• 기계와재료
• /
• v.22 no.1
• /
• pp.84-93
• /
• 2010

본 고에서는 소재분야의 기술수준을 정확히 파악하고, 앞으로 나아갈 R&D 정책방향을 설정하는 데 도움이 되도록 하기 위해 NS(National Science Indicators) DB와 Web of Science DB의 재료과학(Materials Science) 분야를 토대로 논문분석을 수행하였다. 최근 10년간(1999-2008년) 소재 분야에 대한 분석결과 양적 지표인 논문수는 연평균 12%로 지속적으로 증가하였으며, 세계순위는 1999년 9위에서 2008년 4위까지 상승하였다. 질적지표인 논문1편당 피인용횟수는 세계 평균 대비 1999년 94.7%(한국 9.35건, 세계 9.87건)에서 2008년 88.4%(한국 0.23건, 세계 0.26건)로 낮아진 것으로 나타났다. 최근 10년간 연구주체간 협력 논문수를 살펴보면 대학-대학간 이 4,337편(39.8%)으로 가장 많으며, 대학-공공연구기관간은 3,135건(28.8%), 대학-기업은 2,295건(21.1%)으로 전체의 약 90%를 차지하고 있다. 또한 해외 협력논문수는 전체 논문에서 약 26%를 차지하고 있다. 결과적으로 기초연구성과의 실용화 연계 지원책 마련, 질중심 논문평가의 강화, 국내외 협력주체간 협력 연수의 강화, 주기적 논문분석을 통한 소재 R&D 정책 수립 및 연구사업기획에의 활용강화 필요하다.

• Proceedings of the Korean Society for Information Management Conference
• /
• 2015.08a
• /
• pp.17-22
• /
• 2015

본 연구는 국내대학의 교원들의 학술논문업적에 관한 합리적이고 객관적인 평가방법 개발에 비계가 되고자, 현재 국내 대학에서 시행중인 교원업적평가 중 학술논문평가기준을 비교 분석하였다. 우선 문헌정보학과가 포함된 국내 종합대학 27개교의 학술논문평가기준을 수집하여 비교한 다음, 2001년에서 2014년까지의 전국문헌정보학과 교원들의 학술논문 서지데이터를 이용하여 학술지의 영향력지수 및 피인용횟수를 적용한 순위와 27개대학 평가기준을 적용한 순위를 학교별, 저자별로 도출하여 비교 분석하였다. 본 연구를 통하여 교원들의 공정한 평가방안 마련에 도모하고자 하며, 교원의 연구 및 학문활동의 상승 제고 뿐 아니라 대학 내 연구환경 개선까지 다방면으로 교원의 사기진작에 도움이 되고자 한다.

• Journal of Korea Technology Innovation Society
• /
• v.12 no.1
• /
• pp.165-188
• /
• 2009

The major purposes of the research are to see the underlying disciplines of technology innovation management which contribute to Korean research. To do that, we employed author cocitation analysis which has been proved to be robust. We compiled all the citations of two major Korean journals between 1993 and 2006. We also included up to 3rd author, which makes a cocitation analysis more comprehensive, compared with the previous analysis for the first author only. We identified 239 authors who have more than 10 citations. From the cocitation combinations based on the 239 authors, we selected and analyzed 100 most cocited authors. Out of 100 authors a group of 23 authors who command both higher citations and cocitations were chosen for detailed analysis. The results show that the average number of publications is 22.2, the average number of citations to them is 58.5, and the average number of citations to a publication is 2.6. Also, the average number of cocitations is around 10 times that of citations. The results indicate that there are six major disciplines: Technology/Innovation, Management of Technology, Economics of Technology, Development, Valuation of Technology, and Growth. Noteworthy points are the following. 1) Most of the members of the technology management group are management scholars, and the groups of economics of technology and growth are economists, while the groups of technology innovation and development group are not represented by specific disciplines. 2) Considering the groups overall from the traditional academic disciplines, the main branches are management and economics. 3) The valuation of technology group consists mostly of Korean researchers.

• Journal of the Korean Society for Library and Information Science
• /
• v.57 no.2
• /
• pp.79-96
• /
• 2023

This study analyzed the open peer review results for 585 papers in the field of social sciences in F1000Research, a representative OPR(Open Peer Review) platform, and checked the relationship between the number of cited-by, altmetrics and review score. In addition, by verifying whether the review score shows a moderating effect between the relationship between the utilization of the paper and the cited-by, it was confirmed whether the paper evaluated as high quality in the open review platform can promote the number of cited-by. As a result of the analysis, first, there was no significant difference in the number of cited-by between the approved and conditionally approved paper groups, but the converted review score and the number of cited-by showed a weak positive correlation (r = 0.40 - 0.60). Second, the review score showed a weak correlation with the altmetrics, and it was analyzed that review result could weakly predict the number of cited-by and social impact. Finally, it was verified that the review score performed a significant positive moderating effect (B=1.69, P < 0.01) in making the use of the paper lead to citation. As a result of the conditional effect test, it was verified that it showed the greatest effect(B=11.32, 95% CI [10.57, 12.08]) in the group of papers rated as the highest quality. Therefore, it was analyzed that the open review scores can help researchers select high quality papers and induce citations.

