成功孕育成功吗?中国学术期刊影响因素与数量相关性研究

Kun-Fu Chen, Xian-tong Ren, Guo-liang Yang, Ailifeire Abudouguli
{"title":"成功孕育成功吗?中国学术期刊影响因素与数量相关性研究","authors":"Kun-Fu Chen, Xian-tong Ren, Guo-liang Yang, Ailifeire Abudouguli","doi":"10.2478/jdis-2021-0031","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Purpose This paper studies the relationship between the impact factor (IF) and the number of journal papers in Chinese publishing system. Design/methodology/approach The method proposed by Huang (2016) is used whereas to analysis the data of Chinese journals in this study. Findings Based on the analysis, we find the following. (1) The average impact factor (AIF) of journals in all disciplines maintained a growth trend from 2007 to 2017. Whether before or after removing outlier journals that may garner publication fees, the IF and its growth rate for most social sciences disciplines are larger than those of most natural sciences disciplines, and the number of journal papers on social sciences disciplines decreased while that of natural sciences disciplines increased from 2007 to 2017. (2) The removal of outlier journals has a greater impact on the relationship between the IF and the number of journal papers in some disciplines such as Geosciences because there may be journals that publish many papers to garner publication fees. (3) The success-breeds-success (SBS) principle is applicable in Chinese journals on natural sciences disciplines but not in Chinese journals on social sciences disciplines, and the relationship is the reverse of the SBS principle in Economics and Education & Educational Research. (4) Based on interviews and surveys, the difference in the relationship between the IF and the number of journal papers for Chinese natural sciences disciplines and Chinese social sciences disciplines may be due to the influence of the international publishing system. Chinese natural sciences journals are losing their academic power while Chinese social sciences journals that are less influenced by the international publishing system are in fierce competition. Research limitation More implications could be found if long-term tracking and comparing the international publishing system with Chinese publishing system are taken. Practical implications It is suggested that researchers from different countries study natural science and social sciences journals in their languages and observe the influence of the international publishing system. Originality/value This paper presents an overview of the relationship between IF and the number of journal papers in Chinese publishing system from 2007 to 2017, provides insights into the relationship in different disciplines in Chinese publishing system, and points out the similarities and differences between Chinese publishing system and international publishing system.","PeriodicalId":92237,"journal":{"name":"Journal of data and information science (Warsaw, Poland)","volume":"6 1","pages":"90 - 110"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-08-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Does Success Breed Success? A Study on the Correlation between Impact Factor and Quantity in Chinese Academic Journals\",\"authors\":\"Kun-Fu Chen, Xian-tong Ren, Guo-liang Yang, Ailifeire Abudouguli\",\"doi\":\"10.2478/jdis-2021-0031\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Purpose This paper studies the relationship between the impact factor (IF) and the number of journal papers in Chinese publishing system. Design/methodology/approach The method proposed by Huang (2016) is used whereas to analysis the data of Chinese journals in this study. Findings Based on the analysis, we find the following. (1) The average impact factor (AIF) of journals in all disciplines maintained a growth trend from 2007 to 2017. Whether before or after removing outlier journals that may garner publication fees, the IF and its growth rate for most social sciences disciplines are larger than those of most natural sciences disciplines, and the number of journal papers on social sciences disciplines decreased while that of natural sciences disciplines increased from 2007 to 2017. (2) The removal of outlier journals has a greater impact on the relationship between the IF and the number of journal papers in some disciplines such as Geosciences because there may be journals that publish many papers to garner publication fees. (3) The success-breeds-success (SBS) principle is applicable in Chinese journals on natural sciences disciplines but not in Chinese journals on social sciences disciplines, and the relationship is the reverse of the SBS principle in Economics and Education & Educational Research. (4) Based on interviews and surveys, the difference in the relationship between the IF and the number of journal papers for Chinese natural sciences disciplines and Chinese social sciences disciplines may be due to the influence of the international publishing system. Chinese natural sciences journals are losing their academic power while Chinese social sciences journals that are less influenced by the international publishing system are in fierce competition. Research limitation More implications could be found if long-term tracking and comparing the international publishing system with Chinese publishing system are taken. Practical implications It is suggested that researchers from different countries study natural science and social sciences journals in their languages and observe the influence of the international publishing system. Originality/value This paper presents an overview of the relationship between IF and the number of journal papers in Chinese publishing system from 2007 to 2017, provides insights into the relationship in different disciplines in Chinese publishing system, and points out the similarities and differences between Chinese publishing system and international publishing system.