經濟學者及社會學者引用文獻特性及學術表現之研究

Citation Behavior and Research Performance of Economists and Sociologists

10.6575/JoLIS.2012.80.04

黃慕萱(Mu-Hsuan Huang)；楊曉雯(Hsiao-Wen Yang)

經濟學者 ； 社會學者 ； 學術評鑑 ； 書目計量學 ； Economist ； Sociologist ； Research evaluation ； Academic evaluation ； Bibliometrics

圖書與資訊學刊

80期（2012 / 05 / 01）

59 - 75

繁體中文

本研究採用引文分析方法，以臺灣地區出版之七種經濟學與12種社會學期刊為研究對象，從臺灣學者之引文角度，探討經濟學者及社會學者引用文獻特性及學術表現。在引用文獻特性方面，經濟學者引用文獻類型以期刊引用為主；社會學者則以圖書為主，顯示不同領域、學門引用文獻特性不同。在臺灣學者學術表現方面，首先瞭解學者於域內期刊與全域期刊被引用次數排名之差異，並進行域內被引次數與學術成就表現的相關檢定。結果顯示經濟學及社會學期刊於域內與全域之被引用次數排名無極大差異，也就是說兩種領域以少數域內期刊之引用次數排名即可用以代表多數期刊被引用數的排名。然而經濟學與社會學期刊域內被引次數與傑出學者與否的檢定中，雖然兩者被引次數的平均值有差異，但仍未達顯著差異；在被引次數排名與國科會計畫數的相關檢定方面，經濟學呈中度相關，但於社會學則未達顯著相關。因此，期刊引文分析未必能用來評鑑臺灣經濟學及社會學學者之學術表現，以期刊引文分析來評鑑臺灣經濟學與社會學學者學術表現時需謹慎進行。

This article uses citation analysis to study citation behavior and research performance of economists and sociologists in Taiwan. Regarding citation behavior, economists tend to cite materials from journal articles, while sociologists tend to apply citations from books. As for research performance, the results show that there is a consistency between citation rankings made among top economics and sociology journals and citation rankings made among journals of general fields. The consistency indicates that citation counts made among top economics and sociology journals can generally reflect the impact of researchers from the two fields. In contrast, rankings of highly cited researchers nonetheless show no close correlation with rankings of outstanding researchers. Also, the correlation between rankings of cited researchers and numbers of their research projects sponsored by National Science Council (NSC) is statistically moderate in economics while unobvious in sociology. The discovery suggests that citation analysis may not necessarily be applicable to evaluations of research performance in the fields of economics and sociology. Evaluations based on the standard of citation behavior require well-judged interpretations.

1. 郭炳伸、曹添旺、于若蓉、藍青玉、陳致綱(2007)。臺灣經濟學期刊之再評比。經濟論文，35(3)，345-380。
   連結：
2. 黃慕萱(2008)。從臺灣學者引文角度看圖書資訊學期刊及學者之評鑑。圖書資訊學刊，6(1/2)，1-27。
   連結：
3. 黃慕萱(2010)。從臺灣學者引文角度看歷史學期刊及學者之評鑑。圖書資訊學研究，4(2)，1-39。
   連結：
4. 黃慕萱、張郁蔚(2006)。人文社會學者學術評鑑指標之探討。圖書資訊學刊，4(1/2)，17-47。
   連結：
5. 國立新竹教育大學教務處學術發展組 （民 95）。國內三十六所大學校級教師評鑑相關辦法彙編。上網日期：民國 97 年10 月30 日。檢自：http//www.nhcue.edu.tw/~aca/te/004.doc
6. Bourke, P.,Bulter, L.(1996).Publication types, citation rates and evaluation.Scientometrics,37(3),473-494.
7. Cronin, B.,Snyder, H.(1997).Comparative citation rankings of authors in monographic and journal literature：A Study of Sociology.Journal of Documentation,53(3),263-273.
8. Earle, P.,Vickery, B.(1969).Social science literature use in the UK as indicated by citations.Journal of Documentation,25(2),123-141.
9. Finkenstaedt, T.(1990).Measuring research performance in the humanities.Scientometrics,19,409-417.
10. Fletcher, J.(1972).A view of the literature of economics.Journal of Documentation,28(4),283-295.
11. Guha, M.(1971).Literature use by European sociologists.International Library Review,3,445-452.
12. Hicks, D.(1999).The difficulty of achieving full coverage of international social science literature and the bibliometric consequences.Scientometrics,44(2),193-215.
13. Huang, M. H.,Chang, Y. W.(2008).Characteristics of research output in social sciences and humanities: From a research evaluation perspective.Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology,59(11),1819-1828.
14. Lindholm-Romantschuk, Y.(1996).The role of monographs in scholarly communication : A empirical study of philosophy, sociology and economics.Journal of Documentation,52(4),389-404.
15. Meho, L. I.,Sonnenwald, D. H.(2000).Citation ranking versus peer evaluation of senior faculty research performance: A case study of Kurdish scholarship.Journal of the American Society for Information Science,51(2),123-138.
16. Nederhof, A. J.,van Raan, A. F. J.(1993).A bibliometric analysis of six economics research groups: A comparison with peer review.Research Policy,22(4),353-368.
17. Nederhof, A. J.,Zwaan, R.A.,De Bruin, R. E.,Dekker, P.J.(1989).Assessing the usefulness of bibliographic indicators for the humanities and the social and behavioral sciences: A comparative study.Scientomotrics,15(5/6),423-435.
18. Rinia, E. J.,van Leeuwen, T. N.,van Vuren, H. G.,van Raan, A.F. J.(1998).Comparative analysis of a set of bibliometric indicators and central peer review criteria evaluation of condensed matter physics in the Netherlands.Research Policy,27,95-107.
19. 郭炳伸、曹添旺、于若蓉、藍青玉、陳致綱(2006)。國科會專題研究計畫成果報告國科會專題研究計畫成果報告,臺北市:政治大學國際貿易系。
20. 章英華、黃毅志、余漢儀、羅文輝(2002)。國科會專題研究計畫成果報告國科會專題研究計畫成果報告,臺北市:中央研究院社會學研究所。