Keyword occurrences and journal specialization

Author:

Sampagnaro GabrieleORCID

Abstract

AbstractSince the borders of disciplines change over time and vary across communities and geographies, they can be expressed at different levels of granularity, making it challenging to find a broad consensus about the measurement of interdisciplinarity. This study contributes to this debate by proposing a journal specialization index based on the level of repetitiveness of keywords appearing in their articles. Keywords represent one of the most essential items for filtering the vast amount of research available. If chosen correctly, they can help to identify the central concept of the paper and, consequently, to couple it with manuscripts related to the same field or subfield of research. Based on these universally recognized features of article keywords, the study proposes measuring the specialization of a journal by counting the number of times that a keyword is Queryrepeated in a journal on average (Sj). The basic assumption underlying the proposal of a journal specialization index is that the keywords may approximate the article’s topic and that the higher the number of papers in a journal based on a topic, the higher the level of specialization of that journal. The proposed specialization metric is not invulnerable to a set of limitations, among which the most relevant seems to be the lack of a standard practice regarding the number and consistency of keywords appearing in each article.

Funder

Università Parthenope di Napoli

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Subject

Library and Information Sciences,Computer Science Applications,General Social Sciences

Reference40 articles.

1. Abramo, G., D’Angelo, C. A., & Zhang, L. (2018). A comparison of two approaches for measuring interdisciplinary research output: The disciplinary diversity of authors vs the disciplinary diversity of the reference list. Journal of Informetrics, 12(4), 1182–1193.

2. Aria, M., & Cuccurullo, C. (2017). Bibliometrix: An R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis. Journal of Informetrics, 11(4), 959–975.

3. Augsburg, T. (2016). Becoming Interdisciplinary: An Introduction to Interdisciplinary Studies. Kendall Hunt.

4. Bensman, S. J. (2001). Bradford’s law and fuzzy sets: Statistical implications for library analyses. IFLA Journal, 27, 238–246.

5. Boyack, K. W., & Klavans, R. (2011). Multiple dimensions of journal specificity: Why journals can’t be assigned to disciplines. Paper Presented at the 13th Conference of the International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics, Durban

Cited by 3 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3