Publications-Theses
Article View/Open
Publication Export
-
題名 二十一世紀諾貝爾物理學獎得主之學術生產力和學術影響力之比較研究
A Comparative Study of Academic Productivity and Academic Influence of Nobel Prize Winners in Physics in the 21st Century作者 盧依函
Lu, Yi-Han貢獻者 蔡明月
Tsay, Ming-Yueh
盧依函
Lu, Yi-Han關鍵詞 資訊計量學
諾貝爾獎得主
學術生產力
學術合作
超級作者
學術影響力
Informetrics
Nobel laureates
Scholarly productivity
Collaboration
Hyperauthorship
Academic influence日期 2018 上傳時間 27-Aug-2018 14:41:29 (UTC+8) 摘要 科學界的最高榮譽無非是諾貝爾獎，獲獎同時也代表個人的成就得到認可，在研究中具有一定的影響力也承擔更多的責任。本文目的為分析獲獎者第一篇研究出版年齡與獲獎年齡的關係、學術生產力的變化、學術合作模式以及學術影響力情形，以資訊計量學的方法分析論文生產數的概況、論文作者數、作者排序的情形，並進一步分析參與超級作者文章的獲獎者，最後驗證被引用總次數與h-index的相關性以及獲獎者論文發表期刊之影響力。研究結果發現：1. 出版年齡與獲獎年具齡有相關性；2. 獲獎者在獲獎前後的學術生產力大致相等，且學術生產力在年齡方面有統計上的差異性；3. 多數獲獎者以學術合作論文為主要研究模式且獲獎後每篇論文平均作者數增加；4. 獲獎後的學術合作論文中以第一作者發表的論文比例減少；5. 獲獎前的論文平均被引用次數較高；6. 大部分獲獎者合著論文的平均被引用次數較多；7. 被引用總次數與h-index具顯著正相關；8. 獲獎者發表論文最多的期刊為《Physical Review Letters》。
The purpose of the study was to analyze the changes in scholarly productivity, patterns of collaboration, and the academic influence of the Nobel laureates. Informetrics is used to analyze the number of authors, patterns of author order, and further analysis of the hyperauthorship articles. Then finally verified the correlation between the total cites and h-index, and the influence of laureates’ published journals.The results of the study were that: (a) The age of publication was related to the age of the prize-winners; (b) Scholarly productivity of the laureates before and after the Nobel Prize was roughly equal to each other, and in terms of age, the scholarly productivity was statistically different; (c) Most of the laureates used academic collaborative papers as the main research patterns and the average number of authors per paper after the Nobel Prize was increased; (d) After the Nobel Prize, the proportion of the academic collaborative papers published by the first author decreased; (e) Average number of citations before the Nobel Prize is higher; (f) Most of laureates` collaborative papers with a higher average number of citations; (g) The h-index was positively correlated with the total number of citations; (h) The journal with the most published papers by the laureates was the “Physical Review Letters.”參考文獻 英文文獻Abramo, G., & D’Angelo, C. A. (2014). How do you define and measure research productivity? Scientometrics, 101(2), 1129-1144.Abramo, G., D’Angelo, C. A., & Di Costa, F. (2009). Research collaboration and productivity: is there correlation? Higher Education, 57(2), 155-171.Aleixandre, B. R., Valderrama, Z. J., Castellano, G. M., Simó, M. R., & Navarro, M. C. (2004). Impact factor of the Spanish medical journals. Medicina clinica, 123(18), 697-701.Aleixandre, B. R., Zurián, J., Miguel-Dasit, A., Arroyo, A., & Gómez, M. (2007). Hypothetical influence of non-indexed Spanish medical journals on the impact factor of the Journal Citation Reports-indexed journals. Scientometrics, 70(1), 53-66.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.Baker, D. R. (1990). Citation analysis: A methodological review. Social Work Research and Abstracts, 26, 3-10. Oxford University Press.Ball, P. (2005). Index aims for fair ranking of scientists. Nature Publishing Group.Bar-Ilan, J. (2008). Which h-index?－A comparison of WoS, Scopus and Google Scholar. Scientometrics, 74(2), 257-271.Barner, J. R., Holosko, M. J., Thyer, B. A., & King Jr, S. (2015). Research productivity in top-ranked schools in psychology and social work: Does having a research culture matter? Journal of Social Work Education, 51(1), 5-18.Batista, P. D., Campiteli, M. G., & Kinouchi, O. (2006). Is it possible to compare researchers with different scientific interests? Scientometrics, 68(1), 179-189.Beaver, D., & Rosen, R. (1978). Studies in scientific collaboration: Part I. The professional origins of scientific co-authorship. Scientometrics, 1(1), 65-84.Carter, T. E., Smith, T. E., & Osteen, P. J. (2017). Gender comparisons of social work faculty using H-Index scores. Scientometrics, 111(3), 1547-1557.Chan, H. F., Gleeson, L., & Torgler, B. (2014). Awards before and after the Nobel Prize: A Matthew effect and/or a ticket to one’s own funeral? Research Evaluation, 23(3), 210-220.Chan, H. F., Önder, A. S., & Torgler, B. (2015). Do Nobel laureates change their patterns of collaboration following prize reception? Scientometrics, 105(3), 2215-2235.Chan, H. F., Önder, A. S., & Torgler, B. (2016). The first cut is the deepest: repeated interactions of coauthorship and academic productivity in Nobel laureate teams. Scientometrics, 106(2), 509-524.Chariker, J. H., Zhang, Y., Pani, J. R., & Rouchka, E. C. (2017). Identification of successful mentoring communities using network-based analysis of mentor–mentee relationships across Nobel laureates. Scientometrics, 1-17.Charyton, C., DeDios, S. L., & Nygren, T. E. (2015). Scientific productivity and idea acceptance in Nobel laureates. