传统文献计量与科学评价的一个补充视角:全时间域的RPYS

发布时间：2019-06-20 17:41

【摘要】：本文对传统文献计量和科学评价存在的问题进行了分析,假设全时间域的RPYS分析可能成为传统文献计量和科学评价的一个补充视角。为了验证该假设,笔者在前期RPYS研究的基础上,将其分析时间延展至一个学科或领域的全时间域,然后以情感分析领域为例,进行实验设计,识别该领域的重要文献及其学者、期刊分布,并分析该领域的研究起源、研究演化和研究热点。RPYS结果显示,1905—2010期间有17篇文献对于情感分析的起源、发展和演化起到了积极的推动作用;同时,由于RPYS是基于参考文献视角的分析方法,因此在对情感分析的研究热点和研究趋势的发现上存在一定的局限性。最后,文章将RPYS得到的结果与传统文献计量视角得到的前17篇高被引论文进行比较分析发现,在传统的文献计量方法为主的情况下,加入RPYS作为补充视角,可能得到更加全面、准确和客观的结果。
[Abstract]:In this paper, the problems existing in traditional literature measurement and scientific evaluation are analyzed, and it is assumed that RPYS analysis in the whole time domain may become a supplementary perspective for traditional literature measurement and scientific evaluation. In order to verify this hypothesis, the author extends its analysis time to the whole time domain of a subject or field on the basis of the previous RPYS research, and then takes the field of emotional analysis as an example to carry out experimental design, identify the important literature in this field and its scholars, periodical distribution, and analyze the origin of research in this field, research evolution and research hotspots. RPYS results show that there are 17 literatures about the origin of emotional analysis during 1905 / 2010. Development and evolution have played a positive role in promoting; At the same time, because RPYS is an analysis method based on the perspective of references, there are some limitations in the research hotspots and research trends of emotional analysis. Finally, by comparing the results obtained by RPYS with the first 17 highly cited papers obtained from the traditional bibliometric perspective, it is found that under the condition of traditional bibliometric methods, adding RPYS as a supplementary perspective may obtain more comprehensive, accurate and objective results.
【作者单位】：武汉大学信息管理学院;信息检索与知识挖掘研究所;
【基金】：中国博士后科学基金资助项目(2016M602371)的研究成果之一
【分类号】：G353.1

【参考文献】