Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.3743/KOSIM.2020.37.2.285

An Analysis on Scholarly Communication Characteristics of Domestic Researchers in High Energy Physics Focused on SCOAP3 Open Access Journals  

Lee, Seonhee (한국과학기술정보연구원)
Kim, Ji-Young (한국과학기술정보연구원)
Publication Information
Journal of the Korean Society for information Management / v.37, no.2, 2020 , pp. 285-310 More about this Journal
Abstract
This paper analyzed SCOAP3 journals, which have been evaluated as successful open access models, to understand the characteristics of scholarly communication among domestic researchers in the field of high energy physics (HEP). As research methods, a quantitative analysis using statistics and a network analysis of authors' affiliated institutions and academic journals were conducted to understand collaboration and research activities of domestic researchers in the HEP field. The results of the study revealed that, among the 10 SCOAP3 journals in which Korean researchers participated, the proportion of articles in which Korean authors participated was 8.0% of the total. The proportion of papers with more than 1,000 co-authors per paper was 28.7% of the total. The results of this analysis proved that Korean researchers were actively collaborating in the HEP global network. From the results of the network analysis to understand the cooperative relationship centered on the affiliated organization, the cooperative network could be divided into three clusters: a cluster centered on S universities, a cluster centered on K research institutes that provided researchers a cooperative infrastructure with CERN, and a cluster centered on I research institute. Through the network analysis for research institutes and journals, it was found that JHEP, PRD, and PLB among academic journals were highly participating journals, and universities and researchers were also participating in the writing of open access papers. The results of this study can be used as a basic resource for understanding researchers and building a research information environment in libraries.
Keywords
scholarly communication; high energy physics; SCOAP3; network analysis; open access journals;
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 8  (Citation Analysis)
연도 인용수 순위
1 Lee, Jae Yun, & Choi, Sanghee (2013). Collaboration networks and document networks in informetrics research from 2001 to 2011: Finding influential nations, institutions, documents. Journal of the Korean Society for Information Management, 30(1), 179-191. https://doi.org/10.3743/KOSIM.2013.30.1.179   DOI
2 Zhu, Yu-Peng, & Park, Han-Woo (2019). Evaluating blockchain research trend using bibliometricsbased network analysis. Journal of Digital Convergence, 17(6), 219-227. https://doi.org/10.14400/JDC.2019.17.6.219   DOI
3 Borgman, C. L. (2000). Digital libraries and the continuum of scholarly communication. Journal of Documentation, 56(4), 412-430. https://doi.org/10.1108/EUM0000000007121   DOI
4 Borgman, C. L., & Furner, J. (2002). Scholarly communication and bibliometrics. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 36(1), 2-72. https://doi.org/10.1002/aris.1440360102   DOI
5 Dastidar, P. G. (2004). Ocean science & technology research across the countries: A global scenario. Scientometrics, 59(1), 15-27. https://doi.org/10.1023/b:scie.0000013296.33677.ef   DOI
6 Everett, M. G., & Borgatti, S. P. (2013). The dual-projection approach for two-mode networks. Social Networks, 35(2), 204-210. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socnet.2012.05.004   DOI
7 Freeman, L. C. (1978). Centrality in social networks conceptual clarification. Social Networks, 1(3), 215-239. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-8733(78)90021-7   DOI
8 Gentil-Beccot, A., Mele, S., & Brooks, T. (2010). Citing and reading behaviours in high-energy physics. Scientometrics, 84(2), 345-355. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0111-1   DOI
9 Gephi (n.d.). Retrieved from https://gephi.org/
10 Goldschmidt-Clermont, L. (2002). Communication patterns in high-energy physics. High Energy Physics Libraries Webzine, issue 6. http://library.cern.ch/HEPLW/6/papers/1/
11 Krause, J., Mele, S., & Lindqvist, C. M., (2007). Quantitative study of the geographical distribution of the authorship of High-Energy Physics journals, (No. CERN-OPEN-2007-014).