\",\"PeriodicalId\":92237,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of data and information science (Warsaw, Poland)\",\"volume\":\"6 1\",\"pages\":\"90 - 110\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-08-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of data and information science (Warsaw, Poland)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2478/jdis-2021-0031\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of data and information science (Warsaw, Poland)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2478/jdis-2021-0031","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要目的研究影响因子(IF)与中国出版系统期刊论文数量的关系。设计/方法论/方法本研究采用黄(2016)提出的方法对中国期刊的数据进行分析。调查结果基于分析,我们发现以下几点。(1) 2007-2017年,各学科期刊的平均影响因子(AIF)均保持增长趋势。从2007年到2017年,无论是在删除可能收取出版费的异常期刊之前还是之后,大多数社会科学学科的IF及其增长率都大于大多数自然科学学科,社会科学学科期刊论文数量减少,而自然科学学科期刊文件数量增加。(2) 剔除异常期刊对国际单项体育联合会与一些学科(如地球科学)期刊论文数量之间的关系有更大的影响,因为可能会有期刊发表许多论文来收取出版费。(3) 成功孕育成功(SBS)原则适用于中国自然科学学科期刊,但不适用于中国社会科学学科期刊。(4) 基于访谈和调查,IF与中国自然科学学科和中国社会科学学科期刊论文数量之间的关系差异可能是由于国际出版体系的影响。中国的自然科学期刊正在失去学术力量,而受国际出版体系影响较小的中国社会科学期刊则处于激烈的竞争中。研究局限如果长期跟踪和比较国际出版体系和中国出版体系,可能会发现更多的启示。实际意义建议来自不同国家的研究人员用各自的语言研究自然科学和社会科学期刊,并观察国际出版体系的影响。原创性/价值本文概述了2007-2017年中国出版系统期刊论文数量与IF之间的关系,深入了解了中国出版系统不同学科的关系,并指出了中国出版体系与国际出版体系的异同。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Does Success Breed Success? A Study on the Correlation between Impact Factor and Quantity in Chinese Academic Journals
Abstract Purpose This paper studies the relationship between the impact factor (IF) and the number of journal papers in Chinese publishing system. Design/methodology/approach The method proposed by Huang (2016) is used whereas to analysis the data of Chinese journals in this study. Findings Based on the analysis, we find the following. (1) The average impact factor (AIF) of journals in all disciplines maintained a growth trend from 2007 to 2017. Whether before or after removing outlier journals that may garner publication fees, the IF and its growth rate for most social sciences disciplines are larger than those of most natural sciences disciplines, and the number of journal papers on social sciences disciplines decreased while that of natural sciences disciplines increased from 2007 to 2017. (2) The removal of outlier journals has a greater impact on the relationship between the IF and the number of journal papers in some disciplines such as Geosciences because there may be journals that publish many papers to garner publication fees. (3) The success-breeds-success (SBS) principle is applicable in Chinese journals on natural sciences disciplines but not in Chinese journals on social sciences disciplines, and the relationship is the reverse of the SBS principle in Economics and Education & Educational Research. (4) Based on interviews and surveys, the difference in the relationship between the IF and the number of journal papers for Chinese natural sciences disciplines and Chinese social sciences disciplines may be due to the influence of the international publishing system. Chinese natural sciences journals are losing their academic power while Chinese social sciences journals that are less influenced by the international publishing system are in fierce competition. Research limitation More implications could be found if long-term tracking and comparing the international publishing system with Chinese publishing system are taken. Practical implications It is suggested that researchers from different countries study natural science and social sciences journals in their languages and observe the influence of the international publishing system. Originality/value This paper presents an overview of the relationship between IF and the number of journal papers in Chinese publishing system from 2007 to 2017, provides insights into the relationship in different disciplines in Chinese publishing system, and points out the similarities and differences between Chinese publishing system and international publishing system.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Editorial board publication strategy and acceptance rates in Turkish national journals Multimodal sentiment analysis for social media contents during public emergencies Perspectives from a publishing ethics and research integrity team for required improvements Build neural network models to identify and correct news headlines exaggerating obesity-related scientific findings An author credit allocation method with improved distinguishability and robustness
×
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