-검정.jpg){kind=logo}
- P-ISSN1225-598X
- E-ISSN2982-6292
The Evaluation of Web Contents by User ‘Likes’ Count: An Usefulness of hT-index for Topic Preference Measurement
The Evaluation of Web Contents by User ‘Likes’ Count: An Usefulness of hT-index for Topic Preference Measurement
박지홍 (연세대학교)
심지영 (연세대학교)
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to suggest an appropriate index for evaluating preferences of Web contents by examining the h-index and its variants. It focuses on how successfully each index represents relative user preference towards topical subjects. Based on data obtained from a popular IT blog (engadget.com), subject values of the h-index and its variants were calculated using 53 subject categories, article counts and the ‘Likes’ counts aggregated in each category. These values were compared through critical analysis of the indices and Spearman rank correlation analysis. A PFNet (Pathfinder Network) of subjects weighted by hT values was drawn and cluster analysis was conducted. Based on the four criteria suggested for the evaluation of Web contents, we concluded that the hT-index is a relatively appropriate tool for the Web contents preference evaluation. The hT-index was applied to visually represent the relative weight (topic preference by user ‘Likes’ count) for each subject category of the real online contents after suggesting the relative appropriateness of the hT-index. Applying scientometric indicators to Web information could provide new insights into, and potential methods for, Web contents evaluation. In addition, information on the focus of users’ attention would help online informants to plan more effective content strategies. The study tries to expand the application area of the h-type indices to non-academic online environments. The research procedure enables examination of the appropriateness of the index and highlights considerations for applying the indicators to Web contents.
- keywords
- Web Contents Evaluation, Preference Measurement, Tapered h-index, hT-index, h-type Indices
참고문헌
Alonso, S., Cabrerizo, F. J., Herrera-Viedma, E., and Herrera, F. 2009. h-Index: A review focused in its variants, computation and standardization for different scientific fields. Journal of Informetrics, 3(4), 273-289.
Alonso, S., Cabrerizo, F. J., Herrera-Viedma, E., and Herrera, F. 2010. hg-index: A new index to characterize the scientific output of researchers based on the h-and g-indices. Scientometrics, 82(2), 391-400.
Anderson, T. R., Hankin, R. K., and Killworth, P. D. 2008. Beyond the Durfee square: Enhancing the h-index to score total publication output. Scientometrics, 76(3), 577-588.
Batista, P. D., Campiteli, M. G., Konouchi, O., and Martinez, A. S. 2006. Is it possible to compare researchers with different scientific interests? Scientometrics, 68(1), 179-189.
Bornmann, L., Mutz, R., and Daniel, H. D. 2008. Are there better indices for evaluation purposes than the h index? A comparison of nine different variants of the h index using data from biomedicine. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(5), 830-837.
Egghe, L. 2006. An improvement of the H-index: the G-index. ISSI newsletter, 2(1), 8-9.
Egghe, L. 2010. The Hirsch index and related impact measures. Annual review of information science and technology, 44(1), 65-114.
Eppler, M. J., and Mengis, J. 2004. The concept of information overload: A review of literature from organization science, accounting, marketing, MIS, and related disciplines. The information society, 20(5), 325-344.
Guan, J. C., and Gao, X. 2009. Exploring the h-index at patent level. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60(1), 35-40.
Harzing, A. W., and Van Der Wal, R. 2009. A Google Scholar h-index for journals: An alternative metric to measure journal impact in economics and business. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60(1), 41-46.
Hirsch, J. E. 2005. An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output. Proceedings of the National academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 102(46), 16569-16572.
Hovden, R. 2013. Bibliometrics for Internet media: Applying the h-index to YouTube.Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 64(11), 2326-2331.
Hua, P. H., Wan, J. K., and Wu, J. H. 2010. A perfect Hirsch-type index? Experiences using the tapered h-index (hT). Chinese Journal of Scientific and Technical Periodicals, 21(1), 33-37.
Jin, B. 2006. H-index: an evaluation indicator proposed by scientist. Science Focus, 1(1), 8-9.
Jin, B., Liang, L., Rousseau, R., and Egghe, L. 2007. The R-and AR-indices: Complementing the h-index. Chinese science bulletin, 52(6), 855-863.
Kevin, L., Jason, K., Marco, G., Andreas, W., and Nicholas, C. 2008. Tastes, ties, and time:A new social network dataset using Facebook.com. Social Networks, 30(4), 330-342.
Kim, P. J., Lee, J. Y., and Park, J. H. 2009. Developing a new collection evaluation method:Mapping and the user-side h-index. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60(11), 2366-2377.
Lee, J. Y. 2006. A novel clustering method for examining and analyzing the intellectual structure of a scholarly field. Journal of Korean Society for Information Management, 23(4), 215-231.
McCreadie, R. M. C., Macdonald, C., and Ounis, I. 2010. Personalization and Fusion of Heterogeneous Information. Proceedings of the RIAO '10 Adaptivity, LE CENTRE DE HAUTES ETUDES INTERNATIONALES D’INFORMATIQUE DOCUMENTAIRE, France:Paris. 40-48.
Rousseau, R., and Leuven, K. U. 2008. Reflections on recent developments of the h-index and h-type indices. COLLNET Journal of Scientometrics and Information Management, 2(1), 1-8.
Shin, H., and Lee, J. 2009. Ranking user-created contents by search user’s inclination in online communities. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 18th international conference on World wide web, Spain: Madrid.
Shuai, X., Liu, X., and Bollen, J. 2012. Improving news ranking by community tweets.WWW '12 Companion Proceedings of the 21st international conference companion on World Wide Web, New York: ACM. 1227-1232.
Timian, A., Rupcic, S., Kachnowski, S., and Luisi, P. 2013. Do Patients Like Good Care? Measuring Hospital Quality via Facebook. American Journal of Medical Quality, 1062860612474839.
Van Raan, A. F. 2006. Comparison of the Hirsch-index with standard bibliometric indicators and with peer judgment for 147 chemistry research groups. scientometrics, 67(3), 491-502.
Wang, C., Zhang, M., Ru, L., and Ma, S. 2008. Automatic online news topic ranking using media focus and user attention based on aging theory. CIKM '08 Proceedings of the 17th ACM conference on Information and knowledge management, New York: ACM. 1033-1042.
White, H. D. 2003. Pathfinder networks and author cocitation analysis: A remapping of paradigmatic information scientists. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 54(5), 423-434.
Wiyartanti, L., Yo-Sub, H., and Laehyun, K. 2008. A ranking algorithm for user-generated video contents based on social activities. Paper presented at the Digital Information Management, ICDIM 2008. Third International Conference on.
- 다운로드 수
- 조회수
- 0KCI 피인용수
- 0WOS 피인용수