Comparative analysis of open government data topics and usability.

Q1 Mathematics Quality & Quantity Pub Date : 2023-02-16 DOI:10.1007/s11135-023-01630-x
Jane Cho
{"title":"Comparative analysis of open government data topics and usability.","authors":"Jane Cho","doi":"10.1007/s11135-023-01630-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study identifies differences in the content of open public data managed by the central government, local governments, public institutions, and the office of education in Korea through keyword network analysis. Pathfinder network analysis was performed by extracting keywords assigned to 1,200 data cases, open to the Korean Public Data Portals. Subject clusters were derived for each type of government and their utility was compared using download statistics. Eleven clusters were formed for public institutions with specialized information on national issues such as <i>Health care</i> and <i>Real estate</i>, while 15 clusters were formed for the central government with national administrative information, including <i>Crime</i> and <i>Safety policing</i>. Local governments and offices of education were assigned 16 and 11 topic clusters respectively, with data focusing on regional life such as <i>Local factories and manufacturing, Resident registration</i>, and <i>Lifelong education.</i> Usability was higher in public and central governments that deal with national-level specialized information than for regional-level information. It was also confirmed that subject clusters such as <i>Health care, Real estate,</i> and <i>Crime</i> showed high usability. Furthermore, there was a large gap in data utilization because of the existence of popular data that showed extremely high usage.</p><p><strong>Supplementary information: </strong>The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11135-023-01630-x.</p>","PeriodicalId":49649,"journal":{"name":"Quality & Quantity","volume":" ","pages":"1-17"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9933817/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Quality & Quantity","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-023-01630-x","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Mathematics","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study identifies differences in the content of open public data managed by the central government, local governments, public institutions, and the office of education in Korea through keyword network analysis. Pathfinder network analysis was performed by extracting keywords assigned to 1,200 data cases, open to the Korean Public Data Portals. Subject clusters were derived for each type of government and their utility was compared using download statistics. Eleven clusters were formed for public institutions with specialized information on national issues such as Health care and Real estate, while 15 clusters were formed for the central government with national administrative information, including Crime and Safety policing. Local governments and offices of education were assigned 16 and 11 topic clusters respectively, with data focusing on regional life such as Local factories and manufacturing, Resident registration, and Lifelong education. Usability was higher in public and central governments that deal with national-level specialized information than for regional-level information. It was also confirmed that subject clusters such as Health care, Real estate, and Crime showed high usability. Furthermore, there was a large gap in data utilization because of the existence of popular data that showed extremely high usage.

Supplementary information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11135-023-01630-x.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
开放式政府数据主题和可用性比较分析。
本研究通过关键词网络分析,找出韩国中央政府、地方政府、公共机构和教育厅管理的开放式公共数据内容的差异。通过提取分配给韩国公共数据门户网站开放的 1,200 个数据案例的关键词,进行了开拓者网络分析。针对每类政府得出了主题集群,并利用下载统计对其效用进行了比较。为公共机构建立了 11 个群组,提供有关国家问题的专业信息,如医疗保健和房地产;为中央政府建立了 15 个群组,提供国家行政信息,包括犯罪和安全警务。地方政府和教育办公室分别被分配了 16 个和 11 个主题集群,其数据侧重于地区生活,如地方工厂和制造业、居民登记和终身教育。与地区级信息相比,处理国家级专业信息的公共和中央政府的可用性更高。此外,医疗保健、房地产和犯罪等主题集群的可用性也很高。此外,由于存在使用率极高的流行数据,数据利用率存在很大差距:在线版本包含补充材料,可在 10.1007/s11135-023-01630-x 上获取。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Quality & Quantity
Quality & Quantity 管理科学-统计学与概率论
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
276
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Quality and Quantity constitutes a point of reference for European and non-European scholars to discuss instruments of methodology for more rigorous scientific results in the social sciences. In the era of biggish data, the journal also provides a publication venue for data scientists who are interested in proposing a new indicator to measure the latent aspects of social, cultural, and political events. Rather than leaning towards one specific methodological school, the journal publishes papers on a mixed method of quantitative and qualitative data. Furthermore, the journal’s key aim is to tackle some methodological pluralism across research cultures. In this context, the journal is open to papers addressing some general logic of empirical research and analysis of the validity and verification of social laws. Thus The journal accepts papers on science metrics and publication ethics and, their related issues affecting methodological practices among researchers. Quality and Quantity is an interdisciplinary journal which systematically correlates disciplines such as data and information sciences with the other humanities and social sciences. The journal extends discussion of interesting contributions in methodology to scholars worldwide, to promote the scientific development of social research.
期刊最新文献
Biodegradable electronics: a two-decade bibliometric analysis Developing the halal-sufficiency scale: a preliminary insight Measuring income inequality via percentile relativities. Research design: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches / sixth edition Using biograms to promote life course research. An example of theoretical case configuration relating to paths of social exclusion
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1