Pub Date : 2023-02-21DOI: 10.1080/00987913.2023.2174405
Mallikarjun Dora, Raj Kishor Kampa
Abstract The study examines the possible predatory journals in Library and Information Science research in India, including the affiliation status of the authors publishing in those predatory journals, frequency of returning authors, and country-wise distribution of authors. The paper used Beall’s list to find out the predatory journals in LIS published from India. Publication trends, affiliations of authors, and the status of the 22 LIS journals under the study were critically analyzed. The result shows that the predatory journals were diminishing slowly; in 2016, there were eight active journals, while in 2021, it was reduced to four journals. Similarly, the publication trends show that the highest number of articles (398) was published in the year 2015, and it was only 66 articles in 2020. It is revealed that academics hailing from state universities (42.88%) are the highest contributors to the predatory journals, followed by professionals from government colleges (16.76%). The results indicate that predatory publishing was rampant in the early years but declined gradually. Researchers from India have published the most articles, totaling 1760 (93%), followed by those from Nigeria (64, 3.3%), Bangladesh (10), and Saudi Arabia (eight articles). It is also revealed that 21.66% (n = 438) are returning authors who have published more than one article in the sample journals. The paper discusses the role of the government and especially the University Grants Commission (UGC) in curbing the menace of predatory publishing. The authors also discuss the possible role of library professionals in stopping the plague of predatory publishing.
{"title":"Predatory Publishing in Indian LIS Research: A Case Study","authors":"Mallikarjun Dora, Raj Kishor Kampa","doi":"10.1080/00987913.2023.2174405","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00987913.2023.2174405","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The study examines the possible predatory journals in Library and Information Science research in India, including the affiliation status of the authors publishing in those predatory journals, frequency of returning authors, and country-wise distribution of authors. The paper used Beall’s list to find out the predatory journals in LIS published from India. Publication trends, affiliations of authors, and the status of the 22 LIS journals under the study were critically analyzed. The result shows that the predatory journals were diminishing slowly; in 2016, there were eight active journals, while in 2021, it was reduced to four journals. Similarly, the publication trends show that the highest number of articles (398) was published in the year 2015, and it was only 66 articles in 2020. It is revealed that academics hailing from state universities (42.88%) are the highest contributors to the predatory journals, followed by professionals from government colleges (16.76%). The results indicate that predatory publishing was rampant in the early years but declined gradually. Researchers from India have published the most articles, totaling 1760 (93%), followed by those from Nigeria (64, 3.3%), Bangladesh (10), and Saudi Arabia (eight articles). It is also revealed that 21.66% (n = 438) are returning authors who have published more than one article in the sample journals. The paper discusses the role of the government and especially the University Grants Commission (UGC) in curbing the menace of predatory publishing. The authors also discuss the possible role of library professionals in stopping the plague of predatory publishing.","PeriodicalId":54165,"journal":{"name":"Serials Review","volume":"49 1","pages":"23 - 29"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2023-02-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45994307","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-02-21DOI: 10.1080/00987913.2023.2174402
Stephen Woods, J. Russell
Abstract Our study compares journal citations from dissertations granted at three universities (Penn State, Cornell, and Auburn) using a novel bibliometric approach: text mining. We first tested the validity of text mining as a method for collecting journal title mentions by comparing text mining results with human-tallied results on a set of dissertations. We then text mined a group of dissertations using a preexisting list of journal titles in order to count journal title mentions in combination with the number of dissertations citing each title. The combination of journal title mentions and number of citing dissertations created a ranking for comparison across institutions. Our study presents text mining as a reliable and less time-intensive option for certain types of bibliometric analyses and also shows the utility of a ranked score approach (CD rank) for making cross-institutional citation comparisons.
{"title":"Comparison of Journal Usage in Rural Sociology Dissertations Using Text Analysis and CD Rank","authors":"Stephen Woods, J. Russell","doi":"10.1080/00987913.2023.2174402","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00987913.2023.2174402","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Our study compares journal citations from dissertations granted at three universities (Penn State, Cornell, and Auburn) using a novel bibliometric approach: text mining. We first tested the validity of text mining as a method for collecting journal title mentions by comparing text mining results with human-tallied results on a set of dissertations. We then text mined a group of dissertations using a preexisting list of journal titles in order to count journal title mentions in combination with the number of dissertations citing each title. The combination of journal title mentions and number of citing dissertations created a ranking for comparison across institutions. Our study presents text mining as a reliable and less time-intensive option for certain types of bibliometric analyses and also shows the utility of a ranked score approach (CD rank) for making cross-institutional citation comparisons.","PeriodicalId":54165,"journal":{"name":"Serials Review","volume":"49 1","pages":"1 - 9"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2023-02-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48347411","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-02-21DOI: 10.1080/00987913.2023.2179783
Fayaz Ahmad Loan, Rabiya Mushtaq
Abstract The purpose of the study is to test the application of the Pareto Principle on the research productivity of journals. Oncology was selected as the subject of study and data were extracted from the “Web of Science.” A series of keywords specifying Oncology and sub-fields have been derived from the Medical Subject Headings (MeSH). A string of 15 search terms (Lead, Related, and Narrow) was connected using the Boolean operator “OR” to retrieve results limiting the scope to journal articles of India and Iran consecutively. The results weren’t strictly as per Pareto’s Principle of 80/20 rule, but almost close (i.e., 75/25 in the case of India and 65/35 in the case of Iran). The results derived provide strong evidence that the Pareto principle fits the research productivity of journals to a great extend. The study could help libraries to improve the efficiency of collection development and financial management policies. The results will be highly applicable for the acquisition of scholarly journals for libraries, especially for library consortia. This law will be highly useful for cost-benefit analysis (CBA) of serial publications and will help in “subscribing the maximum collection at the least cost.”