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 49(4), 245-262.Costas, R., & Bordons, M. (2007). The h-index: Advantages, limitations and its relation with other bibliometric indicators at the micro level. Journal of informetrics, 1(3), 193-203.Cronin, B. (2001). Hyperauthorship: A postmodern perversion or evidence of a structural shift in scholarly communication practices? Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 52(7), 558-569.Cronin, B., & Meho, L. (2006). Using the h-index to rank influential information scientistss. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 57(9), 1275-1278.Culnan, M. J., O’Reilly, C. A., & Chatman, J. A. (1990). Intellectual structure of research in organizational behavior, 1972-1984: a cocitation analysis. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 41(6), 453-458.DeLuca, L. A., St John, A., Stolz, U., Matheson, L., Simpson, A., & Denninghoff, K. R. (2013). The Distribution of the H-index Among Academic Emergency Physicians in the United States. Academic Emergency Medicine, 20(10), 997-1003.Du Toit, A. S. A. (2005). Analysis of the citation of Web-based information resources by UNISA academic researchers. South African Journal of Information Management, 7(3), 1-14.Egghe, L. (2006). Theory and practice of the g-index. Scientometrics, 69(1), 131-152.Engemann, K. M., & Wall, H. J. (2009). A journal ranking for the ambitious economist. Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Review, 91(3), 127-139.Estabrook, L. S. (1984). Sociology and library research. Library Trends, 32(4), 461-476.Falagas, M. E., Kouranos, V. D., Arencibia-Jorge, R., & Karageorgopoulos, D. E. (2008). Comparison of SCImago journal rank indicator with journal impact factor. The FASEB journal, 22(8), 2623-2628.Fox, M. F. (1983). Publication productivity among scientists: A critical review. Social studies of science, 13(2), 285-305.Fox, M. F., & Mohapatra, S. (2007). Social-organizational characteristics of work and publication productivity among academic scientists in doctoral-granting departments. The Journal of Higher Education, 78(5), 542-571.Garfield, E. (1979). Is citation analysis a legitimate evaluation tool? Scientometrics, 1(4), 359-375.Garfield, E. (1999). Journal impact factor: a brief review. Canadian Medical Association Journal, 161(8), 979-980.Garfield, E., & Sher, I. H. (1963). New factors in the evaluation of scientific literature through citation indexing. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 14(3), 195-201.Garfield, E., & Welljamsdorof, A. (1990). Language use in international research: a citation analysis. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 511(1), 10-24.Gazni, A., Sugimoto, C. R., & Didegah, F. (2012). Mapping world scientific collaboration: Authors, institutions, and countries. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 63(2), 323-335.González-Alcaide, G. (2014). Scientometric portrait of biochemist Santiago Grisolía: publication productivity, collaboration patterns, and citation analysis. Research Evaluation, 23(2), 150-165.Harzing, A. W. K. (2013). A preliminary test of Google Scholar as a source for citation data: a longitudinal study of Nobel prize winners. Scientometrics, 94(3), 1057-1075.Haycock, L. A. (2004). Citation analysis of education dissertations for collection development. Library Resources & Technical Services, 48(2), 102-106.Heffner, A. G. (1979). Authorship recognition of subordinates in collaborative research. Social Studies of Science, 9(3), 377-384.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), 165-169.Ho, Y. S., & Hartley, J. (2016). Classic articles in psychology in the Science Citation Index Expanded: a bibliometric analysis. British Journal of Psychology, 107(4), 768-780.Hsu, J., & Huang, D. (2011). Dynamics of citation distribution. Computer Physics Communications, 182(1), 185-187.Huang, C., Varum, C. A., & Gouveia, J. B. (2006). Scientific productivity paradox: The case of China’s S&T system. Scientometrics, 69(2), 449-473.InCites Journal Citation Reports (2017). InCites Journal Citation Reports Help. Retrieved from: http://ipscience-help.thomsonreuters.com.ap.lib.nchu.edu.tw:2048/incitesLiveJCR/whatsNewGroup/whatsNewJCR.htmlJones, B. F., & Weinberg, B. A. (2011). Age dynamics in scientific creativity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 108(47), 18910-18914.Kademani, B. S., Kalyane, V. L., & Jange, S. (1999). Scientometric portrait of nobel laureate Dorothy Crowfoot Hodgkin. Scientometrics, 45(2), 233-250.Kademani, B. S., Kalyane, V. L., Kumar, V., & Mohan, L. (2005). Nobel laureates: Their publication productivity, collaboration and authorship status. Scientometrics, 62(2), 261-268.Kelly, C., & Jennions, M. (2006). The h-index and career assessment by numbers. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 21(4), 167-170.Koch, J. E. (1979). A citation analysis for business communication. The Journal of Business Communication (1973), 16(4), 45-52.Long, J. S. (1992). Measures of sex differences in scientific productivity. Social Forces, 71(1), 159-178.Mabe, M. A., & Amin, M. (2002). Dr Jekyll and Dr Hyde: author-reader asymmetries in scholarly publishing. Aslib Proceedings, 54, 149-157.Meyer, T., & Spencer, J. (1996). A citation analysis study of library science: who cites librarians? College & Research Libraries, 57(1), 23-33.Meyers, J. (2007). The literary politics of the Nobel Prize. The Antioch Review, 65(2), 214-223.Misteli, T. (2013). Eliminating the impact of the Impact Factor. Rockefeller University Press.Moed, H. F. (2005). Citation analysis in research evaluation. Dordrecht: Springer.Moody, J. (2004). The structure of a social science collaboration network: Disciplinary cohesion from 1963 to 1999. American sociological review, 69(2), 213-238.Nisonger, T. E. (1999). JASIS and library and information science journal rankings: A review and analysis of the last half-century. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 50(11), 1004-1019.Ponomariov, B., & Boardman, C. (2016). What is co-authorship? Scientometrics, 109(3), 1939-1963.Rousseau, R. (2002). Journal evaluation: Technical and practical issues.Rushforth, A., & Rijcke, S. (2015). Accounting for impact? The journal impact factor and the making of biomedical research in the Netherlands. Minerva, 53(2), 117-139.Saad, G. (2006). Exploring the h-index at the author and journal levels using bibliometric data of productive consumer scholars and business-related journals respectively. Scientometrics, 69(1), 117-120.Sabharwal, M., & Hu, Q. (2013). Participation in university-based research centers: Is it helping or hurting researchers? Research Policy, 42(6), 1301-1311.Schreiber, M. (2007). Self-citation corrections for the Hirsch index. EPL (Europhysics Letters), 78(3), 1-6.Shaman, J., Solomon, S., Colwell, R. R., & Field, C. B. (2013). Fostering Advances in Interdisciplinary Climate Science. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 110(1), 3653-3656.Smith, L. C. (1981). Citation Analysis. Library Trends, 30(1), 83-106.Tenopir, C., & King, D. W. (1998). Designing electronic journals with 30 years of lessons from print. Journal of Electronic Publishing, 4(2). doi.org/10.3998/3336451.0004.202Torrisi, B. (2014). A multidimensional approach to academic productivity. Scientometrics, 99(3), 755-783.Toutkoushian, R. K., Porter, S. R., Danielson, C., & Hollis, P. R. (2003). Using publications counts to measure an institution’s research productivity. Research in Higher Education, 44(2), 121-148.Turner, W. (1994). What’s in an R: Info r metrics or infometrics? Scientometrics, 30(2-3), 471-480.Van Rijnsoever, F. J., & Hessels, L. K. (2011). Factors associated with disciplinary and interdisciplinary research collaboration. Research policy, 40(3), 463-472.Vanclay, J. K. (2007). On the robustness of the h-index. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(10), 1547-1550.Vanclay, J. K. (2011). An evaluation of the Australian Research Council’s journal ranking. Journal of Informetrics, 5(2), 265-274.Wagner, C. S., Horlings, E., Whetsell, T. A., Mattsson, P., & Nordqvist, K. (2015). Do Nobel Laureates create prize-winning networks? An analysis of collaborative research in physiology or medicine. PloS one, 10(7), e0134164. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0134164Weinstock, M. (1971). Citation Indexes. Encyclopedia of Library and Information Science, 5, 16-40.Wuchty, S., Jones, B. F., & Uzzi, B. (2007). The increasing dominance of teams in production of knowledge. Science, 316(5827), 1036-1039.Zuckerman, H. (1967a). Nobel laureates in science: Patterns of productivity, collaboration, and authorship. American sociological review, 391-403.Zuckerman, H. (1967b). The sociology of the Nobel prizes. Scientific American, 217(5), 25-33.Zuckerman, H. (1996). Scientific Elite: Nobel Laureates in the United States. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers.Zunde, P. (1971). Structural models of complex information sources. Information storage and retrieval, 7(1), 1-18.中文文獻丁顯其（2002）。諾貝爾傳奇。臺北市：大步文化。王恆、朱幼文（2001）。諾貝爾百年百人物理學獎。新北市：世潮。王崇德（1969）。文獻計量學的歧議。情報理論與實踐，19，5-8。王崇德（1996）。關於文獻計量學的爭議。資訊傳播與圖書館學。2（4），15-21。杜赫堤（Peter Doherty）（2009）。諾貝爾獎中獎指南（楊玉齡譯）。臺北市:：天下文化。（原著出版年：2006）孟連生（1983）。中文科學引文分析。情報科學，3，11-21。孟連生（1996）。試問引文索引法的性質與功能。資訊傳播與圖書館學，3（1），15-19。林巧敏、范蔚敏（2010）。臺灣地區檔案學文獻計量分析。圖書與資訊學刊，72，16-38林巧敏、許蓀咪（2015）。歷史期刊文獻引用偏好與引用檔案分析：2006-2014年變化。圖資與檔案學刊，86，1-2。邱敏之（2016）。遺傳學領域與高能物理領域之超級作者多機構作者研究（未出版之碩士論文）。臺灣大學圖書資訊學研究所，臺北市。邵婉卿（2010）。期刊評鑑及期刊影響係數之研究。台灣圖書館管理季刊。6（3），75-94。俞培果（1995）。論引文分析方法的方法的發展。圖書情報工作，4，9-13。科學月刊（2005）。諾貝爾的榮耀－物理傳奇。臺北市：天下遠見。科學月刊（2016）。諾貝爾物理獎2005－2015。新北市：八旗文化。胡承楷、陳慶祥（2005）。供應鏈管理相關文獻資料引用之分析-以1999年到2003年高引用之文獻作者及期刊為例。運籌管理評論，1（1），111-123。耿立群（2011）。《漢學研究》歷史類論著引用文獻計量分析(2004-2009)。國家圖書館館刊，（100年2），99-125。郭麗君（2004）。一流大學的學術生產力。黑龍江高教研究，7，1-4。黃琡雅、嚴貞（2007）。1996-2004 台灣設計學報研究趨向及引文分析研究。設計學報（Journal of Design），12（1），1-17。黃慕萱（2008）。H-index 在大學層級學術評估之應用。