圖書資訊學與相關學科之期刊自我引用研究

A Journal Self-Citation of Library and Information Sciences and its Related Subject Fields

古育詩(Yu-Shih Ku)

指導教授 ： 蔡明月

淡江大學/文學院/資訊與圖書館學系碩士班/碩士(2006年)

https://doi.org/10.6846/TKU.2006.00784

摘要

本研究旨在探討圖資學相關學科期刊自我引用數據之特性，根據學者專家的意見選出傳播學、教育學、圖資學、管理學、心理學和電腦科學等六大學科做為研究對象。研究時間自1990至2004年共15年，採用ISI公司所製作的JCR資料庫之引用數據，包括：被引用次數、影響因素、即時引用指數、刊載文章篇數、引用半衰期、被引用半衰期、同時法自我引用率及歷時法自我引用率等八項數據來進行分析。本研究分析內容為2004年的期刊基本特性和自我引用數據特性外，並利用皮爾森相關係數、費雪爾Z轉換、獨立樣本T檢定及簡單迴歸等統計方法來進行15年數據之檢測，分析各學科自我引用率與其他引用數據之相關性、學科間的自我引用率與其他引用數據相關性之差異、學科間期刊引用數據之同質性與平均數差異及自我引用率在不同時期之發展趨勢。
研究結果歸納如下：
一、各學科期刊自我引用率與期刊基本特性之分析
1.各學科同時法自我引用率的分佈相似；歷時法自我引用率則不太相同。
2.社會科學類期刊的刊期以季刊為主，電腦科學則以月刊為主。
3.圖資學相關學科期刊的創刊年，多集中於1960至1979年創刊。
4.由自我引用率與期刊出版頻率來說，發現出版頻率較高的期刊，同時法自我引用率也偏高；至於歷時法自我引用率則不然。
5.就自我引用率與期刊主題數方面，三個以上主題數的同時法自我引用率較高，一個主題數的則較低；歷時法自我引用率反之。
6.若以自我引用率與創刊年代來看，分析結果顯示創刊年代久遠，同時法自我引用率較高；歷時法自我引用率反之。
7.同時法自我引用率與歷時法自我引用率為正相關。
二、各學科期刊自我引用率與其他引用數據之相關性分析
1.同時法自我引用率與被引用次數、歷時法自我引用率與影響因素為最相關的引用數據，而自我引用率與引用半衰期之相關性極小。
2.各學科的十三組引用數據之相關性檢定結果，心理學有十組達到顯著相關，其次為傳播學、教育學及電腦科學的八組，圖資學和管理學亦有六組，顯示出自我引用率與被引用次數、影響因素、即時引用指數、刊載文章篇數、被引用半衰期之關係密不可分。
三、各學科期刊自我引用率與其他引用數據之相關性差異分析
1.學科間十三組引用數據之相關性，僅12%具有差異。
2.學科間的同時法自我引用率與被引用半衰期之相關性為最具差異；無相關差異性的引用數據，包括同時法自我引用率與影響因素、即時引用指數、歷時法自我引用率與影響因素、被引用半衰期。
3.學科間具有相關差異性，分別為圖資學和心理學、管理學和電腦科學；而傳播學和教育學、傳播學和心理學、心理學和管理學之間則沒有相關差異性。
四、各學科期刊引用數據變異數同質性與平均數差異性分析
1.就自我引用率而論，各學科同時法自我引用率檢定結果比歴時法自我引用率的差異性小；以心理學和電腦科學之間的變異數與平均數最具差異。
2.由八項引用數據來看，影響因素的差異性最大，其次為被引用次數和刊載文章篇數。學科間最具顯著差異性的為心理學與傳播學、教育學；傳播學和教育學之間則不具差異性。以單一學科分析，心理學和其他學科之間的差異最大，其次為電腦科學、管理學。
3.分別觀察自我引用率和八項引用數據的變異數及平均數檢定結果中，發現同樣以電腦科學與傳播學為最具差異性，沒有差異性的則為傳播學和教育學，顯示出自我引用率的確受到其他引用數據之影響。
五、各學科在不同時期自我引用率之差異及發展趨勢
1.近十年和十五年的同時法自我引用率之迴歸分析，電腦科學約有四分之一的期刊可透過迴歸線來推測未來趨勢，期刊數量較其他學科多。
2.近十年和十五年的歷時法自我引用率之迴歸分析，觀察出歷時法自我引用率明顯會隨著時間的推移，有逐漸減少之趨勢。

關鍵字

圖書資訊學 ； 期刊 ； 引用文獻分析 ； 期刊引用報告 ； 同時法自我引用率 ； 歷時法自我引用率 ； 被引用次數 ； 影響因素 ； 即時引用指數 ； 刊載文章篇數 ； 引用半衰期 ； 被引用半衰期