{"title":"Pareto 80/20 Rule: A New Principle for Serial Subscription","authors":"Fayaz Ahmad Loan, Rabiya Mushtaq","doi":"10.1080/00987913.2023.2179783","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00987913.2023.2179783","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The purpose of the study is to test the application of the Pareto Principle on the research productivity of journals. Oncology was selected as the subject of study and data were extracted from the “Web of Science.” A series of keywords specifying Oncology and sub-fields have been derived from the Medical Subject Headings (MeSH). A string of 15 search terms (Lead, Related, and Narrow) was connected using the Boolean operator “OR” to retrieve results limiting the scope to journal articles of India and Iran consecutively. The results weren’t strictly as per Pareto’s Principle of 80/20 rule, but almost close (i.e., 75/25 in the case of India and 65/35 in the case of Iran). The results derived provide strong evidence that the Pareto principle fits the research productivity of journals to a great extend. The study could help libraries to improve the efficiency of collection development and financial management policies. The results will be highly applicable for the acquisition of scholarly journals for libraries, especially for library consortia. This law will be highly useful for cost-benefit analysis (CBA) of serial publications and will help in “subscribing the maximum collection at the least cost.”","PeriodicalId":54165,"journal":{"name":"Serials Review","volume":"49 1","pages":"10 - 14"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2023-02-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42681218","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-02-08DOI: 10.1080/00987913.2023.2174406
Vadim N. Gureyev, N. Mazov
Abstract The paper aims to detect publication contributions of editorial board members (EBMs) to academic journal ranking as exemplified by Russian LIS serials divided into three groups according to their authority. To reveal the EBMs’ contribution in each group, papers by EBMs in their parent journals as well as other sources were studied with comparative analyses of EBMs’ papers in parent journals and papers by other authors in the same journals. The Russian Science Citation Index (RSCI) was used for collecting indicators that reflect journal ranks and scholarly output of EBMs. We found no relationship between journal ranking and a share of EBMs’ papers in a parent journal. Citation analyses of EBMs’ papers as well as citations of parent journals made by EBMs from other sources reveals a significant effect of EBMs on the rank of top-tiered and low-tiered journals pointing at active participation of EBMs in the development of parent journals. Zero or even negative impact of EBMs’ papers on the journal rank is registered in the middle-tiered group implying formalistic engagement of researchers to join the editorial boards, lack of interest in the journal work, or possible violation of the publication ethics by publishing poorly cited or uncited papers in parent journals due to less strict peer-review processes. The paper adds to a better understanding of the nature of journal ranking, particularly, impact factors, as well as performance of EBMs in the field of LIS publications. The ethics and possible conflict of interests related to publishing in parent journals are discussed. The results of the study can be useful for revising journal policy or editorial board composition.