高教評鑑，1（2），29-50。黃慕萱（2017年12月）。學術論文合著之重要作者議題探討：作者、作者序、論文計次、並列作者、超級作者與多機構作者。在邱炯友（主持），2017年圖書資訊學專題計畫成果發表暨研究發展趨勢研討會。國立政治大學圖書資訊與檔案學研究所、國立政治大學圖書資訊學數位碩士在職專班主辦，臺北市。蔡明月（2003）。資訊計量學與文獻特性。臺北市：編譯館。蔡明月（2011）。期刊影響力指標探析。教育資料與圖書館學，49（2），195-214。羅思嘉（2001）。引用文獻分析與學術傳播研究。Bulletin of the Library Association of China，66，73-85。電子資源APS Physics(2018a). Physical Review Letters. Retrieved from: https://journals.aps.org/prl/aboutAPS Physics(2018b). Editorial Policies and Practices. Retrieved from: https://journals.aps.org/prl/authors/editorial-policies-practices#accritAPS Physics(2018c). Physical Review journals. Retrieved from: https://journals.aps.org/aboutClarivate Analytics (2017). Web of Science Databases. Retrieved from: https://clarivate.com/products/web-of-science/databases/CONCERT（2016）。Web of Science資料系統介紹。檢索自https://concert.stpi.narl.org.tw/database/31DAWN (Dec, 2009). Benefits of academic and research collaboration. Retrieved from https://www.dawn.com/news/880957/benefit New Brunswick s-of-academic-and-research-collaborationIBM (2016). IBM SPSS Statistics. Retrieved from https://www.ibm.com/tw-zh/marketplace/spss-statisticsMicrosoft Corporation (2016).Microsoft Office Excel 2016. Retrieved from https://products.office.com/zh-tw/excelNobelPrize (2017). All Nobel Prizes in Physics. Retrieved from: https://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/index.htmlNobelPrize(2002). Press Release: The 2002 Nobel Prize in Physics. Retrieved from: http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/2002/press.htmlNobelPrize(2003). Press Release: The 2003 Nobel Prize in Physics. Retrieved from: http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/2003/press.htmlNobelPrize(2004). Press Release: The 2004 Nobel Prize in Physics. Retrieved from: http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/2004/press.htmlNobelPrize(2005). Press Release: The 2005 Nobel Prize in Physics. Retrieved from: http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/2005/press.htmlNobelPrize(2006). Press Release: The 2006 Nobel Prize in Physics. Retrieved from: http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/2006/press.htmlNobelPrize(2007). Press Release: The 2007 Nobel Prize in Physics. Retrieved from: http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/2007/press.htmlNobelPrize(2008). Press Release: The 2008 Nobel Prize in Physics. Retrieved from: http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/2008/press.htmlNobelPrize(2009). Press Release: The 2009 Nobel Prize in Physics. Retrieved from: http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/2009/press.htmlNobelPrize(2010). Press Release: The 2010 Nobel Prize in Physics. Retrieved from: http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/2010/press.htmlNobelPrize(2011). Press Release: The 2011 Nobel Prize in Physics. Retrieved from: http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/2011/press.htmlNobelPrize(2012). Press Release: The 2012 Nobel Prize in Physics. Retrieved from: http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/2012/press.htmlNobelPrize(2013). Press Release: The 2013 Nobel Prize in Physics. Retrieved from: http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/2013/press.htmlNobelPrize(2014). Press Release: The 2014 Nobel Prize in Physics. Retrieved from: http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/2014/press.htmlNobelPrize(2015). Press Release: The 2015 Nobel Prize in Physics. Retrieved from: http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/2015/press.htmlNobelPrize(2016). Press Release: The 2016 Nobel Prize in Physics. Retrieved from: http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/2016/press.htmlNobelPrize(2017). Press Release: The 2017 Nobel Prize in Physics. Retrieved from: http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/2017/press.html 描述 碩士
國立政治大學
圖書資訊與檔案學研究所
105155005資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0105155005 資料類型 thesis dc.contributor.advisor 蔡明月 zh_TW dc.contributor.advisor Tsay, Ming-Yueh en_US dc.contributor.author (Authors) 盧依函 zh_TW dc.contributor.author (Authors) Lu, Yi-Han en_US dc.creator (作者) 盧依函 zh_TW dc.creator (作者) Lu, Yi-Han en_US dc.date (日期) 2018 en_US dc.date.accessioned 27-Aug-2018 14:41:29 (UTC+8) - dc.date.available 27-Aug-2018 14:41:29 (UTC+8) - dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 27-Aug-2018 14:41:29 (UTC+8) - dc.identifier (Other Identifiers) G0105155005 en_US dc.identifier.uri (URI) http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/119564 - dc.description (描述) 碩士 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 圖書資訊與檔案學研究所 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 105155005 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) 科學界的最高榮譽無非是諾貝爾獎，獲獎同時也代表個人的成就得到認可，在研究中具有一定的影響力也承擔更多的責任。本文目的為分析獲獎者第一篇研究出版年齡與獲獎年齡的關係、學術生產力的變化、學術合作模式以及學術影響力情形，以資訊計量學的方法分析論文生產數的概況、論文作者數、作者排序的情形，並進一步分析參與超級作者文章的獲獎者，最後驗證被引用總次數與h-index的相關性以及獲獎者論文發表期刊之影響力。