论文部分内容阅读
[目的/意义]借助引文分析与其他文献计量学研究方法对特定领域的“研究前沿”进行分析,是目前情报学研究的重要课题。但是中文“研究前沿”实际对应于Research Front与Research Frontier两个具有不同内涵的英文术语,厘清这两个术语关系有助于学者改进并正确应用“研究前沿”分析方法。[方法/过程]在分析Research Frontier与Research Front两个概念交集关系模型的基础上,以Scientometrics和JASIST两种期刊为样本,检验了常见Research Front引文分析指标的可靠性。[结果/结论]实证研究结果显示,尽管高被引论文比零被引在引文的新颖性、热点性、耦合关联性上具有相对显著的优势,但这些特征指标并不能高效地映射潜在的高被引论文。因此,Research Front与Research Frontier是具有显著差异的不同概念,学者们应该对这两组概念进行更为深入的讨论。
[Purpose / Significance] The analysis of “frontiers of research” in specific fields by using citation analysis and other bibliometrics methods is an important issue in information science research. However, the Chinese “research frontier” actually corresponds to two different terms in English between Research Front and Research Frontier. Clarifying the relationship between these two terms helps scholars to improve and correctly apply the “research frontier” analysis method. [Methods / Processes] Based on the analysis of two conceptual intersection models of Research Frontier and Research Front, we use the two kinds of Journals: Scientometrics and JASIST as samples to test the reliability of common Research Front citation analysis indicators. [Results / Conclusion] The empirical results show that although the highly cited papers have a relatively significant advantage over citation in the novelty, hotness and coupling relevance of citations, these characteristics can not efficiently map the potential high Cited Papers. Therefore, Research Front and Research Frontier are different concepts with significant differences. Scholars should discuss these two concepts in more detail.