並列摘要

The purpose of this study is to analyze the journal self-citation of library & information sciences and its related subject fields. According to the experts' and scholars' opinions, the related subject fields of library & information sciences are communication, education, management, psychology, and computer science. This study adopts the citation data of Journal Citation Reports (JCR), with the coverage of years from 1990 to 2004. The citation data include total cites, impact factor, immediacy index, source items, citing half-life, cited half-life, synchronous self-citation rate, and diachronous self-citation rate. This research analyzes the journals' basic characteristics and the characteristics of self-citation data on 2004. By employing the following statistical tests the research results were obtained. Firstly, the correlation between each pair of citation data, such as synchronous self-citation rate and total cites, was determined based on the Pearson correlation tests. Secondly, the Fisher's Z-Transform examination was used to examine the correlation coefficient variation between self-citation rate and other citation data. Thirdly, the study focuses on independent-samples T test was used to ascertain whether there were equality and mean difference between the citation data in library & information sciences and its related subject fields. Fourthly, the simple regression analysis was used to forecast tendency of self-citation rate.
The results of this study revealed:
1.The journals' basic characteristics and the characteristics of journal self-citation data
(1)The synchronous self-citation rate for each discipline journals are similar; whereas diachronous self-citation rate are different.
(2)Computer science journals are primarily published monthly, however, journals of other fields are quarterly.
(3)The journals' starting years are concentrated from 1960 to 1979.
(4)Journals with high publication frequency are in positive correlation with high synchronous self-citation rate. Such a correlation do not exist for diachronous self-citation rate.
(5)The synchronous self-citation rate for the journals with have three and above subjects is higher than that with single subject; the diachronous self-citation rate presents the opposite trend.
(6)The longer the journal published, the higher the synchronous self-citation rate is and the lower diachronous self-citation rate is.
(7)There is positive correlation between the synchronous self-citation rate and the diachronous self-citation rate.
2.The correlation between self-citation rate and other citation data in journals of library & information sciences and its related subject fields.
(1)The highest correlations of journals citation data are between the synchronous self-citation rate and total cites, and between diachronous self-citation rate and impact factor; but the correlation between self-citation rate and citing half-life is the minimum.
(2)For the thirteen groups citation data in each discipline, psychology has ten groups presenting significant correlation, followed by communication, education and computer science, all of which have eight groups, library & information sciences and management have six groups. The results demonstrated close correlation between self-citation rate and total cites, impact factor, immediacy index, source items, and cited half-life.
3.The correlation coefficient variation of self-citation rate and other citation data in journals of library & information sciences and its related subject fields.
(1)Only 12% of thirteen groups citation data in each discipline have significant difference in correlation coefficient.
(2)The difference of correlation coefficient between synchronous self-citation rate and cited half-life is the highest. However, there is no significant difference between synchronous self-citation rate and impact factor, synchronous self-citation rate and immediacy index, diachronous self-citation rate and impact factor, diachronous self-citation rate and immediacy index.
(3)By analyzing the variation of disciplines' journals in self-citation rate and other citation data correlation coefficient, the differences between library & information sciences and psychology, and management and computer science journals are the highest. There is no significant difference between communication and education, communication and psychology, psychology and management are not differences.
4.The analysis of equality and mean difference between the citation data in journals of library & information sciences and its related subject fields.
(1)According to the analysis result of self-citation rate, the difference in synchronous self-citation rate is lower than the diachronous self-citation rate. The difference in variance and mean value between psychology and computer science is the highest.
(2)According to the analysis results of eight citation data, the difference in impact factor is the highest; followed by both total cites, and source items. The difference among psychology and communication, and education is the highest. However, there is no difference between communication and education. The difference between education and other disciplines is the highest, computer science, and management come next.
(3)By analyzing the self-citation rate and eight citation data respectively, the difference between computer science and communication is the highest. However, there is no significant difference betweencommunication and education. This demonstrates that the self-citation rate may be influenced by the other citation data.
5.The difference and development tendency of the self-citation rate in the different period of each discipline
(1)The regression analysis of synchronous self-citation rate in nearly ten years and fifteen years respectively, about 1/4 computer science journals' future tendency can be predicted by the regression line.
(2)The regression analysis of diachronous self-citation rate in nearly ten years and fifteen years respectively, the diachronous self-citation rate obviously follow the time evolution and has the trend of gradually decrease.

並列關鍵字

Library and Information Sciences ； Journals ； Citation Analysis ； Journal Citation Reports ； Synchronous Self-Citation Rate ； Diachronous Self-Citation Rate ； Total Cites ； Impact Factor ； Immediacy Index ； Source Items ； Citing Half-Life ； Cited Half-Life

參考文獻

徐怡華。「數字的迷思：淺述WOS/JCR與學術評鑑」。國立臺灣大學醫學院圖書分館館訊 72期（民國93年7月)：頁1-2。

Thomson ISI. “Journal self-citation in the Journal Citation Reports- Science Edition (2002): a citation study from the Thomson Corporation.” 2004, (2005年9月1日).

羅思嘉、羅靜純。「從核心期刊與資料利用探討圖書館期刊館藏之發展－以商學期刊為例」。國立成功大學圖書館館刊 5期（民國89年4月）：頁23-52。

洪祖培、王顏和。「科學引用文獻索引與影響指數」。醫學教育 2卷1期 (1998年)：頁65-74。

陳光華。「中國大陸引用文獻索引建置機構之參訪」。國家圖書館館刊 90年第1期（民國90年6月）：頁171。