초록

이 연구에서는 연구자의 연구 이력을 분석하기 위해서 White(2000)가 제안한 인용 정체성과 Hellsten 등(2007)이 제안한 자기 인용 네트워크의 두 가지 최신 기법을 비교해보았다. 국내 대표적인 정보학자인 정영미의 연구 성과물을 대상으로 실험적인 분석을 수행해본 결과 두 기법에서 구분한 연구 시기가 동일하게 나뉘었으며 주요 연구 주제도 유사하게 파악되었다. 그러나 인용 정체성 지도에서는 주제영역별로 영향받은 주요 저자를 파악할 수 있는 반면에 자기 인용 네트워크에서는 시기별 핵심 문헌과 선도 문헌이 식별되었다. 따라서 이 두 가지 기법을 상호보완적으로 사용할 때 연구자의 연구 이력에 대해서 풍부한 정보를 획득할 수 있다는 결론을 얻었다.

Abstract

This paper compares two recent methods for exploring a scientist's research history: citation identity and self-citation network. The former is proposed by White(2000), while the latter is suggested by Hellsten et al.(2007). An experimental citation analysis was carried out on the research output of Young Mee Chung, a renouned Korean information scientist. The result shows that the two methods divided the research period into two sub-periods in the same way. They also identified the major research themes very similarly. In the analysis of each method's performance in depth, the two methods revealed different functions to understand a researcher's history. Citation identity was useful to identify authors who have affected Chung's research in terms of research topics. whereas, self-citation network was successful to identify the core papers and leading papers of the research sub-periods. This study indicates the combination of two methods can provide rich information on a scientist's research history.

초록

본 연구는 국내 문헌정보학분야 유력 학술지간의 상호 인용관계를 바탕으로 영향지수, 즉시성지수, 피인용반감기, 자기인용비율을 밝히고자 하였다. 이를 위하여 2014년에 발행된 국내 문헌정보학 분야 학술지 4종의 학술논문 252건에서 인용한 인용문헌 9,329건을 대상으로 분석하였다. 그 결과 국내 주요 학술지의 인용문헌 비율은 한국도서관․정보학회지가 20.2%, 한국문헌정보학회지 19.1%, 한국비블리아학회지 18.8%, 정보관리학회지 17.0%의 순으로 나타나 국내 학술논문 생산에 주요 학술지 논문의 활용이 미미한 것으로 분석되었다. 또한 피인용반감기는 정보관리학회지가 4.25년, 한국문헌정보학회지가 5.87년, 한국도서관․정보학회지가 5.40년, 한국비블리아학회지가 3.57년으로 나타나 비교적 최신논문을 인용하고 있었으며, 영향력 지수는 0.47～0.67로 나타나 타 주제 분야 학술지에 비해 낮은 지수를 보였다.

Abstract

This study is to analyze impact factor, self-citation, immediacy index and cited half-life through citation analysis of scholarly journals of LIS field in Korea. This study was analysed the 9,329 references cited in Korean scholarly journal of LIS field. As a result, it analyzed that the articles of Korean LIS journal among the cited references in scholarly journal of LIS field in Korea is very insignificant. In other words, the percentage of citations was observed 19.1% in Journal of Korean Library and Information Science Society (KSLIS), 20.2% in Journal of the Korean Society for Library and Information Science (KLISS), 17.0% in Journal of the Korean Society for Information Management (KOSIM), 18.8% in Korean Biblia Society for Library and Information Science (KBIBLIA). Also, the cited half-life was analysed 5.87 years in KSLIS, 5.40 years in KLISS, 4.25 years in KOSIM, 3.57 years in KBIBLIA. And Impact factor has been found to be very low compared to journals of other fields.

