论文部分内容阅读
为了探究“互引指数”在期刊定量评价中的作用,以林学中4本期刊为研究对象,以《中国学术期刊影响因子年报》和中国知网引文数据库中的6年数据为基础,从4本期刊影响因子和他引影响因子的年变化表象开始,分析了4本期刊的互引指数以及引用期刊的情况。在2009—2014统计年,4本林业期刊影响因子主要与他引总引比呈现相关性,4本期刊中的A刊和B刊两本期刊虽然在2012和2013统计年具有较高的影响因子和他引影响因子,却具有较低互引指数,根据互引指数的定义以及两本期刊引用期刊的分布情况,这两本期刊高的影响因子和他引影响因子并不能代表这两本期刊的被引期刊分布广度的合理性,只有互引指数可以。互引指数可以补充影响因子和他引影响因子在期刊评价中的不足,能够代表某期刊的被引期刊分布广度的合理性和期刊之间互引情况的严重性,对以影响因子为主的定量评价体系表现出约束作用。
In order to explore the role of “mutual index” in quantitative evaluation of periodicals, this paper takes 4 periodicals in forest science as the research object and based on the 6-year data in “China Academic Journal Impact Factor Annual Report” and CNKI citation database, Beginning with the appearance of four journals influencing factors and the annual variation of citation factors, this paper analyzes the mutual citation indexes of the four journals and the situation of citing journals. In the 2009-2014 statistical year, the influential factors of the four forestry journals are mainly related to his quotations, although the two Journals in the journal A and B have higher impact factors in the 2012 and 2013 statistical years According to the definition of reciprocal index and the distribution of the periodicals cited by the two journals, the high impact factors and the citation factors of the two journals do not represent the two journals The rationality of the breadth of the cited periodicals’ distribution can only be achieved by reciprocal indexing. Mutual index can supplement the influence factors and citation factors in the evaluation of journals, can represent the rationality of the breadth of citation distribution of journals and the severity of citing situation between journals, Quantitative evaluation system shows the constraint.