• Proceedings of the Korea Information Processing Society Conference
• /
• 2012.11a
• /
• pp.1632-1635
• /
• 2012

연구기관의 연구 활동에 대한 평가는 연구기관에 소속된 연구자들의 논문으로 연구 활동을 분석함으로써 이루어질 수 있다. 논문으로 연구 활동을 분석하여 연구기관에 대한 평가를 하기 위해서는 논문을 작성한 저자의 소속기관이 가장 먼저 식별되어야 한다. 본 논문에서는 국내 과학학술지 논문에 대한 저자의 소속 연구기관을 식별하는 시스템을 구축하여 각 연구기관의 연구 활동에 대하여 분석해 보았다. 이러한 시스템을 기반으로 연구기관별 논문 수, 피인용 횟수, 1회 이상 피인용 된 논문 수 등의 기본 연구 활동을 분석하여 얻은 결과는 연구 기관 평가의 근거로 사용할 있으며, 나아가 특정 분야에서 강세를 보이는 연구기관과 연구기관끼리의 협업 관계를 분석하여 정책에 활용할 수도 있다.

• Journal of Korean Library and Information Science Society
• /
• v.53 no.4
• /
• pp.143-162
• /
• 2022

Altmetrics is an alternative impact evaluation index that evaluates the social interest in the research performance of individuals or institutions in universities, research institutions, and research fund support institutions. This study empirically analyzed what kind of attention a papers of domestic library and information science researchers published in an international academic journal was receiving in the international community using Altmetric explorer. As a result of the analysis, 230 papers were tracked. The average Altmetric Attention Score (AAS) was 6.63, but there were 2 papers that received overwhelming attention (over 170 points) as they were mentioned in news report and Twitter. Second, there was a tendency for high AAS to appear in cases where a domestic researcher participated as a co-author and the main author belonged to an overseas institution, and in the case where the research funds were supported by foreign government agencies. In addition to the field of the library information science or information system, the papers classified as the field of public health service and education showed high AAS, and it was confirmed that these papers were published in the journals of various fields such as life science. Finally, it was confirmed that there was a weak correlation of r =0.25 between the AAS and the number of citations of the analyzed paper, but a strong correlation of r =0.68 between the number of Mendeley readers and the number of citations.

• Journal of the Korean Society for information Management
• /
• v.30 no.1
• /
• pp.33-50
• /
• 2013

The purpose of this study was to identify differences between KCI and Naver Scholar as citation analysis tools. Four subcategories in the humanities category were selected as the subject of study. The recall of Naver Scholar was 64%(2,227 times) and the KCI's was 77%(2,665 times). There were some differences in the results at the individual article level or the subcategory level, but the gaps were not significant. Therefore, researchers who analyze citations are urged to use both databases because neither of them are complete, but supplementary to each other.

• Journal of Technology Innovation
• /
• v.21 no.1
• /
• pp.85-108
• /
• 2013

This paper introduces a new qualitative measurement indicator, Relatively Rank-normalized Impact Factor ($R^2nIF$) that can overcome drawbacks of the existing research performance measures. With the help of this innovative indicator, this study analyzes and compares the quality of research papers across countries and National Science Indicators (NSI) standard academic fields. The development of an improved bibliometric indicator for evaluating the quality of research papers and disentangling the "international" dimension of research performance will be of interest to academics and practitioners alike.

• Journal of Korea Technology Innovation Society
• /
• v.13 no.4
• /
• pp.656-679
• /
• 2010

IT was 90's that the government actually support the basic research in Korea. During the two decades, government accelerate the support to the basic research and therefore distinctive increase in the number of SCI papers. In 2008, Korea produced 35,569 SCI papers and it takes 2.42% of total SCI papers in the world. But, in spite of this quantitative growth, the qualitative level of Korean SCI papers is stagnant at 30s. To improve these phenomenon, this paper suggests recommendations about three aspects of research management-research support, evaluation, output diffusion. In the 21st century, the creative research output is more important than ever. Thus the government shout change its basic research supporting system from quantitative to qualitative aspect.

• Proceedings of the Korean Society for Information Management Conference
• /
• 2014.08a
• /
• pp.31-36
• /
• 2014

이 연구는 한중일 3개국의 해양분야 대표학술지 3종(OSJ, CJOL, JO)을 대상으로 편집위원단, 저자, 피인용도 및 국가간 연구협력 현황을 분석하였다. 이 결과, 편집위원단의 연구실적은 CJOL이 가장 뛰어나며, 3개 학술지 모두 동아시아 지역 연구자의 논문 투고율이 높았다. OSJ는 서아시아와 서남아시아에서, JO는 동아시아 중에서 한국과 중국이 높은 투고율을 보였고, CJOL은 중국(자국) 연구자의 비율이 가장 높았다. 평균 피인용 횟수는 5년이 경과하면 JO가 OSJ와 CJOL에 비해 상대적으로 급증하는 경향을 보였다. 국가간 연구협력 현황에서 JO는 일본을 중심으로 미국, 중국, 대만, 한국과의 연구교류가 활발하고, CJOL은 미국 외 국가와의 협력은 미미하다. 그리고 OSJ는 일본, 미국, 인도와의 연구협력이 활발한 것으로 나타났다.