Dominant Characteristics of Subject Categories in a Multiple-Category Hierarchical Scheme: A Case Study of Scopus

IF 4.6 Q1 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE Publications Pub Date : 2023-12-08 DOI:10.3390/publications11040051
Eungi Kim, Da-Yeong Jeong
{"title":"Dominant Characteristics of Subject Categories in a Multiple-Category Hierarchical Scheme: A Case Study of Scopus","authors":"Eungi Kim, Da-Yeong Jeong","doi":"10.3390/publications11040051","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Scopus journal classification method, known as All Science Journal Classification (ASJC), follows a hierarchical organization of subject categories: minor, major, and supergroups. At the minor level, journals are assigned to one or more subject categories. We refer to this classification scheme as a multiple-category hierarchical scheme. The objective of this study is to investigate the dominant characteristics of subject categories within the Scopus database and quantify their dominance using various subject indices. To conduct the study, we formulated a set of subject category indices, including the Number of Journals (J), Total Instances of Subject Categories (SC), Number of Unique Subject Categories (USC), and Dominance Index (DOMI). The results showed that high DOMI values in subject categories indicate specialization and limited associations with other fields. There were minimal correlations between DOMI and other subject category indices like J, SC, and USC, demonstrating their uniqueness and independence. The study also revealed that subject categories within the Health Sciences exhibited higher DOMI values and greater specialization compared to those in the Physical Sciences, indicating a pronounced dominance in Health Sciences minor categories. Finally, minor subject categories exhibited more variation in subject category indices compared to their upper-level subject categories, highlighting the intricate variations within the hierarchical system of the Scopus classification. These findings have implications for researchers, emphasizing the need to consider a subject category’s dominance and associations when selecting journals for their research.","PeriodicalId":37551,"journal":{"name":"Publications","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Publications","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/publications11040051","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The Scopus journal classification method, known as All Science Journal Classification (ASJC), follows a hierarchical organization of subject categories: minor, major, and supergroups. At the minor level, journals are assigned to one or more subject categories. We refer to this classification scheme as a multiple-category hierarchical scheme. The objective of this study is to investigate the dominant characteristics of subject categories within the Scopus database and quantify their dominance using various subject indices. To conduct the study, we formulated a set of subject category indices, including the Number of Journals (J), Total Instances of Subject Categories (SC), Number of Unique Subject Categories (USC), and Dominance Index (DOMI). The results showed that high DOMI values in subject categories indicate specialization and limited associations with other fields. There were minimal correlations between DOMI and other subject category indices like J, SC, and USC, demonstrating their uniqueness and independence. The study also revealed that subject categories within the Health Sciences exhibited higher DOMI values and greater specialization compared to those in the Physical Sciences, indicating a pronounced dominance in Health Sciences minor categories. Finally, minor subject categories exhibited more variation in subject category indices compared to their upper-level subject categories, highlighting the intricate variations within the hierarchical system of the Scopus classification. These findings have implications for researchers, emphasizing the need to consider a subject category’s dominance and associations when selecting journals for their research.
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
多类别分层方案中主题类别的主要特征:Scopus 案例研究
Scopus期刊分类方法,被称为全科学期刊分类(ASJC),遵循主题类别的层次组织:次要、主要和超组。在次要级别,期刊被分配到一个或多个主题类别。我们把这种分类方案称为多类别分层方案。本研究的目的是调查Scopus数据库中主题类别的主导特征,并使用各种主题指数量化它们的主导地位。为了进行研究,我们制定了一套学科类别指标,包括期刊数量(J)、学科类别总数(SC)、唯一学科类别数量(USC)和优势指数(DOMI)。结果表明,学科类别的高DOMI值表明专业化和与其他领域的关联有限。DOMI与J、SC、USC等其他主题类指标的相关性很小,显示了它们的独特性和独立性。研究还显示,与物理科学的学科类别相比,健康科学的学科类别表现出更高的DOMI值和更大的专业化,表明健康科学的次要类别明显占主导地位。最后,小主题分类的主题分类指数比大主题分类的主题分类指数变化更大,凸显了Scopus分类体系内部复杂的变化。这些发现对研究人员有启示意义,强调在为他们的研究选择期刊时需要考虑一个学科类别的主导地位和关联。
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
Publications
Publications Social Sciences-Library and Information Sciences
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
1.90%
发文量
40
审稿时长
11 weeks
期刊介绍: The scope of Publications includes: Theory and practice of scholarly communication Digitisation and innovations in scholarly publishing technologies Metadata, infrastructure, and linking the scholarly record Publishing policies and editorial/peer-review workflows Financial models for scholarly publishing Copyright, licensing and legal issues in publishing Research integrity and publication ethics Issues and best practices in the publication of non-traditional research outputs (e.g., data, software/code, protocols, data management plans, grant proposals, etc.) Issues in the transition to open access and open science Inclusion and participation of traditionally excluded actors Language issues in publication processes and products Traditional and alternative models of peer review Traditional and alternative means of assessment and evaluation of research and its impact, including bibliometrics and scientometrics The place of research libraries, scholarly societies, funders and others in scholarly communication.
期刊最新文献
Bibliometric Analysis of Papers Dealing with Dental Videos on YouTube An Exploratory Comparative Analysis of Librarians’ Views on AI Support for Learning Experiences, Lifelong Learning, and Digital Literacy in Malaysia and Indonesia Practices and Attitudes of the Research and Teaching Staff at the University of Split about the Online Encyclopedia Wikipedia GFsa (GF “Scientific Age”) Index Application for Assessment of 1020 Highly Cited Researchers in Dentistry: A Pilot Study Comparing GFsa Index and H-Index Book Reviews in Medical History Journals
×
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