{"title":"How Do Editorial Board Members Contribute to Journal Ranking in Library and Information Science?","authors":"Vadim N. Gureyev, N. Mazov","doi":"10.1080/00987913.2023.2174406","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00987913.2023.2174406","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The paper aims to detect publication contributions of editorial board members (EBMs) to academic journal ranking as exemplified by Russian LIS serials divided into three groups according to their authority. To reveal the EBMs’ contribution in each group, papers by EBMs in their parent journals as well as other sources were studied with comparative analyses of EBMs’ papers in parent journals and papers by other authors in the same journals. The Russian Science Citation Index (RSCI) was used for collecting indicators that reflect journal ranks and scholarly output of EBMs. We found no relationship between journal ranking and a share of EBMs’ papers in a parent journal. Citation analyses of EBMs’ papers as well as citations of parent journals made by EBMs from other sources reveals a significant effect of EBMs on the rank of top-tiered and low-tiered journals pointing at active participation of EBMs in the development of parent journals. Zero or even negative impact of EBMs’ papers on the journal rank is registered in the middle-tiered group implying formalistic engagement of researchers to join the editorial boards, lack of interest in the journal work, or possible violation of the publication ethics by publishing poorly cited or uncited papers in parent journals due to less strict peer-review processes. The paper adds to a better understanding of the nature of journal ranking, particularly, impact factors, as well as performance of EBMs in the field of LIS publications. The ethics and possible conflict of interests related to publishing in parent journals are discussed. The results of the study can be useful for revising journal policy or editorial board composition.","PeriodicalId":54165,"journal":{"name":"Serials Review","volume":"49 1","pages":"30 - 45"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2023-02-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46397165","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-02-06DOI: 10.1080/00987913.2023.2174404
Susan Vandagriff
Abstract Research productivity is a basic quantitative measure for universities, but obtaining a comprehensive view of a university’s output is difficult. Databases like Web of Science and Scopus can provide a list of publications associated with an institution, but they are limited in the formats and disciplines they cover. An institution can rely on its researchers to provide information on their own publications, which may avoid format and discipline limitations, but the data is often too messy or incomplete for research assessments. This study compares research productivity data obtained through Web of Science and Scopus to self-provided data from researchers at the University of Colorado Colorado Springs (UCCS). The study seeks to determine if certain disciplines are advantaged or disadvantaged by their representation in each dataset and to determine how complete researcher’s self-provided data is. It was determined that basing UCCS’s research assessment on researcher provided data led to more comprehensive results.
摘要科研生产力是衡量大学产出的一项基本定量指标，但要全面了解一所大学的科研产出是困难的。像Web of Science和Scopus这样的数据库可以提供与一个机构相关的出版物列表，但是它们所涵盖的格式和学科是有限的。一个机构可以依靠它的研究人员提供关于他们自己的出版物的信息，这可能会避免格式和学科的限制，但是这些数据对于研究评估来说往往太混乱或不完整。本研究将通过Web of Science和Scopus获得的研究生产力数据与科罗拉多大学科罗拉多斯普林斯分校(UCCS)研究人员提供的数据进行了比较。该研究旨在确定某些学科在每个数据集中的表现是否有利或不利，并确定研究人员自己提供的数据的完整性。我们认为基于研究者提供的数据进行UCCS的研究评估可以得到更全面的结果。
{"title":"Do We Know What We Publish? Comparing Self-Reported Publication Data to Scopus and Web of Science","authors":"Susan Vandagriff","doi":"10.1080/00987913.2023.2174404","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00987913.2023.2174404","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Research productivity is a basic quantitative measure for universities, but obtaining a comprehensive view of a university’s output is difficult. Databases like Web of Science and Scopus can provide a list of publications associated with an institution, but they are limited in the formats and disciplines they cover. An institution can rely on its researchers to provide information on their own publications, which may avoid format and discipline limitations, but the data is often too messy or incomplete for research assessments. This study compares research productivity data obtained through Web of Science and Scopus to self-provided data from researchers at the University of Colorado Colorado Springs (UCCS). The study seeks to determine if certain disciplines are advantaged or disadvantaged by their representation in each dataset and to determine how complete researcher’s self-provided data is. It was determined that basing UCCS’s research assessment on researcher provided data led to more comprehensive results.","PeriodicalId":54165,"journal":{"name":"Serials Review","volume":"49 1","pages":"15 - 22"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2023-02-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47298965","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-10-17DOI: 10.1080/00987913.2022.2127457
Kerry Walton, Yael D. Hod, Lynne Jones, Rebecca Tatterson, Erin Calhoun, Heidi Zuniga, Chris Vidas, Whitney Bates-Gómez
Abstract This column reports on sessions from the virtual Electronic Resources and Libraries 2022 conference. Four reports are about data in academic libraries including: text and data mining licensing and discovery, acquisition processes for datasets, EBSCO’s data visualization product, Panorama, and their development partners, and case studies using collections data science to demonstrate library value. Two reports cover working cross-departmental collaborations, one to better manage evidence-based acquisition and demand-driven acquisition ebook programs, and the other about overall library reorganization. The other reports summarize conference presentations on problematic language in subject headings and discovery tools, tracking perpetual access rights in license agreements, implementation of cyclical renewal assessments, and a pilot to test whole ebook interlibrary loan.