研究結果發現：1. 出版年齡與獲獎年具齡有相關性；2. 獲獎者在獲獎前後的學術生產力大致相等，且學術生產力在年齡方面有統計上的差異性；3. 多數獲獎者以學術合作論文為主要研究模式且獲獎後每篇論文平均作者數增加；4. 獲獎後的學術合作論文中以第一作者發表的論文比例減少；5. 獲獎前的論文平均被引用次數較高；6. 大部分獲獎者合著論文的平均被引用次數較多；7. 被引用總次數與h-index具顯著正相關；8. 獲獎者發表論文最多的期刊為《Physical Review Letters》。 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) The purpose of the study was to analyze the changes in scholarly productivity, patterns of collaboration, and the academic influence of the Nobel laureates. Informetrics is used to analyze the number of authors, patterns of author order, and further analysis of the hyperauthorship articles. Then finally verified the correlation between the total cites and h-index, and the influence of laureates’ published journals.The results of the study were that: (a) The age of publication was related to the age of the prize-winners; (b) Scholarly productivity of the laureates before and after the Nobel Prize was roughly equal to each other, and in terms of age, the scholarly productivity was statistically different; (c) Most of the laureates used academic collaborative papers as the main research patterns and the average number of authors per paper after the Nobel Prize was increased; (d) After the Nobel Prize, the proportion of the academic collaborative papers published by the first author decreased; (e) Average number of citations before the Nobel Prize is higher; (f) Most of laureates` collaborative papers with a higher average number of citations; (g) The h-index was positively correlated with the total number of citations; (h) The journal with the most published papers by the laureates was the “Physical Review Letters.” en_US dc.description.tableofcontents 第一章 緒論 1第一節 研究背景與動機 1第二節 研究目的 3第三節 研究問題 4第四節 名詞解釋 5第二章 文獻探討 9第一節 諾貝爾獎概述 9第二節 資訊計量學 16第三節 學術影響力 27第三章 研究設計與實施 45第一節 研究方法 45第二節 研究範圍與限制 45第三節 研究工具 48第四節 研究步驟與實施 50第四章 研究結果分析 55第一節 諾貝爾物理學獎得主獲獎理論概述 55第二節 諾貝爾物理學獎得主學術生產力結果分析 62第三節 諾貝爾物理學獎得主學術合作結果分析 112第四節 諾貝爾物理學獎得主學術影響力結果分析 158第五章 結論與建議 201第一節 結論 201第二節 建議 204第三節 未來研究之建議 205參考文獻 207附錄一 論文作者數統整表 221附錄二 個人著作與合著論文統整表 223附錄三 被引用次數統整表 225 zh_TW dc.format.extent 4083163 bytes - dc.format.mimetype application/pdf - dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0105155005 en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) 資訊計量學 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 諾貝爾獎得主 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 學術生產力 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 學術合作 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 超級作者 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 學術影響力 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) Informetrics en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Nobel laureates en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Scholarly productivity en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Collaboration en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Hyperauthorship en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Academic influence en_US dc.title (題名) 二十一世紀諾貝爾物理學獎得主之學術生產力和學術影響力之比較研究 zh_TW dc.title (題名) A Comparative Study of Academic Productivity and Academic Influence of Nobel Prize Winners in Physics in the 21st Century en_US dc.type (資料類型) thesis en_US dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 英文文獻Abramo, G., & D’Angelo, C. A. (2014). How do you define and measure research productivity? Scientometrics, 101(2), 1129-1144.Abramo, G., D’Angelo, C. A., & Di Costa, F. (2009). Research collaboration and productivity: is there correlation? Higher Education, 57(2), 155-171.Aleixandre, B. R., Valderrama, Z. J., Castellano, G. M., Simó, M. R., & Navarro, M. C. (2004). Impact factor of the Spanish medical journals. Medicina clinica, 123(18), 697-701.Aleixandre, B. R., Zurián, J., Miguel-Dasit, A., Arroyo, A., & Gómez, M. (2007). Hypothetical influence of non-indexed Spanish medical journals on the impact factor of the Journal Citation Reports-indexed journals. Scientometrics, 70(1), 53-66.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.Baker, D. R. (1990). Citation analysis: A methodological review. Social Work Research and Abstracts, 26, 3-10. Oxford University Press.Ball, P. (2005). Index aims for fair ranking of scientists. Nature Publishing Group.Bar-Ilan, J. (2008). Which h-index?