引用文獻索引資料庫在Institute for Scientific Information(ISI)建置了Science Citation Index(SCI)與Social Science Citation Index(SSCI)以後，逐漸為學術界所重視，也帶動了傳統商業公司發展引用文獻索引資料庫之風潮，其中又以Science Citation Index-Expanded(SCIE)及後起之Scopus最為人稱道。但由於傳統商業公司對學者及圖書館收費過於高昂，引起學者及圖書館的反動，興起一陣由計畫及少數商業公司所發展，開放存取引用文獻索引資料庫之風潮，其中又以Google公司製作的Google Scholar，及NEC公司隨著計畫建置的CiteSeer最受人注目。 / 本研究採取實作法為研究方法，評比四個引用文獻索引資料庫的檢索介面及檢索細項之優劣。並以美國計算機械學會(ACM)頒發的杜林獎之50位得主為樣本，對SCIE、Scopus、CiteSeer及Google Scholar四個引用文獻索引資料庫進行作者檢索，逐一過濾檢索結果後，針對正確的檢索結果進行分析，比較四個引用文獻索引資料庫內部重複性與完整性，並交叉比對四個引用文獻索引資料庫兩兩比較之重複性、獨特性及完整性，並歸納造成此研究結果之原因。 / 研究結果發現SCIE與Scopus的檢索方式較容易，不會造成使用者太大的負擔，檢索方式也較為多元詳盡，其中又以Scopus的作者檢索使用最方便；而Google Scholar及CiteSeer皆主要利用一簡潔的檢索列，較難精準的檢索出所需資料。收錄資料完整度方面，Google Scholar收錄資料最多元，SCIE則涵蓋最完整之學術資源。交叉比對結果可得知，Google Scholar之資料獨特性最高；CiteSeer之收錄資料完整度最低。此外除了SCIE以外，其他三個引文索引資料庫皆收錄大量的網路資源。此外，美國計算機械學會的出版品則在四個引文索引資料庫中，皆扮演重要角色。 / 根據研究結果，對此四個引文索引資料庫提出建議，希望傳統商業引文索引資料庫能增加索引網路資源，並調整收費政策；開放存取引文索引資料庫應改正其書目著錄格式；希望圖書館能增加對引文索引資料庫使用之推廣，並教導使用者正確利用開放存取引文索引資料庫。 / 引文索引資料庫索引之文獻，已對學術評鑑造成很大的影響。圖書館應實地使用並引導使用者正確的利用引文索引資料庫，及使用網路資源的正確觀念。如此方可協助使用者不在浩瀚之網路資源中迷失。 / After Institute for Scientific Information(ISI) made Science Citation Index(SCI) and Social Science Citation Index(SSCI), Scholars progressively took notice of citation indexing databases. Commercial Companies also had begun to expand citation indexing database like the famous products are Science Citation Index-Expanded(SCIE). However, the commercial companies charged too much for using the database. So it excited the development of open access(OA) citation indexing database, instant of Google Scholar and CiteSeer. / OA means that people can use these citation indexing database for free. This paper aims to adopt comparison as four databases’ retrieval interface, and unique and overlap of documents of the subjects of computing machinery and electrical engineering. The research subjects are composed of OA and traditional commercial citation indexing database in the follow: SCIE, Scopus, Google Scholar, and CiteSeer. Moreover, this research retrieved all documents of Turing award winners in the four citation indexing databases, in order to examine these four citation indexing databases’ unique and overlap. / As a consequence, this study provides the findings as follows : Firstly, traditional commercial citation indexing databases (SCIE and Scopus) have the easier retrieval interface and various searching forms. The Google Scholar collects more multiform resources of retrieval results, and SCIE completed collects scholarly literatures. We make a comparison to find that Google Scholar has much more unique data, but CiteSeer is completely less in four citation indexing databases. Besides SCIE, another three citation indexing databases conclude a large number of internet data. Finally, publications of The Association of Computing Machinery(ACM) play an important role in the four citation indexing databases.

本研究旨在針對WoS、Scopus、CSSCI、CCD、TSSCI、THCI與ACI等七個引文索引資料庫，觀察與統計現有引文索引資料庫之系統文獻來源、查詢功能、索引欄位、輸出欄位、引文分析功能及其檢索結果分析與個人化功能等，藉此瞭解現有引文索引資料庫之現況與不足之處，並輔以資料庫使用者、圖書館館員以及資料庫建置專家之訪談，瞭解建置人文社會科學引文索引資料庫之阻礙、後續維護管理問題、推廣問題以及與國際接軌之建議作法，進而對人文社會科學引文索引資料庫的建置提出建議。 　　本研究結果歸納如下：（1）系統文獻來源為綜合性較佳，較能建構出較完整的引文網路。（2）查詢功能、索引欄位、輸出欄位、引文分析、檢索結果分析與個人化功能宜參考WoS、Scopus與CCD三個建置較齊全之資料庫，提供使用者較全面的系統功能。（3）建置阻礙包括參考文獻引文格式的差異問題、拖刊問題、選刊問題、建檔的人力與資源問題、以及名稱的權威檔等問題。（4）後續維護管理問題包括人力與經費、資料庫的推廣、資料庫所採取的營運模式問題、資料的來源問題、以及引文資料的建檔問題。（5）若欲推廣資料庫，必須建置功能及內容完整之資料庫，讓使用者感受到資料庫的查詢具有引文網路的架構。（6）資料庫在建置時就須參考國外資料庫在處理引文資料庫時所注重的重點，例如各項索引與輸出欄位等，將來與國外接軌或合併的可行性才有可能提高。 　　本研究結果可供期刊出版商提升自我品質之參考，亦可對建置人文社會科學引文索引資料庫各項系統功能提出建置建議，希冀有朝一日能建置出媲美國外大型引文索引資料庫的臺灣人文社會科學引文索引資料庫。 / Citation index databases have been explored and made impact on academic research for several decades. The Web of Science (WOS) of Thomson Reuters ISI is one of the most well-known citation databases in the world, and the Scopus of Elsevier is also a famous citation databases. In addition, the Mainland China has also developed Chinese Social Sciences Citation Index (CSSCI) database and Chinese Citation Database (CCD) since recent twenty years. Under the sponsorship of the National Science Council in Taiwan, the Taiwan Social Science Research Center established the Taiwan Social Sciences Citation Index (TSSCI) database in 1996 and the Center for Humanities Research built up Taiwan Humanities Citation Index (THCI) database in 1999. On the other hand, Airiti Incorporation has developed Academic Citation Index (ACI). However, the application of TSSCI, THCI and ACI reveals many design flaws and use limitations for both databases, some search functions are different and not available, and it is therefore difficult for users to get information through the same search interface. It is truly important to construct an integrate citation index database for Taiwan humanity and social science researchers. Working with an information service company, the purpose of the present study is to propose a design plan to establish a Taiwan humanity and social science citation database. 　　The following issues will be investigated in this study: 1. Collecting source literature and citation literature from humanity and social science journals publishing by Taiwan academic institutes. 2. Designing the structure of citation index system, types and contents of the database. 3. Setting up the standards for description on database fields. 4. Developing the basic, advanced and other information retrieval functions. 5. Seeking for the integration with WoS to fulfill the goal of information resources sharing and the promotion of global visualization. 6. Building the quantitative indicator for evaluating the humanity and social science research.