바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

ACOMS+ 및 학술지 리포지터리 설명회

  • 한국과학기술정보연구원(KISTI) 서울분원 대회의실(별관 3층)
  • 2024년 07월 03일(수) 13:30
사전등록 바로가기
 

logo

  • P-ISSN2466-2542
  • KCI

논문 상세

이전 다음
논문 투고

Vol.46 No.1

Citation Share

Altmetrics를 통한 연구의 영향력 평가에 관한 연구

A Study about Scholarly Impact Measurement through Altmetrics

한국도서관·정보학회지 / Journal of Korean Library and Information Science Society, (P)2466-2542;
2015, v.46 no.1, pp.65-81
https://doi.org/10.16981/kliss.46.1.201503.65
조재인 (인천대학교)
조재인. (2015). Altmetrics를 통한 연구의 영향력 평가에 관한 연구. 한국도서관·정보학회지, 46(1), 65-81, https://doi.org/10.16981/kliss.46.1.201503.65

초록

Altmetrics는 각종 연구성과물의 영향을 소셜미디어, 언론보도, 참고문헌관리도구 등으로부터 수집하여 다차원적으로 분석함으로써 기존 방식에서는 찾아낼 수 없었던 사회적 영향도를 측정하는 기법이다. 최근 학술커뮤니케이션 방식이다양해지고, 오픈 엑세스 문화에 의해 다양한 분야의 논문을 저장하고 배포할 수 있는 OA 레포지토리가 활성화되면서아티클 단위의 영향력을 다면적·복합적으로 측정할 수 있는 새로운 평가 체계에 대한 고민이 시작되고 있다. 본 연구는Altmetrcis의 등장 배경, 응용 현황과 장단점에 대해 고찰하며, 실제 오픈소스 기반의 Altmetrcis 측정 도구인ImpactStory를 활용하여 국제학술지에 출판된 한중일 디지털도서관 관련 논문의 영향력을 살펴보고 피인용도와 어떠한 상관성을 나타내는지 분석하였다. Altmetrcis 측정 결과, 분석된 연구는 참고문헌관리도구에 ‘saved’된 경우가 소셜미디어에 의해 ‘discussed’되거나, 후속연구에 의해 ‘cited’된 빈도보다 더 높게 나타났으며, ‘saved’와 ‘cited’와 간에는양의 상관성(r = 0.718)이 존재하는 것으로 나타났다. 한편, 분석 대상 논문을 한중일로 구분하여 영향력 차이를비교 분석한 결과, 한국은 일본과 중국에 비해 ‘saved’ 빈도가 높은 것으로 나타났다.

keywords
Altmetrics, Bibliometrics, Impact factor, ImpactStory, Mendeley, Altmetrics, 연구 영향력, 인용계수, ImpactStory, Mendeley

Abstract

Altmetircs is the new method to measure social impact of research result which couldn't be found by traditional way, through measuring how much research result is reacting to social media. As academic communication has been diverse and OA repository which can preserve diverse type of article has been activated, New paradigm that measure impact of articles through multifaceted and complex way has been started. This study considers background, status of application, pros and cons about altmetircs. And by using Impactstory which is open source based tool, analyses the research output about digital library of Korea, china and japan which is published in international journal. Besides, analyses correlation between Altmetricss and citation rates. As results, “saved” shows higher than “cited” in library research analysis, it means that even though articles are not cited by followed study, there are a lot of articles that has saved in reference management tool. And positive correlation(r = 0.718) exists between “saved” and “cited”, it can be inferred that Altmetricss complement the bibliometrics based evaluation system. Meanwhile, Korean researches are saved more in reference management tool than other countries.

keywords
Altmetrics, Bibliometrics, Impact factor, ImpactStory, Mendeley, Altmetrics, 연구 영향력, 인용계수, ImpactStory, Mendeley

참고문헌

1.

國立國會圖書館. 2012. 米ピッツバーグ大学図書館、ソーシャルメディア等を利用した研究成果指標を提供するPlum Analytics社のサービスを初導入. <http://current.ndl.go.jp/node/21150> [引用 2014. 10. 10].