초록

이 연구의 목적은 연구소프트웨어의 공유, 재사용, 인용 현황을 분석하는 것이다. 학술커뮤니케이션에서 연구소프트웨어는 최근 들어 더욱 중요한 역할을 하고 있다. 현재 연구소프트웨어의 인용이 일반적인 관행이 아니거나, 적어도 데이터인용색인(DCI)이 연구소프트웨어의 인용과 재사용을 제대로 인덱싱하지 못하는 것으로 관찰되었다. 소프트웨어인용은 주요 레포지토리(prominent repositories)에서 발견되었다. 소프트웨어인용이 많은 레포지토리는 CRAN(Comprehensive R Archive Network)과 Zenodo였다. 연구소프트웨어가 재사용되는 경우, 비공식 소프트웨어인용(informal software citation)과 공식 소프트웨어인용(formal software citation)이 동시에 관찰되었다. 비공식 소프트웨어인용은 연구소프트웨어가 논문의 본문에서는 언급되지만 참고문헌에는 없는 경우였고, 공식 소프트웨어인용은 참고문헌에도 있는 경우였다. 또한, 이 연구의 결과는 연구소프트웨어의 자기 인용(self-citation) 현황을 설명했다.

Abstract

The purpose of this research is to explore the phenomenon of the sharing, reuse, and citation of research software. These practices are playing an increasingly important role in scholarly communication. The researchers found that the citation and reuse of research software are currently uncommon or at least not reflected in the Data Citation Index (DCI). Such citation was observed, however, for the newer software in a number of prominent repositories. The repositories Comprehensive R Archive Network (CRAN) and Zenodo received the most formal software citations. The researchers observed both formal and informal forms of citation when researchers reused software. The latter form involves mentioning research software in passing in the main text of articles, while formal citations appear in the references section. In addition, our comparative analysis helps to explain the phenomenon of self-citation of research software.

초록

Abstract

Despite the widespread use, critics claim that citation analysis has serious limitations in evaluating the research performance of scholars. First, conventional citation analysis methods yield one-dimensional and sometimes misleading evaluation as a result of not taking into account differences in citation quality, not filtering out citation noise such as self-citations, and not considering non-numeric aspects of citations such as language, culture, and time. Second, the citation database coverage of today is disjoint and incomplete, which can result in conflicting quality assessment outcomes across different data sources. This paper discuss the findings from a citation analysis study that measured the impact of scholarly publications based on the data mined from Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar, and briefly describes a work-in-progress prototype system called CiteSearch, which is designed to overcome the weaknesses of existing citation analysis methods with a robust citation-based quality assessment approach.

초록

Abstract

A large and reliable citation database is necessary to identify and analyze citation behavior of Korean researchers in science and technology. Korea Institute of Science and Technology Information (KISTI) built the Korea Science Citation Database (KSCD), and have provided Korea Science Citation Index (KSCI) and Korea Journal Citation Reports (KJCR) services. In this article, citing behavior of Korean scientists on Korean journals was examined by using the KSCD that covers 459 Korean core journals. This research dealt with (1) statistical numeric information of journals in KSCD, (2) analysis of document types cited, (3) ratio of domestic to international documents cited and ratio of citing different disciplines, (4) analysis on immediacy index, peak time, and half-life of cited documents, and (5) analysis on impact of journals based on KJCR citation indicators. From this research, we could find the immediacy citation rate (average 2.36%), peak-time (average 1.7 years) and half-life (average 5.2 years) of cited journals in Korea. We also found that the average journal self-citation rate is more than 50% in every field. In sum, citing behavior of Korean scientists on Korean journals was comprehensively identified from this research.

초록

Abstract

Although it has been a long subject of study why researchers prefer some cited documents to others, the existing relative researches have had a variety of perspectives on the nature and complexity of the citation behavior and not provided a complete answer to this question. In particular, Korea researchers mainly used statistical analysis of bibliographic information, which has limitations in revealing dynamic and complex cognitive aspects of the citation process. In this study, I investigate the citer perception of citing motives and bibliographic factors through survey and compared the responses according to the researchers’ characteristics. After extracting the 22 motivations and 21 factors through the literature analysis and configuring a 5-point Likert scale questions, I conducted a survey in the wat of an e-mail attachment. From the SPSS 22.0, the frequency analysis, t-test, and one-way ANOVA were performed on the 354 valid samples. As a result, it is found that supporting is considered the most important citing motive and social connection, self-citation have little influence. In the case of bibliographic factors, the journal’s reputation was recognized the most influential factor and the number of pages and authors was the least. Significant differences in fields of study and research careers were showed in some parts. These results can substantiate earlier studies, determine whether the factors assumed influential in selecting references were intended, and suggest the search point to the specialty library or academic database.

