers from unimolecular reaction velocities to natural opiates - the changing frontiers of science. ” Current Contents33 (1985B): 3–11.
20. Glanze, W. & U. Schoepflin, “A bibliometric study of reference literature in the sciences and social sciences, “Information Processing &Management 35(1) (1999): 31–44.
21. Griffith, B. et al. “The Aging of Scientific Literature: A Citation Analysis.” Journal of Documentation 35(1979): 179-197.
22. Guha, M. “Literature use by European sociologists.” International Library Review 3(1971): 445-452.
23. Gupta, U. “Obsolescence of Physics Literature: Exponential Decrease of the Destiny of Citation to Physical Review Articles with Age.” Journal of the American Society for information Science 41(1990): 282-287.
24. Hayes, R. M. “Citation statistics as a measure of faculty research productivity.” Journal of Education for Librarianship 23(1983): 151-172.
25. Heinzkill, R. “Characteristics of references in selected scholarly English literary journals.”Library Quarterly 50(3) (1980): 352-365.
26. Heisey, T. M. “Paradigm Agreement and Reference Concentration: A Study of Reference Obsolescence and Dispersion in the Literature of the Dead Sea Scrolls.” Ph. D. Dissertation, Rutgers the State University of New Jersey-New Brunswick, 1987. Abstracts in LISA on CD-ROM.
27. International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences. New York: Macmilliam, 1968.
28. ISI Web of Science .<http://wokinfo.com/products_tools/Multidisciplinary/
webofscience/>(accessed 30.Nov.2009)
29. Jennings, C. “Citation data: The wrong impact？”Neuroendocrinology Letters 20(1999): 7-10.
30. Jones, C., M. Chapman and P. C. Woods. “The Characteristics of the Literature Used by Historians.” Journal of Librarianship 4 (1972): 137-156.
31. Kelland, J. L. and A. P. Young. “Citation as a form of library use.” Collection Management19 (1/2) (1994): 81-100.
32. Knievel, J. E. and C. Kellsey. “Citation analysis for collection development: A comparative study of eight humanities fields.” Library Quarterly 75(2) (2005), 142-168.
33. Kuper, A. and J. Kuper. The Social Science Encyclopedia. New York : Routledge, 1996.
34. Laband, D. and M. J. Piette, “The Relative Impacts of Economics Journals: 1970-1990.” Journal of Economic Literature 32(2)(1994): 640-667.
35. Lariviere , V., E. Archambault and Y. Gingras, “The place of serials in referencing practices: comparing Nature Sciences and Engineering with Social Sciences and Humanities.” Journal of the American Society for information Science57(8)(2006):282-287.
36. Levitt. J. M. “The most highly cited Library and Information Science articles: Interdisciplinary, first authors and citation patterns.” Scientometrics 78(1) (2009): 45-67.
37. Library of Congress Classification .Washington, D.C.: Library of Congress, 1965.
38. Lindholm-Romantschuk, Y. “ The role of monographs in scholarly communication: An empirical study of philosophy, sociology and economics. ”Journal of Documentation52 (4) (1996): 389-404.
39. Line, M.B. and A . Sandison. “‘Obsolescence’ and changes in the Use of Literature with Time.” Journal of Documentation 30(3) (1974): 283-350.
40. Meyer, T. and J. Spencer. “A citation analysis study of library science: Who cites librarians?” College and Research Libraries 57(1) (1996): 23–33.
41. Mitzel, H. E. Encyclopedia of Research, 5ed. New York: Free Press, 1982.
42. Moed, H. F., L. Van, Reedijk and T. N., “Toward Appropriate Indicators of Journal Impact.,” Scientometrics 46(3)(1999): 575-589.
43. Motylev, V. M. “The Main Problem of Studying Literature Aging.” Scientometrics15(1-2) (1989): 97.
44. Musib, S.K. “Age of Literature Studies in Philosophy.” Journal of Library and information Science 12 (1987): 46-52.
45.Nederhof ,A.,J. R. A. Zwaan, De Bruin, R.E. & Dekker, P. J. “ Assessing the usefulness of bibliographic indicators for the humanities and the social and behavioral sciences: A comparative study.” Scientometrics 15(5/6) (1989): 423-435.
46. Nederhof , A. J. & A. F. J. Van Raan, “A bibliometric analysis of six economics research groups: A comparison with peer review.” Research Policy 22,
(1993): 353–368.
47. Penelope, E. P. and B .Vickery, “Social science literature use in the UK as indicated by citations.” Journal of Documentation 25(2) (1969): 123-141.
48. Price, D.D. S. “Citation Measure of Hard Science, Soft Science, Technology and Non-science.” In: C.E. Nelson and D.K. Pollock eds., Communication among Scientist and Engineers, Lexington, MA: Heath, 1970, 3-22
49. Riordon, P. J. and Nils Gjerdet. “The Use of Periodical Literature Studies in a Norwegin Dental Library.” Bulletin of Medical Library Association 69 (1981): 387-391.
50. Robinson, W. C. & P. E. Poston. “Literature use by U.S. economists published in 1999: An exploratory study. “Behavioral and Social Science “Libraries 22(2)
(2004):53-65.
51. Segmour, C. A. “Weeding Collection a Review of Research on Indentifying Obsolete Stock, Part I : Monographs.” Libri 22 (1972): 137.
52. Whalen, M. L. “ The Literature Used in Catholic and Protestant Doctoral Research in Theology.”(Ph.D. dissertation, Columbia University, 1965).
53. Social Science Research Council. Canberra: Australia National University press, 1960.
54. Soper, M. E. “Characteristic and Use of personal Collection.” Library Quarterly 46 (1976): 397-415.
55. Stern, B. “Characteristics of Literature of Library Scholarships.” College& Research Libraries 44(1983):199-209.
56. Tahai, A. and J. T. Rigsby. “Information processing using citation to investigate journal influence in accounting.” Information Processing &Management34 (2/3) (1998): 341-359.
57. Tang, R. “Evolution of the interdisciplinary characteristics of information and library science.” ASIST 2004: Proceedings of the 67th ASIST Annual Meeting1(2004 A): 54–63.
58. Thompson, J. W. “The death of the scholarly monograph in the humanities? Citation patterns in literary scholarship.” Libri 52 (2002): 121-136.
59. Van Diest, P. J. ,H. Holzel, D. Burnett and J. Crocker. “Impactitis: New cures for an old disease.” Journal of Clinical Pathology 54 (2001): 817-819.
60. Web of Science Social Sciences Citation Index Products <http://wokinfo.com/
products_tools/multidisciplinary/webofscience/ssci/ >(accessed 30.Nov.2009) |
| Description: | 碩士
國立政治大學
圖書資訊與檔案學研究所
97155011
98 |
| Source URI: | http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0097155011 |
| Data Type: | thesis |
| Appears in Collections: | [圖書資訊與檔案學研究所] 學位論文
|
Files in This Item:
| File |
Description |
Size | Format | |
|---|
| 501101.pdf | | 2535Kb | Adobe PDF2 | 1250 | View/Open |
|
All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.
|
