Journal of Information Management (정보관리연구)

Korea Institute of Science and Technology Information (한국과학기술정보연구원 과학기술정보센터)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

A Study on Bibliometric Indices for Utilizing Korean Science Citation Index

KSCI 활용을 위한 지표에 관한 연구

  • 최광남 (한국과학기술정보연구원) ;
  • 이재윤 (경기대학교 문헌정보학과) ;
  • 조현양 (경기대학교 문헌정보학과)
  • Published : 2006.06.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Methodology Science Citation Index, developed by TS, has been used as an indicator to evaluate academic and research performance in worldwide research environment, as the world goes. With this trend, Korean Science Citation Index(KSCI) databases for domestic journals in the field of science and engineering have been constructed by some institutes such as KISTI, KRF, KOSEF, and so on. Many institutes in Korea are accepting the Impact Factor(IF) and SCI databases, proposed by TS as toolkits for evaluating research capability of their members without any criticism. However, the IF, mostly used as an analyzing tool, has been criticized by many different sectors. The validity of IF has been examined and/or complimented by a case study. In this study various indices as substitutes for IF are scrutinized and examined to maximize the usability of KSCI database.

TS사(구 ISI)의 SCI는 최근 들어 우리나라에서 학술적 성과를 반영하는 지표로 선호되고 있다. 국내에서도 일부 기관이 국내 문헌의 인용색인 데이터베이스 구축을 본격적으로 진행하고 있다. 이들 국내 사업의 구축결과가 제대로 결실을 맺기 위해서는, TS사의 SCI 영향력지수가 가지는 한계점을 인식하고 이를 보완하거나 대체하는 다양한 지표를 검토해야 한다. 이 연구에서는 국내 인용색인 데이터베이스가 가진 가능성을 최대한 활용하기 위해서 적용가능한 다양한 지표를 실제 사례와 함께 검토하였다.

Keywords

References

  1. 이재윤. 2005. 중심성 척도 TBC를 이용한 저자동시인용 네트워크 분석. "한국정보관리학회 학술대회 논문집", 12: 357-364.
  2. Freeman, L. C.. 1979. “Centrality in Social Networks Conceptual Clarification.” Social Networks, 1: 215-239. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-8733(78)90021-7
  3. Garfield, E. 1979. Citation Indexing: Its Theory and Application in Science, Technology, and Humanities. New York: Wiley.
  4. Gl3nzel, W. 2003. Bibliometrics as a Research Field: A Course on Theory and Application of Bibliometric Indicators. .
  5. Glnzel, W., and H. F. Moed. 2002. “Journal Impact Measures in Bibliometric Research.” Scientometrics, 53(2): 171-193. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1014848323806
  6. Hecht, F., B. K. Hecht, and A. A. Sandberg. 1998. “The Journal “Impact Factor”: a misnamed, misleading, misused measure.” Cancer Genet Cytogenet, 104(2): 77-81. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0165-4608(97)00459-7
  7. Hirst, G. 1978. “Discipline impact factors: A Method for Determining Core Journal Lists.” Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 29(4): 171-172. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.4630290403
  8. Pinski, G., and F. Narin. 1976. “Citation Influence for Journal Aggregates of Scientific Publications.” Information Processing & Management, 12: 297-312. https://doi.org/10.1016/0306-4573(76)90048-0
  9. Rousseau, R. 2005. “Journal Evaluation: Technical and Practical Issues.” Library Trends, 50(3): 418-439.
  10. Rousseau, R. 2005. “Median and Percentile Impact Factors: A set of new indicators.” Scientometrics, 63(3): 431-441. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-005-0223-1
  11. Scott, J. P. 2000. Social Network Analysis: A Handbook. London: SAGE Publications.
  12. Sombatsompop, N., T. Markpin, and N. Premkamolnetr 2004. “A Modified Method for Calculating the Impact Factors of Journals in ISI Journal Citation Reports: polymer science category in 1997-2001.” Scientometrics, 60: 217-235. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:SCIE.0000027794.98854.f6