2.

林 和弘, 2013. “研究論文の影響度を測定する新しい動き : 論文単位で即時かつ多面的な測定を可能とするAltmetrics.” 科学技術動向. 3-4: 20-29.

3.

Altmetirc.com Home page. <http://www.altmetric.com/whatwedo.php> [cited 2014. 11. 10].

4.

Bornmann, Lutz. 2014. Alternative metrics in scientometrics: A meta-analysis of research into three Altmetricss. <http://arxiv.org/abs/1407.8010> [cited 2014. 12. 10].

5.

Ceek.jp Hompage. <http://www.ceek.jp/> [cited 2015. 1. 10].

6.

Eysenbach, Gunther. 2011. “Can Tweets Predict Citations? Metrics of Social Impact Based on Twitter and Correlation with Traditional Metrics of Scientific Impact.”Journal of Medical Internet Research, 13(4): e123.

7.

Exlibris Initiative blog. <http://initiatives.exlibrisgroup.com/2012/12/Altmetrics-on-primo.html> [cited 2014. 11. 10].

8.

Galligan, Finbar and Sharon Dyas-Correia. 2013. “Altmetrics: Rethinking the Way We Measure”. Serials Review, 39(1): 56-61.

9.

Hammarfelt, Björn. 2014. “Using Altmetrics for Assessing Research Impact in the Humanities.” Scientometrics, 101(2): 1419-1430.

10.

ImpactStory blog. <http://blog.impactstory.org/4-things-librarians-Altmetrics/> [cited 2014. 12. 10].

11.

Konkiel Stacy and Dave Scherer. 2013. “New Opportunities for Repositories in the Age of Altmetrics”. Bulletin of the ASISandT, 39(4): 22-26.

12.

Lapinski, Scott, Heather Piwowar and Jason Priem. 2013. “Riding the Crest of the Altmetrics Wave How Librarians can Help Prepare Faculty for the Next Generation of Research Impact Metrics”. College & Research Libraries New, 74(6): 292-300.

13.

Liu, Jean. 2014. Bringing Altmetrics to Institutions, 2014 ALA Annual Conference,<http://libraryconnect.elsevier.com/sites/default/files/Jean_Liu_June_2014.pdf> [cited 2014. 12. 12].

14.

Mounce Ross, 2013. “Open Access and Altmetrics: Distinct but Complementary”. Bulletin of the ASISandT, 39(4): 14-17.

15.

Neylon, Cameron and Shirley Wu. 2009. “Article-Level Metrics and the Evolution of Scie ntific Impact”. PLOS Biology, 7(11): e1000242.

16.

NISO. 2014. NISO Altmetrics Standards Project White Paper Draft. <http://www.niso.org/apps/group_public/download.php/13295/niso_Altmetrics_white_paper_draft_v4.pdf> [cited 2015. 1. 12].

17.

Mohammadi, Ehsan and Mike Thelwall. 2013. “Mendeley Readership Altmetrics for the Social Sciences and Humanities: Research Evaluation and Knowledge Flows”. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 65(8):1627-1638.

18.

Roemer, Robin chin and Rachel Borchardt. 2013. “From bibliometrics to Altmetricss A Changing Scholarly Landscape”. College & ; Research Libraries News, 73(10):596-600.

19.

Warne, Verity. 2014. Wiley Introduces Altmetrics to its Open Access Journals, <http://exchanges.wiley.com/blog/2014/03/19/wiley-introduces-Altmetrics-to-its-open-access-journals/> [cited 2014. 12. 10].

20.

Wiley. 2013. Wiley Trial Alternative Metrics on Subscription and Open Access Article. <http://www.wiley.com/WileyCDA/PressRelease/pressReleaseId-108763.html> [cited 2014. 12. 12].

21.

Zahedi, Zohreh, Rodrigo Costas, and Paul Wouters. 2014. “How well developed are altmetrics? A cross-disciplinary analysis of the presence of 'alternative metrics”. Scientometrics, 101(2): 1491-1513.

한국도서관·정보학회지

논문 투고 OA 정책