12 Heuer, R. D., Holtkamp, A., & Mele, S. (2008). Innovation in scholarly communication: Vision and projects from High-Energy Physics. Information Services & Use, 28(2), 83-96.   DOI
13 KnowledgeMatrix Plus (n.d.). Retrieved from http://mirian.kisti.re.kr/km/
14 Kohls, A., & Mele, S. (2018). Converting the literature of a scientific field to open access through global collaboration: The experience of SCOAP3 in particle physics. Publications, 6(2), 15. https://doi.org/10.3390/publications6020015   DOI
15 Modularity (n.d.). Retrieved from https://github.com/gephi/gephi/wiki/Modularity/
16 SCOAP3 KOREA (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.kesli.or.kr/scoap3/html/pop_scoap3.html
17 Nagpaul, P. (2002). Visualizing cooperation networks of elite institutions in India. Scientometrics, 54(2), 213-228. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1016036711279   DOI
18 Newman, M. E. (2004). Coauthorship networks and patterns of scientific collaboration. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 101(suppl 1), 5200-5205. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0307545100   DOI
19 Price, D. D. S., & Beaver, D. (1966). Collaboration in an invisible college. American Psychologist, 21(11), 1011-1018. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0024051   DOI
20 SCOAP3 (n.d.). Retrieved from https://scoap3.org/scoap3-repository/
21 Spink, A, Robins, D., & Schamber, L., (1998). Use of scholarly book reviews: Implications for electronic publishing and scholarly communication. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 44(9), 364-374.   DOI
22 Tableau (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.tableau.com/
23 Shon, Dongwon (2002). Social network analysis (2nd ed.). Seoul: Kyungmoon-sa.
24 Nam, Eunkyung, & Park, Ji-Hong (2014). Factors influencing research collaboration in the field of informetrics. Journal of the Korean Society for Information Management, 31(4), 201-227. https://doi.org/10.3743/KOSIM.2014.31.4.201   DOI
25 Park, Chan Sook (2019). Using text network analysis for analyzing academic papers in nursing. Perspectives in Nursing Science, 16(1), 12-24. https://doi.org/10.16952/pns.2019.16.1.12   DOI
26 Seo, Tae-Sul, Hwang, Hyekyong, & Kim, Wan-Jong (2017, April). Current status of publication of open access articles by Korean physicsists in HEP. Poster session presented at the 2017 Korean Physical Society Spring Conference, DCC, Daejeon.
27 Lee, Jae Yun (2006). Centrality measures for bibliometric network analysis. Journal of the Korean Society for Library and Information Science, 40(3), 191-214. https://doi.org/10.4275/KSLIS.2006.40.3.191   DOI
28 Lee, Gyeong Min, Kim, Chan Hui, & Park, Han Woo (2017). Network analysis of SNS-mediated learning community: A Facebook group ‘Magic of flipped-learning’. Journal of The Korean Data Analysis Society, 19(2), 873-884.   DOI
29 Lee, Bangrae, Yeo, Woon-Dong, Lee, June-Young, Lee, Chang-Hoan, Kwon, Oh-Jin, & Moon, Yeong-Ho (2008). Development of the KnowledgeMatrix as an informetric analysis system. Journal of the Korean Contents Association, 8(1), 68-74. https://doi.org/10.5392/JKCA.2008.8.1.068   DOI
30 Lee, Soo-Sang (2013). Analytical study on the relationship between centralities of research networks and research performances. Journal of Korean Library and Information Science Society, 44(3), 405-428. https://doi.org/10.4097/kjae.2003.44.3.405   DOI
31 Kim, Yonghak (2016). Social network analysis (3rd ed.). Seoul: Park Young-sa.
32 VOSviewer (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.vosviewer.com/
33 Kim, Ga-Yoon (2019). Analysis on destination network characteristics of using 2-mode network analysis: Case of Japanese tourists visiting Korea. Journal of Tourism Studies, 31(4), 23-46. https://doi.org/10.21581/jts.2019.11.31.4.23   DOI
34 Kim, Dong-Rae, Kwon, Ki-Seok, & Jeong, Seok-Bong (2015). Knowledge structure analysis on business administration research using keyword network analysis. Journal of Decision Science, 23(1), 111-125.