－A comparison of WoS, Scopus and Google Scholar. Scientometrics, 74(2), 257-271.Barner, J. R., Holosko, M. J., Thyer, B. A., & King Jr, S. (2015). Research productivity in top-ranked schools in psychology and social work: Does having a research culture matter? Journal of Social Work Education, 51(1), 5-18.Batista, P. D., Campiteli, M. G., & Kinouchi, O. (2006). Is it possible to compare researchers with different scientific interests? Scientometrics, 68(1), 179-189.Beaver, D., & Rosen, R. (1978). Studies in scientific collaboration: Part I. The professional origins of scientific co-authorship. Scientometrics, 1(1), 65-84.Carter, T. E., Smith, T. E., & Osteen, P. J. (2017). Gender comparisons of social work faculty using H-Index scores. Scientometrics, 111(3), 1547-1557.Chan, H. F., Gleeson, L., & Torgler, B. (2014). Awards before and after the Nobel Prize: A Matthew effect and/or a ticket to one’s own funeral? Research Evaluation, 23(3), 210-220.Chan, H. F., Önder, A. S., & Torgler, B. (2015). Do Nobel laureates change their patterns of collaboration following prize reception? Scientometrics, 105(3), 2215-2235.Chan, H. F., Önder, A. S., & Torgler, B. (2016). The first cut is the deepest: repeated interactions of coauthorship and academic productivity in Nobel laureate teams. Scientometrics, 106(2), 509-524.Chariker, J. H., Zhang, Y., Pani, J. R., & Rouchka, E. C. (2017). Identification of successful mentoring communities using network-based analysis of mentor–mentee relationships across Nobel laureates. Scientometrics, 1-17.Charyton, C., DeDios, S. L., & Nygren, T. E. (2015). Scientific productivity and idea acceptance in Nobel laureates. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 49(4), 245-262.Costas, R., & Bordons, M. (2007). The h-index: Advantages, limitations and its relation with other bibliometric indicators at the micro level. Journal of informetrics, 1(3), 193-203.Cronin, B. (2001). Hyperauthorship: A postmodern perversion or evidence of a structural shift in scholarly communication practices? Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 52(7), 558-569.Cronin, B., & Meho, L. (2006). Using the h-index to rank influential information scientistss. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 57(9), 1275-1278.Culnan, M. J., O’Reilly, C. A., & Chatman, J. A. (1990). Intellectual structure of research in organizational behavior, 1972-1984: a cocitation analysis. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 41(6), 453-458.DeLuca, L. A., St John, A., Stolz, U., Matheson, L., Simpson, A., & Denninghoff, K. R. (2013). The Distribution of the H-index Among Academic Emergency Physicians in the United States. Academic Emergency Medicine, 20(10), 997-1003.Du Toit, A. S. A. (2005). Analysis of the citation of Web-based information resources by UNISA academic researchers. South African Journal of Information Management, 7(3), 1-14.Egghe, L. (2006). Theory and practice of the g-index. Scientometrics, 69(1), 131-152.Engemann, K. M., & Wall, H. J. (2009). A journal ranking for the ambitious economist. Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Review, 91(3), 127-139.Estabrook, L. S. (1984). Sociology and library research. Library Trends, 32(4), 461-476.Falagas, M. E., Kouranos, V. D., Arencibia-Jorge, R., & Karageorgopoulos, D. E. (2008). Comparison of SCImago journal rank indicator with journal impact factor. The FASEB journal, 22(8), 2623-2628.Fox, M. F. (1983). Publication productivity among scientists: A critical review. Social studies of science, 13(2), 285-305.Fox, M. F., & Mohapatra, S. (2007). Social-organizational characteristics of work and publication productivity among academic scientists in doctoral-granting departments. The Journal of Higher Education, 78(5), 542-571.Garfield, E. (1979). Is citation analysis a legitimate evaluation tool? Scientometrics, 1(4), 359-375.Garfield, E. (1999). Journal impact factor: a brief review. Canadian Medical Association Journal, 161(8), 979-980.Garfield, E., & Sher, I. H. (1963). New factors in the evaluation of scientific literature through citation indexing. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 14(3), 195-201.Garfield, E., & Welljamsdorof, A. (1990). Language use in international research: a citation analysis. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 511(1), 10-24.Gazni, A., Sugimoto, C. R., & Didegah, F. (2012). Mapping world scientific collaboration: Authors, institutions, and countries. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 63(2), 323-335.González-Alcaide, G. (2014). Scientometric portrait of biochemist Santiago Grisolía: publication productivity, collaboration patterns, and citation analysis. Research Evaluation, 23(2), 150-165.Harzing, A. W. K. (2013). A preliminary test of Google Scholar as a source for citation data: a longitudinal study of Nobel prize winners. Scientometrics, 94(3), 1057-1075.Haycock, L. A. (2004). Citation analysis of education dissertations for collection development. Library Resources & Technical Services, 48(2), 102-106.Heffner, A. G. (1979). Authorship recognition of subordinates in collaborative research. Social Studies of Science, 9(3), 377-384.