期刊專區/ Periodical Section

引文?引文—大學學術發表影響力之初探：以成功大學為例

Citation, Citation, Citation: A First Look at the Publication Effect of National Cheng Kung University Faculty

所屬期刊：	第18卷第4期 主編：國立彰化師範大學教育研究所教授 龔心怡
系統編號：	vol071_01
主題：	教育政策與制度
出版年份：	2022
作者：	郭玲玲；許清芳
作者(英文)：	Ling-Ling Kueh；Ching-Fan Sheu
論文名稱：	引文?引文—大學學術發表影響力之初探：以成功大學為例
論文名稱(英文)：	Citation, Citation, Citation: A First Look at the Publication Effect of National Cheng Kung University Faculty
共同作者：
最高學歷：
校院名稱：
系所名稱：
語文別：	中文
論文頁數：	40
中文關鍵字：	學術發表影響力；h指數；學術資歷；研究生；博士學位
英文關鍵字：	publication impact；h index；seniority；graduate students；Ph.D. degree
服務單位：	國立中山大學社會科學院評估研究中心博士後研究員；國立成功大學教育研究所名譽教授；國立彰化師範大學人力資源管理研究所講座教授
稿件字數：	20723
作者專長：
投稿日期：	2023/1/16
論文下載：
摘要(中文)：	引文常被視為學術發表影響力的評估指標，受到學術界的重視，也是近年來重要的研究議題。本研究以成功大學九個學院為例，抽取50 個系所，798 名教師為樣本。從「學術成大」網頁取得教師之h 指數，做為學術發表影響力之評估指標，同時收集性別、職等、博士學位（國內、國外）、第一篇發表論文著作之年份，所屬學院與系所資料。再從「臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統」擷取教師指導之論文，為指導研究生之畢業人數。透過R 軟體進行資料串聯與整理，再以視覺化功能，展現學術發表影響力之不同特性。研究發現：（一）各學院、不同學科領域的學術發表影響力各有所異，不宜一概論之；（二）正教授的學術發表影響力領先於副教授與助理教授；（三）研究生對大學教師的學術發表影響力有所助益；（四）國內博士與國外博士的學術發表影響力，因性別而有所不同。最後針對研究結果提出研究與實務面的建議。
摘要(英文)：	Citation metrics are widely recognized as a measure of the effect of an academic publication and are highly regarded in academia. They have also become a prominent topic in research. The present study took a sample of 798 faculty members from 50 departments and institutes of the nine colleges of National Cheng Kung University (NCKU). Each faculty member’s publication effect, as characterized by the h index, was obtained from their “Research NCKU” web page. We also collected data from the same source on gender, academic rank, doctoral degree (local or foreign), year of first paper publication, and college and department affiliation for each faculty member in the sample. The number of graduate students supervised by each faculty member was extracted from a search entered into the web page hosted by the “National Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations in Taiwan.” The key findings are: (1) citation patterns vary between disciplines and cannot be generalized, (2) the academic publication effect of full professors is greater than that of associate and assistant professors, (3) graduate students are more of a help than a hindrance, and (4) the effect of research by domestic and foreign degree holders differs with gender. Finally, recommendations for research and practical applications are presented.