{"title":"Serials Spoken Here","authors":"Kerry Walton, Yael D. Hod, Lynne Jones, Rebecca Tatterson, Erin Calhoun, Heidi Zuniga, Chris Vidas, Whitney Bates-Gómez","doi":"10.1080/00987913.2022.2127457","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00987913.2022.2127457","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This column reports on sessions from the virtual Electronic Resources and Libraries 2022 conference. Four reports are about data in academic libraries including: text and data mining licensing and discovery, acquisition processes for datasets, EBSCO’s data visualization product, Panorama, and their development partners, and case studies using collections data science to demonstrate library value. Two reports cover working cross-departmental collaborations, one to better manage evidence-based acquisition and demand-driven acquisition ebook programs, and the other about overall library reorganization. The other reports summarize conference presentations on problematic language in subject headings and discovery tools, tracking perpetual access rights in license agreements, implementation of cyclical renewal assessments, and a pilot to test whole ebook interlibrary loan.","PeriodicalId":54165,"journal":{"name":"Serials Review","volume":"49 1","pages":"58 - 68"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2022-10-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42545483","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-10-02DOI: 10.1080/00987913.2022.2166327
Maria D. D. Collins
{"title":"Editorial: 2022 NC Serials Conference Special Issue","authors":"Maria D. D. Collins","doi":"10.1080/00987913.2022.2166327","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00987913.2022.2166327","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":54165,"journal":{"name":"Serials Review","volume":"48 1","pages":"189 - 190"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2022-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43748930","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-10-02DOI: 10.1080/00987913.2022.2128629
F. Leibowitz, D. Soufi, Amber Billey, Sarah Theimer
Abstract The Open Rules for Cataloging (ORC) project is proposed to be a freely available alternative to Resource Description and Access (RDA) for those who desire a simpler, less abstract cataloging code. The premise of the ORC project is that it is possible to identify universal cataloging concepts in preexisting cataloging rule sets which can be used as the base of a modern cataloging code. The ORC Project has three goals in mind: to reduce needless expense, to promote inclusion, and to facilitate data interoperability. ORC complies with ethical principles and best practices. It will be compatible with a variety of metadata environments. This compatibility will enable data exchange and reuse as well as adaptation. The Open Rules for Cataloging have the potential to revolutionize cataloging practice by simplifying it and making it accessible to all.
{"title":"Open Rules for Cataloging","authors":"F. Leibowitz, D. Soufi, Amber Billey, Sarah Theimer","doi":"10.1080/00987913.2022.2128629","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00987913.2022.2128629","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The Open Rules for Cataloging (ORC) project is proposed to be a freely available alternative to Resource Description and Access (RDA) for those who desire a simpler, less abstract cataloging code. The premise of the ORC project is that it is possible to identify universal cataloging concepts in preexisting cataloging rule sets which can be used as the base of a modern cataloging code. The ORC Project has three goals in mind: to reduce needless expense, to promote inclusion, and to facilitate data interoperability. ORC complies with ethical principles and best practices. It will be compatible with a variety of metadata environments. This compatibility will enable data exchange and reuse as well as adaptation. The Open Rules for Cataloging have the potential to revolutionize cataloging practice by simplifying it and making it accessible to all.","PeriodicalId":54165,"journal":{"name":"Serials Review","volume":"48 1","pages":"229 - 233"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2022-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41696977","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-10-02DOI: 10.1080/00987913.2022.2132103
A. Craft
Abstract This conference report covers a lightning talk from the 2022 North Carolina Serials Conference on the topic of OpenUNC, a collaborative website that shares information about and links to open access efforts and content from institutions in the University of North Carolina System. Site background, content, and opportunities for use are covered.
{"title":"OpenUNC: Collaborating to Increase the Visibility of Open Scholarship from the UNC System","authors":"A. Craft","doi":"10.1080/00987913.2022.2132103","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00987913.2022.2132103","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This conference report covers a lightning talk from the 2022 North Carolina Serials Conference on the topic of OpenUNC, a collaborative website that shares information about and links to open access efforts and content from institutions in the University of North Carolina System. Site background, content, and opportunities for use are covered.","PeriodicalId":54165,"journal":{"name":"Serials Review","volume":"48 1","pages":"194 - 195"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2022-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43842126","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-10-02DOI: 10.1080/00987913.2022.2132779
Xiaoyan Song
Abstract As the keynote speaker at the 2022 NC Serials Conference, Kendrick shared select data from her numerous studies and data collection projects on morale in library workplaces, and offered opportunities to have intentional discussions about associated frameworks, organizational impacts, and established and emerging countermeasures for library workers and leaders.
{"title":"Exploring Morale in Library Workplaces: From Culture to Countermeasures","authors":"Xiaoyan Song","doi":"10.1080/00987913.2022.2132779","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00987913.2022.2132779","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract As the keynote speaker at the 2022 NC Serials Conference, Kendrick shared select data from her numerous studies and data collection projects on morale in library workplaces, and offered opportunities to have intentional discussions about associated frameworks, organizational impacts, and established and emerging countermeasures for library workers and leaders.","PeriodicalId":54165,"journal":{"name":"Serials Review","volume":"48 1","pages":"248 - 250"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2022-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46681494","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：