Abstract
Purpose
Citations have been used as a common basis to measure the academic accomplishments of scientific books. However, traditional citation analysis ignored content mining and without consideration of citation equivalence, which may lead to the decline of evaluation reliability. Hence, this paper aims to integrate multi-level citation information to conduct multi-dimensional analysis.
Design/methodology/approach
In this paper, books’ academic impacts were measured by integrating multi-level citation resources, including books’ citation frequencies and citation-related contents. Specifically, firstly, books’ citation frequencies were counted as the frequency-level metric. Secondly, content-level metrics were detected from multi-dimensional citation contents based on finer-grained mining, including topic extraction on the metadata and citation classification on the citation contexts. Finally, differential metric weighting methods were compared with integrate the multi-level metrics and computing books’ academic impacts.
Findings
The experimental results indicate that the integration of multiple citation resources is necessary, as it can significantly improve the comprehensiveness of the evaluation results. Meanwhile, compared with the type differences of books, disciplinary differences need more attention when evaluating the academic impacts of books.
Originality/value
Academic impact assessment of books via integrating multi-level citation information can provide more detailed evaluation information and cover shortcomings of methods based on single citation data. Moreover, the method proposed in this paper is publication independent, which can be used to measure other publications besides books.
Subject
Library and Information Sciences,Computer Science Applications
Reference59 articles.
1. Scopus citation analysis of publications from Saudi dental colleges;Library Philosophy and Practice,2019
2. Citations to the ‘introduction to informetrics’ indexed by WOS, Scopus and Google scholar;Scientometrics,2010
3. Latent Dirichlet allocation;Journal of Machine Learning Research Archive,2003
4. What do citation counts measure? A review of studies on citing behavior;Journal of Documentation,2008
5. The evolution of current research impact metrics: from bibliometrics to altmetrics?;Clinical Spine Surgery: A Spine Publication,2017
Cited by
2 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