论文标题

参考文献研究文献中引入的计数方法1970-2018:评论

Counting methods introduced into the bibliometric research literature 1970-2018: A review

论文作者

Gauffriau, Marianne

论文摘要

本文计量计数方法的本综述研究1)文献计量研究文献中独特的计数方法的数量,2)根据计数方法的选定特征,可以在多大程度上对计数方法进行分类,3)方法和元素,以评估计数方法的内部有效性,以及4)与该特征进行评估的方法。 该评论确定了1981年至2018年期间引入的32种计数方法。两个框架对这些计数方法进行了分类。框架1描述了计数方法的选定数学属性,框架2描述了选择计数方法的参数。在32种计数方法中,有20种是依赖等级的,分数和引入的,以衡量研究对象的贡献,参与等。接下来,使用三个内部有效性标准来确定五种测试计数方法的充分性,两个测试灵敏度的元素以及测试计数方法均质性的三个元素。这些方法和元素可用于评估计数方法的内部有效性。最后,文献搜索找到了使用计数方法的研究评估。在32种计数方法中,只有三种研究评估或更多。在这三种计数方法中,两种方法具有与引入计数方法的研究中定义的相同特征。 该评论为研究评估的从业人员和书目计量学研究人员提供了详细的基础,以使用计数方法。同时,审查中的许多发现为未来对计数方法的研究提供了基础。

The present review of bibliometric counting methods investigates 1) the number of unique counting methods in the bibliometric research literature, 2) to what extent the counting methods can be categorized according to selected characteristics of the counting methods, 3) methods and elements to assess the internal validity of the counting methods, and 4) to what extent and with which characteristics the counting methods are used in research evaluations. The review identifies 32 counting methods introduced during the period 1981 - 2018. Two frameworks categorize these counting methods. Framework 1 describes selected mathematical properties of counting methods, and Framework 2 describes arguments for choosing a counting method. Twenty of the 32 counting methods are rank-dependent, fractionalized, and introduced to measure contribution, participation, etc. of an object of study. Next, three criteria for internal validity are used to identify five methods that test the adequacy of counting methods, two elements that test sensitivity, and three elements that test homogeneity of the counting methods. These methods and elements may be used to assess the internal validity of counting methods. Finally, a literature search finds research evaluations that use the counting methods. Only three of the 32 counting methods are used by four research evaluations or more. Of these three counting methods, two are used with the same characteristics as defined in the studies that introduced the counting methods. The review provides practitioners in research evaluation and researchers in bibliometrics with a detailed foundation for working with counting methods. At the same time, many of the findings in the review provide bases for future investigations of counting methods.

扫码加入交流群

加入微信交流群

微信交流群二维码

扫码加入学术交流群,获取更多资源