초록

이 논문에서는 학술지 인용 데이터와 웹 링크 데이터를 이용하여 8개 과학기술 분야의 학제적 구조를 파악하고 각 학문분야 간 학제성을 비교하였다. 분석 대상이 되는 학술지와 웹 페이지의 주제적 성격을 파악하기 위해 기존의 과학기술 분류체계를 재구성하여 이용하였다. 이 연구에서 학제성은 여러 학문분야 간 학제적 연결의 측면에서 파악하였으며, 학제성의 정도는 연관 학문분야의 수로 측정한 학제적 다양성과 자기인용률에 의해 평가하였다. 분석 결과 학술지 인용 분석에서는 밝혀내지 못한 새로운 학제적 연결을 웹 링크 분석에 의해 파악하였으며, 이를 통해 웹 링크 분석이 학제성을 연구하는 수단으로서 유용함을 알 수 있었다. 또한 인용 분석과 링크 분석에서 모두 자연과학 분야에 비해 공학 분야의 학제성이 대체로 더 높게 나타났다.

Abstract

This study identifies the interdisciplinary structures of 8 scientific disciplines in science and technology using the data from journal citations and web links, and compares the interdisciplinarity among these scientific disciplines. The interdisciplinarity refers to interdisciplinary connections among scientific fields and the degree of interdisciplinarity is measured by the number of associated fields and the rate of self-citation. A re-arranged classification scheme for science and technology was adopted to identify subject categories of journals and web pages. Web link analysis revealed a few additional interdisciplinary connections that were not identified by the journal citation analysis, thus demonstrating that it is useful means of investigating the interdisciplinarity of scientific fields. Besides, in most of the cases the interdisciplinarity of the engineering fields were found greater than that of the fields in natural sciences in both analyses.

초록

본 연구는 Web of Science (WoS) 논문을 기반으로 주요 5개국의 Open Access (OA) 논문 비중과 방식을 분석하고 조절효과(Moderating Effect) 검증을 통해 OA의 피인용 유도에 차이가 나타나는지 검증하였다. 분석 결과, OA 비중은 영국이 62.7%로 가장 높았으며, 중국이 38.0%로 가장 낮게 나타났다. 또한 셀프 아카이빙과 Gold Hybrid가 OA의 주요 실천 방법 중 하나로 나타난 영미와 달리, 중국과 한국의 OA 논문은 Gold 저널 출판에 집중되어 있는 것으로 분석되었다. 두 번째, 조절효과 분석 결과, 우수 논문의 OA 출판 및 유통이 활성화된 영국, 미국, 일본의 경우 OA 비중이 높을수록 피인용량을 유도하는 효과가 커지는 것으로 나타났으나, 한국(B=-0.00003, p<0.01)과 중국(B=-0.00001, p<0.01)에서는 역의 방향성이 나타나 차이를 보였다. 더불어 대부분의 학문분야에서 OA가 피인용을 유도하였으나 공학 분야(B=-0.00002, p<0.01)에서는 역의 방향성을 보이는 것으로 분석되었다.

Abstract

This study empirically analyzed the proportion and method of Open Access (OA) in Korea, China, Japan, the United States, United Kingdom based on the Web of Science (WoS) papers. In addition, through the verification of the moderating effect, it was verified whether there is a difference in the effect of the amount of citation depending on the maturity of OA according to the countries or academic fields. As a result of the analysis, the proportion of OA was the highest in the UK at 62.7%, and the lowest in China at 38.0%. Second, the UK and US had a high proportion of indicators through self-archiving and APC-based Gold Hybrid, while only the Gold indicators were found to be prominent in China and Korea. Third, in the UK, US and Japan, the higher the proportion of OA, the greater the effect of inducing the citations. However, Korea (B=-0.00003, p<0.01) and China (B=-0.00001, p<0.01) showed the opposite direction. In addition, in most academic fields, the OA proportion had an effect of inducing citation, but a negative effect was found in the engineering field (B=-0.00002, p<0.01).