圖書資訊學知識來源與知識擴散指標之研究
No Thumbnail Available
Date
2009-10-??
Authors
黃慕萱
何蕙菩
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
國立台灣師範大學圖書資訊研究所
Graduate Institute of Library and Information Studies
Graduate Institute of Library and Information Studies
Abstract
本文以1997 年至2006 年圖書資訊學之引用文獻與被引用文獻作為分析對象，除研究圖書資訊學知識來源與知識擴散程度外，並探討四種知識來源與知識擴散指標之差異性與適用性，包括 COC、WCOC、Brillouin’s Index、Originality/Generality。本文發現，圖書資訊學知識來源程度較知識擴散程度高。圖書資訊學知識來源的學科自我引用率逐 漸降低，而知識擴散仍以學科境內擴散為主，但與過去研究結果相比，對其他學科影響逐漸提高。在各指標比較上，COC 與WCOC著重跨學科引用程度，兩指標相關性極高，相互取代性大；Brillouin’s Index 易受樣本特性影響，適用於衡量分類較細之專利號或學科；Originality/Generality 則適用於衡量分類較粗之學科。
This study uses bibliometric methods to measure knowledge originality and knowledge generality of Library and Information Science (LIS) by using citing and cited documents from 1997 to 2006. This study further discusses the difference and applicability of four knowledge originality and knowledge generality indicators, including COC, WCOC, Brillouin’s Index, and Originality/Generality. We find that the extent of knowledge originality is more than that of knowledge generality in LIS. The subject self-citation (SSC) of LIS in knowledge originality has been trending down, whereas that in knowledge generality is still high, signifying main knowledge transfers within LIS itself. However, comparing this finding with the past, we find LIS has increasingly more impact on the other disciplines. Through analysis from these indicators, we also find that with COC and WCOC, we can quickly identify the rate of subject self-citation and interdisciplinary citations, but the two indicators show high relevance and may be inter-replaceable. While both emphasizing on the distribution of disciplines, Brillouin’s Index tends to be more sensitive to the samples, thus useful in measuring categories with specific classification schemes such as patent classifications or smaller discipline fields, whereas Generality/Originality is useful for more generalized subjects.
This study uses bibliometric methods to measure knowledge originality and knowledge generality of Library and Information Science (LIS) by using citing and cited documents from 1997 to 2006. This study further discusses the difference and applicability of four knowledge originality and knowledge generality indicators, including COC, WCOC, Brillouin’s Index, and Originality/Generality. We find that the extent of knowledge originality is more than that of knowledge generality in LIS. The subject self-citation (SSC) of LIS in knowledge originality has been trending down, whereas that in knowledge generality is still high, signifying main knowledge transfers within LIS itself. However, comparing this finding with the past, we find LIS has increasingly more impact on the other disciplines. Through analysis from these indicators, we also find that with COC and WCOC, we can quickly identify the rate of subject self-citation and interdisciplinary citations, but the two indicators show high relevance and may be inter-replaceable. While both emphasizing on the distribution of disciplines, Brillouin’s Index tends to be more sensitive to the samples, thus useful in measuring categories with specific classification schemes such as patent classifications or smaller discipline fields, whereas Generality/Originality is useful for more generalized subjects.