{"title":"开放式政府数据主题和可用性比较分析。","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":"{\"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}","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}
Comparative analysis of open government data topics and usability.
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.
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.