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), 165-169.Ho, Y. S., & Hartley, J. (2016). Classic articles in psychology in the Science Citation Index Expanded: a bibliometric analysis. British Journal of Psychology, 107(4), 768-780.Hsu, J., & Huang, D. (2011). Dynamics of citation distribution. Computer Physics Communications, 182(1), 185-187.Huang, C., Varum, C. A., & Gouveia, J. B. (2006). Scientific productivity paradox: The case of China’s S&T system. Scientometrics, 69(2), 449-473.InCites Journal Citation Reports (2017). InCites Journal Citation Reports Help. Retrieved from: http://ipscience-help.thomsonreuters.com.ap.lib.nchu.edu.tw:2048/incitesLiveJCR/whatsNewGroup/whatsNewJCR.htmlJones, B. F., & Weinberg, B. A. (2011). Age dynamics in scientific creativity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 108(47), 18910-18914.Kademani, B. S., Kalyane, V. L., & Jange, S. (1999). Scientometric portrait of nobel laureate Dorothy Crowfoot Hodgkin. Scientometrics, 45(2), 233-250.Kademani, B. S., Kalyane, V. L., Kumar, V., & Mohan, L. (2005). Nobel laureates: Their publication productivity, collaboration and authorship status. Scientometrics, 62(2), 261-268.Kelly, C., & Jennions, M. (2006). The h-index and career assessment by numbers. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 21(4), 167-170.Koch, J. E. (1979). A citation analysis for business communication. The Journal of Business Communication (1973), 16(4), 45-52.Long, J. S. (1992). Measures of sex differences in scientific productivity. Social Forces, 71(1), 159-178.Mabe, M. A., & Amin, M. (2002). Dr Jekyll and Dr Hyde: author-reader asymmetries in scholarly publishing. Aslib Proceedings, 54, 149-157.Meyer, T., & Spencer, J. (1996). A citation analysis study of library science: who cites librarians? College & Research Libraries, 57(1), 23-33.Meyers, J. (2007). The literary politics of the Nobel Prize. The Antioch Review, 65(2), 214-223.Misteli, T. (2013). Eliminating the impact of the Impact Factor. Rockefeller University Press.Moed, H. F. (2005). Citation analysis in research evaluation. Dordrecht: Springer.Moody, J. (2004). The structure of a social science collaboration network: Disciplinary cohesion from 1963 to 1999. American sociological review, 69(2), 213-238.Nisonger, T. E. (1999). JASIS and library and information science journal rankings: A review and analysis of the last half-century. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 50(11), 1004-1019.Ponomariov, B., & Boardman, C. (2016). What is co-authorship? Scientometrics, 109(3), 1939-1963.Rousseau, R. (2002). Journal evaluation: Technical and practical issues.Rushforth, A., & Rijcke, S. (2015). Accounting for impact? The journal impact factor and the making of biomedical research in the Netherlands. Minerva, 53(2), 117-139.Saad, G. (2006). Exploring the h-index at the author and journal levels using bibliometric data of productive consumer scholars and business-related journals respectively. Scientometrics, 69(1), 117-120.Sabharwal, M., & Hu, Q. (2013). Participation in university-based research centers: Is it helping or hurting researchers? Research Policy, 42(6), 1301-1311.Schreiber, M. (2007). Self-citation corrections for the Hirsch index. EPL (Europhysics Letters), 78(3), 1-6.Shaman, J., Solomon, S., Colwell, R. R., & Field, C. B. (2013). Fostering Advances in Interdisciplinary Climate Science. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 110(1), 3653-3656.Smith, L. C. (1981). Citation Analysis. Library Trends, 30(1), 83-106.Tenopir, C., & King, D. W. (1998). Designing electronic journals with 30 years of lessons from print. Journal of Electronic Publishing, 4(2). doi.org/10.3998/3336451.0004.202Torrisi, B. (2014). A multidimensional approach to academic productivity. Scientometrics, 99(3), 755-783.Toutkoushian, R. K., Porter, S. R., Danielson, C., & Hollis, P. R. (2003). Using publications counts to measure an institution’s research productivity. Research in Higher Education, 44(2), 121-148.Turner, W. (1994). What’s in an R: Info r metrics or infometrics? Scientometrics, 30(2-3), 471-480.Van Rijnsoever, F. J., & Hessels, L. K. (2011). Factors associated with disciplinary and interdisciplinary research collaboration. Research policy, 40(3), 463-472.Vanclay, J. K. (2007). On the robustness of the h-index. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(10), 1547-1550.Vanclay, J. K. (2011). An evaluation of the Australian Research Council’s journal ranking. Journal of Informetrics, 5(2), 265-274.Wagner, C. S., Horlings, E., Whetsell, T. A., Mattsson, P., & Nordqvist, K. (2015). Do Nobel Laureates create prize-winning networks? An analysis of collaborative research in physiology or medicine. PloS one, 10(7), e0134164. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0134164Weinstock, M. (1971). Citation Indexes. Encyclopedia of Library and Information Science, 5, 16-40.Wuchty, S., Jones, B. F., & Uzzi, B. (2007). The increasing dominance of teams in production of knowledge. Science, 316(5827), 1036-1039.Zuckerman, H. (1967a). Nobel laureates in science: Patterns of productivity, collaboration, and authorship. American sociological review, 391-403.Zuckerman, H. (1967b). The sociology of the Nobel prizes. Scientific American, 217(5), 25-33.Zuckerman, H. (1996). Scientific Elite: Nobel Laureates in the United States. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers.Zunde, P. (1971). Structural models of complex information sources. Information storage and retrieval, 7(1), 1-18.中文文獻丁顯其（2002）。諾貝爾傳奇。臺北市：大步文化。王恆、朱幼文（2001）。諾貝爾百年百人物理學獎。新北市：世潮。王崇德（1969）。文獻計量學的歧議。情報理論與實踐，19，5-8。王崇德（1996）。關於文獻計量學的爭議。資訊傳播與圖書館學。2（4），15-21。杜赫堤（Peter Doherty）（2009）。諾貝爾獎中獎指南（楊玉齡譯）。臺北市:：天下文化。（原著出版年：2006）孟連生（1983）。中文科學引文分析。情報科學，3，11-21。孟連生（1996）。試問引文索引法的性質與功能。資訊傳播與圖書館學，3（1），15-19。林巧敏、范蔚敏（2010）。臺灣地區檔案學文獻計量分析。圖書與資訊學刊，72，16-38林巧敏、許蓀咪（2015）。歷史期刊文獻引用偏好與引用檔案分析：2006-2014年變化。圖資與檔案學刊，86，1-2。邱敏之（2016）。遺傳學領域與高能物理領域之超級作者多機構作者研究（未出版之碩士論文）。臺灣大學圖書資訊學研究所，臺北市。邵婉卿（2010）。期刊評鑑及期刊影響係數之研究。台灣圖書館管理季刊。6（3），75-94。俞培果（1995）。論引文分析方法的方法的發展。圖書情報工作，4，9-13。科學月刊（2005）。諾貝爾的榮耀－物理傳奇。臺北市：天下遠見。科學月刊（2016）。諾貝爾物理獎2005－2015。新北市：八旗文化。胡承楷、陳慶祥（2005）。供應鏈管理相關文獻資料引用之分析-以1999年到2003年高引用之文獻作者及期刊為例。運籌管理評論，1（1），111-123。耿立群（2011）。《漢學研究》歷史類論著引用文獻計量分析(2004-2009)。國家圖書館館刊，（100年2），99-125。郭麗君（2004）。一流大學的學術生產力。黑龍江高教研究，7，1-4。黃琡雅、嚴貞（2007）。1996-2004 台灣設計學報研究趨向及引文分析研究。設計學報（Journal of Design），12（1），1-17。黃慕萱（2008）。H-index 在大學層級學術評估之應用。高教評鑑，1（2），29-50。黃慕萱（2017年12月）。學術論文合著之重要作者議題探討：作者、作者序、論文計次、並列作者、超級作者與多機構作者。在邱炯友（主持），2017年圖書資訊學專題計畫成果發表暨研究發展趨勢研討會。國立政治大學圖書資訊與檔案學研究所、國立政治大學圖書資訊學數位碩士在職專班主辦，臺北市。蔡明月（2003）。資訊計量學與文獻特性。臺北市：編譯館。蔡明月（2011）。期刊影響力指標探析。教育資料與圖書館學，49（2），195-214。羅思嘉（2001）。引用文獻分析與學術傳播研究。Bulletin of the Library Association of China，66，73-85。電子資源APS Physics(2018a). Physical Review Letters. Retrieved from: https://journals.aps.org/prl/aboutAPS Physics(2018b). Editorial Policies and Practices. Retrieved from: https://journals.aps.org/prl/authors/editorial-policies-practices#accritAPS Physics(2018c). Physical Review journals. Retrieved from: https://journals.aps.org/aboutClarivate Analytics (2017). Web of Science Databases. Retrieved from: https://clarivate.com/products/web-of-science/databases/CONCERT（2016）。Web of Science資料系統介紹。檢索自https://concert.stpi.narl.org.tw/database/31DAWN (Dec, 2009). Benefits of academic and research collaboration. Retrieved from https://www.dawn.com/news/880957/benefit New Brunswick s-of-academic-and-research-collaborationIBM (2016). IBM SPSS Statistics. Retrieved from https://www.ibm.com/tw-zh/marketplace/spss-statisticsMicrosoft Corporation (2016).Microsoft Office Excel 2016. Retrieved from https://products.office.com/zh-tw/excelNobelPrize (2017). All Nobel Prizes in Physics. Retrieved from: https://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/index.htmlNobelPrize(2002). Press Release: The 2002 Nobel Prize in Physics. Retrieved from: http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/2002/press.htmlNobelPrize(2003). Press Release: The 2003 Nobel Prize in Physics. Retrieved from: http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/2003/press.htmlNobelPrize(2004). Press Release: The 2004 Nobel Prize in Physics. Retrieved from: http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/2004/press.htmlNobelPrize(2005). Press Release: The 2005 Nobel Prize in Physics. Retrieved from: http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/2005/press.htmlNobelPrize(2006). Press Release: The 2006 Nobel Prize in Physics. Retrieved from: http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/2006/press.htmlNobelPrize(2007). Press Release: The 2007 Nobel Prize in Physics. Retrieved from: http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/2007/press.htmlNobelPrize(2008). Press Release: The 2008 Nobel Prize in Physics. Retrieved from: http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/2008/press.htmlNobelPrize(2009). Press Release: The 2009 Nobel Prize in Physics. Retrieved from: http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/2009/press.htmlNobelPrize(2010). Press Release: The 2010 Nobel Prize in Physics. Retrieved from: http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/2010/press.htmlNobelPrize(2011). Press Release: The 2011 Nobel Prize in Physics. Retrieved from: http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/2011/press.htmlNobelPrize(2012). Press Release: The 2012 Nobel Prize in Physics. Retrieved from: http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/2012/press.htmlNobelPrize(2013). Press Release: The 2013 Nobel Prize in Physics. Retrieved from: http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/2013/press.htmlNobelPrize(2014). Press Release: The 2014 Nobel Prize in Physics. Retrieved from: http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/2014/press.htmlNobelPrize(2015). Press Release: The 2015 Nobel Prize in Physics. Retrieved from: http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/2015/press.htmlNobelPrize(2016). Press Release: The 2016 Nobel Prize in Physics. Retrieved from: http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/2016/press.htmlNobelPrize(2017). Press Release: The 2017 Nobel Prize in Physics. Retrieved from: http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/2017/press.html zh_TW dc.identifier.doi (DOI) 10.6814/THE.NCCU.LIAS.015.2018.A01 -