參考文獻：	陳光華、陳雅琦（2014）。探索人文社會學者研究產出之總合軌跡：以臺灣大學人文社會高等研究院為例。圖書館資訊學刊，12（2），81-116。https://doi.org/10. 6182/jlis.2014.12(2).081 黃淑玲、沈碩彬（2017）。大學教師職級、主持研發計畫數與研究產能關聯性之探討：以一所私立醫學大學為例。教育科學研究期刊，62（4），89-115。https:// doi.org/10.6209/JORIES.2017.62(4).04 黃慕萱、張郁蔚（2006）。人文社會學者學術評鑑指標之探討。圖書資訊學刊，4（1），17-47。https://doi.org/10.6182/jlis.2006.4(1.2).017 Abramo, G., D’Angelo, C. A., & Caprasecca, A. (2009). The contribution of star scientists to overall sex differences in research productivity. Scientometrics, 81(1), 137-156. https:// doi.org/10.1007/s11192-008-2131-7 Abramo, G., D’Angelo, C. A., & Soldatenkova, A. (2017). How long do top scientists maintain their stardom? An analysis by region, gender and discipline: Evidence from Italy. Scientometrics,110(2), 867-877. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-2193-x Aguinis, H., Ji, Y. H., & Joo, H. (2018). Gender productivity gap among star performers in STEM and other scientific fields. Journal of Applied Psychology, 103(12), 1283-1306. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000331 Aksnes, D. W., Langfeldt, L., & Wouters, P. (2019). Citations, citation indicators, and research quality: An overview of basic concepts and theories. Sage Open, 9(1). https://doi.org/10. 1177/2158244019829575 Aiston, S. J., & Jung, J. (2015). Women academics and research productivity: An international comparison. Gender and Education, 27(3), 205-220. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540253.2015.1024617 Alonso, S., Cabrerizo, F. J., Herrera-Viedma, E., & 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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2009.04.001 Baloch, N., Siming, L., Abraha, A., & Hong, S. (2021). Faculty research productivity: Differences between foreign and local doctoral degree holders in Pakistan. Higher Education, 82(1),203-225. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-020-00630-2 Barnes, B. J., Williams, E. A., & Stassen, M. L. (2012). Dissecting doctoral advising: A comparison of students’ experiences across disciplines. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 36(3), 309-331. https://doi.org/10.1080/0309877X.2011.614933 Bornmann, L., & Daniel, H. D. (2007). What do we know about the h index? Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(9), 1381-1385. https:// doi.org/10.1002/asi.20609 Bould, M. D., Boet, S., Sharma, B., Shin, E., Barrowman, N. J., & Grantcharov, T. (2011).H-Indices in a university department of anesthesia: An evaluation of their feasibility, reliability, and validity as an assessment of academic performance. British Journal of Anesthesia, 106(3), 325-330. https://doi.org/10.1093/bja/aeq403 Burrows, R. (2012). Living with the h-index? Metric assemblages in the contemporary academy. The Sociological Review, 60(2), 355-372. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-954X.2012.02077.x Chambers, J. M., Cleveland, W. S., Kleiner, B., & Tukey, P. A. (2017). Graphical methods for data analysis. Chapman and Hall/CRC. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781351072304 Hall, E. E., Walkington, H., Shanahan, J. O., Ackley, E., & Stewart, K. A. (2018). Mentor perspectives on the place of undergraduate research mentoring in academic identity and career development: An analysis of award-winning mentors. International Journal for Academic Development, 23(1), 15-27. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360144X.2017.1412972 Hayes, R. M. (1983). Citation statistics as a measure of faculty research productivity. Journal of Education for Librarianship, 23(3), 151-172. https://doi.org/10.2307/40322880 Hilmer, C., & Hilmer, M. (2007). Women helping women, men helping women? Same-gender mentoring, initial job placements, and early career publishing success for economics PhDs.American Economic Review, 97(2), 422-426. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.97.2.422 Hirsch, J. E. (2005). An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output. Proceedings of the National academy of Sciences, 102(46), 16569-16572. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0507655102 Hirsch, J. E. (2007). Does the h index have predictive power? Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 104(49), 19193-19198. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0707962104 Kwiek, M. (2018). High research productivity in vertically undifferentiated higher education systems: Who are the top performers? Scientometrics, 115(1), 415-462. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2644-7 Kwon, K. S., Kim, S. H., Park, T. S., Kim, E. K., & Jang, D. (2015). The impact of graduate students on research productivity in Korea. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology,Market, and Complexity, 1, 21. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40852-015-0024-6 Leslie, S. J., Cimpian, A., Meyer, M., & Freeland, E. (2015). Expectations of brilliance underlie gender distributions across academic disciplines. Science, 347(6219), 262-265. https:// doi.org/10.1126/science.1261375 Levin, S. G., & Stephan, P. E. (1991). Research productivity over the life cycle: Evidence for academic scientists. The American Economic Review, 81(1), 114-132. Li, B., Jacob-Brassard, J., Dossa, F., Salata, K., Kishibe, T., Greco, E., Baxter, N. N., & Al-Omran, M. (2021). Gender differences in faculty rank among academic physicians: A systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ Open, 11(11), e050322. http://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-050322 Merton, R. K. (1968). The Matthew effect in science: The reward and communication systems of science are considered. Science, 159(3810), 56-63. http://doi.org/10.1126/science.159.3810.56 Milburn, L. A., & Brown, R. D. (2016). Research productivity and utilization in landscape architecture. Landscape and Urban Planning, 147, 71-77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2015.11.005 Netz, N., Hampel, S., & Aman, V. (2020). What effects does international mobility have on scientists’ careers? A systematic review. Research Evaluation, 29(3), 327-351. https:// doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvaa007 Odic, D., & Wojcik, E. H. (2020). The publication gender gap in psychology. American Psychologist,75(1), 92-103. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000480 Petersen, A. M. Fortunato, Pan, R. K., Kaski, K., Penner, O., Rungi, A., Riccaboni, M., Stanley,H. E., & Pammolli, F. (2014). Reputation and impact in academic careers. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(43), 15316-15321. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas. 1323111111 R Core Team. (2022). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. https://www.R-project.org/ Radicchi, F., Fortunato, S., & Castellano, C. (2008). Universality of citation distributions: Toward an objective measure of scientific impact. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 105(45), 17268-17272. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.080697710 Radosic, N., & Diener, E. (2021). Citation metrics in psychological science. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 16(6), 1270-1280. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691620964128 Reale, E., Avramov, D., Canhial, K., Donovan, C., Flecha, R., Holm, P., Larkin, C., Lepori, B., Mosoni-Fried, J., Oliver, E., Primeri, E., Puigvert, L., Scharnhorst, A., Schubert, A., Soler, M., Soos, S., Sorde, T., Travis, C., & Van Horik, R. (2018). A review of literature on evaluating the scientific, social and political impact of social sciences and humanities research. Research Evaluation, 27(4), 298-308. https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvx025 Ruiz-Castillo, J., & Costas, R. (2018). Individual and field citation distributions in 29 broad scientific fields. Journal of Informetrics, 12(3), 868-892. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2018.07.002 Savage, W. E., & Olejniczak, A. J. (2021). Do senior faculty members produce fewer research publications than their younger colleagues? Evidence from Ph. D. granting institutions in the United States. Scientometrics, 126(6), 4659-4686. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192- 021-03957-4 Shaw, D., & Vaughan, L. (2008). Publication and citation patterns among LIS faculty: Profiling a “typical professor”. Library & Information Science Research, 30(1), 47-55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lisr.2007.07.002 Shin, J. C., Jung, J., Postiglione, G. A., & Azman, N. (2014). Research productivity of returnees from study abroad in Korea, Hong Kong, and Malaysia. Minerva, 52, 467-487. https:// doi.org/10.1007/s11024-014-9259-9 Waltman, L. (2016). A review of the literature on citation impact indicators. Journal of Informetrics,10(2), 365-391. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2016.02.007 Wanner, R. A., Lewis, L. S., & Gregorio, D. I. (1981). Research productivity in academia: A comparative study of the sciences, social sciences and humanities. Sociology of Education,54(4), 238-253. https://doi.org/10.2307/2112566 Wang, J., Hooi, R., Li, A. X., & Chou, M. H. (2019). Collaboration patterns of mobile academics:The impact of international mobility. Science and Public Policy, 46(3), 450-462. https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scy073 Way, S. F., Morgan, A. C., Clauset, A., & Larremore, D. B. (2017). The misleading narrative of the canonical faculty productivity trajectory. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 114(44), E9216-E9223. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1702121114 Weinberger, M., Zhitomirsky-Geffet, M., & Bouhnik, D. (2020). Academic and demographic characteristics as predictors of scholarly productivity in the Israeli academia. In iConference 2020 Proceedings. iSchools. http://hdl.handle.net/2142/106541 Yair, G., Goldstein, K., Rotem, N., & Olejniczak, A. J. (2022). The three cultures in American science: Publication productivity in physics, history and economics. Scientometrics, 127(6), 2967-2980. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-022-04396-5 Yong, A. (2014). Critique of Hirsch’s citation index: A combinatorial Fermi problem. Notices of the AMS, 61(9), 1040-1050. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1402.4357