Analisa a produção científica brasileira em Medicina Tropical nas bases de dados Web of Science e Scopus. Trata-se de um estudo quantitativo com abordagem bibliométrica, cuja coleta foi feita nas bases Web of Science e Scopus, no dia 31 de julho de 2013, buscando-se resultados da produção científica brasileira em Medicina Tropical. Os resultados mostram que a Scopus apresentou uma média de 12,5% de artigos e 11,2% de periódicos a mais do que a Web of Science. Cerca de 83,6% dos periódicos são os mesmos nas duas bases de dados. Grande parte da produção científica de cada uma está concentrada nesses. A Scopus obteve 27% de citações a mais do que a WoS, embora elas tenham sido superiores apenas na segunda metade do período. O idioma inglês registrou cerca 80% das ocorrências nas duas bases de dados, e os idiomas português e espanhol aparecem em percentuais muito menores, em função do multilinguismo de alguns artigos. A predominância dos periódicos de origem estadunidense (39,3%), inglesa (26,5%) e holandesa (9,1%) fica evidente na pesquisa. A Scopus contabiliza 80% de periódicos brasileiros a mais do que a WoS. Dentro do núcleo de produtividade, localizado pela aplicação da Lei de Bradford, os periódicos brasileiros são responsáveis por 62% da produção científica da área. A dispersão verificada mostrou que a dinâmica entre as duas bases é praticamente idêntica. Cerca de 64% dos periódicos são publicados por instituições públicas, independente do país de origem. Os periódicos em inglês representam 82% do total. Saúde Coletiva (28,8%) e Parasitologia (23%) foram as categorias da Capes mais identificadas dentro da Medicina Tropical. A Scopus contabilizou cerca de 166,8% citações a mais que a WoS, mas a WoS apresenta valores de FI em torno de 58% maiores. Conclui-se que tanto a WoS como a Scopus proporcionam visibilidade à produção científica brasileira em Medicina Tropical, embora esta seja menor do que a de países com tradição de pesquisa. A indexação influencia a visibilidade da produção científica de diferentes formas. / This research work analyzes the brazilian scientific production of Tropical Medicine in the databases Web of Science and Scopus. The research work employed quantitative methods with bibliometric approach. The collection was made in Web of Science and Scopus, on july 31 of 2013, looking for results about the brazilian scientific production in Tropical Medicine. Regarding coverage, Scopus showed an average of 12,5% of articles and 11,2% of journals more than WoS. Average 83,6% of journals are commons in the two databases, and the most part of scientific production of each is concentrated them. The Scopus has 27% more citations than WoS, however, was superior only in second half time of period. The English language was accounted with average 80% of registers in the two databases, and the Portuguese and Spanish has smallest percentage, only because the multilingual of many articles. The predominance of the American (39,3%), English (26,5%) and Dutch journals (9,1%) was apparent in the study. The Scopus was account average 80% of brazilian journals more than WoS. Inside productivity nucleus, identified by the application of Bradford’s Law, the brazilian journals are responsible by 62% of scientific production of area. The dispersion was showed that dynamic between two databases is same. Average 64% of the journals are published by public institutions, irrespective of country origin. The English language has 82% of total journals. Collective Health (28,8%) and Parasitology (23%) are the categories of Capes more identified inside Tropical Medicine area. Scopus database was accounted average 166,8% of citations more than WoS, but WoS has showed FI values around the 58% greatest. In conclusion, WoS and Scopus provide visibility for the Brazilian scientific production in Tropical Medicine, although smaller than countries with research tradition. The indexing has influenced in the visibility of scientific production, of differently ways. / El trabajo se constituye como un estudio comparativo entre dos bases de datos multidisciplinares internacionales. Tiene como objetivo analisar la producción cientifica brasileña en Medicina Tropical, en las bases de datos Web of Science y Scopus en el día 31 de julio de 2013. La metodología es cuantitativa, con abordaje bibliometrica. La colecta de los datos fue hecha buscándo resultados de la producción cientifica brasileña en Medicina Tropical. Entre los resultados, sobre la cobertura, Scopus presentó una media de 12,5% de artículos y 11,2% de publicaciones que la Web of Science. Alrededor de 83% de las publicaciones son las mismas que las dos bases de datos, y la mayoría de la producción científica del estudio se concentra en estas. Scopus ha obtenido 27% más citas que WoS, sin embargo ellas hajan sido superiores sólamente en la segunda mitad del período. Los artículos en inglés superan en 80% en las dos bases de datos, los idiomas portugués y español tienen porcentajes mucho menores, debido al multilinguismo de algunos artículos. El predomínio de publicaciones de origen estadunidense (39%), inglesa (26,5%) y holandesa (9,1%) es evidénte en el estudio. Scopus tiene más de 80% de las publicaciones brasileñas que WoS. En el núcleo de productividad, obtenido a través de la aplicación de la Ley de Bradford, las publicaciones brasileñas son responsables por 62% de la producción cientifica del área. La dispersión observada ha mostrado que la dinámica entre las dos bases de datos es practicamente idéntica. Aproximadamente 64% de las publicaciones son editadas por instituciones públicas, independiente del país de origen. El inglés constituye 82% del idioma de las publicaciones. Salud Pública (28,8%) y Parasitología (23%), fueron las categorías más identificadas en el área de Medicina Tropical según la Capes. Considerase que Web of Science y Scopus han proporcionado visibilidad a la producción cientifica brasileña en Medicina Tropical, sin embargo esta es menor que la de los países con tradición en investigación cientifica. La indización ha influenciado la visibilidad de la producción cientifica, de formas diferentes.

Analisa a produção científica brasileira em Medicina Tropical nas bases de dados Web of Science e Scopus. Trata-se de um estudo quantitativo com abordagem bibliométrica, cuja coleta foi feita nas bases Web of Science e Scopus, no dia 31 de julho de 2013, buscando-se resultados da produção científica brasileira em Medicina Tropical. Os resultados mostram que a Scopus apresentou uma média de 12,5% de artigos e 11,2% de periódicos a mais do que a Web of Science. Cerca de 83,6% dos periódicos são os mesmos nas duas bases de dados. Grande parte da produção científica de cada uma está concentrada nesses. A Scopus obteve 27% de citações a mais do que a WoS, embora elas tenham sido superiores apenas na segunda metade do período. O idioma inglês registrou cerca 80% das ocorrências nas duas bases de dados, e os idiomas português e espanhol aparecem em percentuais muito menores, em função do multilinguismo de alguns artigos. A predominância dos periódicos de origem estadunidense (39,3%), inglesa (26,5%) e holandesa (9,1%) fica evidente na pesquisa. A Scopus contabiliza 80% de periódicos brasileiros a mais do que a WoS. Dentro do núcleo de produtividade, localizado pela aplicação da Lei de Bradford, os periódicos brasileiros são responsáveis por 62% da produção científica da área. A dispersão verificada mostrou que a dinâmica entre as duas bases é praticamente idêntica. Cerca de 64% dos periódicos são publicados por instituições públicas, independente do país de origem. Os periódicos em inglês representam 82% do total. Saúde Coletiva (28,8%) e Parasitologia (23%) foram as categorias da Capes mais identificadas dentro da Medicina Tropical. A Scopus contabilizou cerca de 166,8% citações a mais que a WoS, mas a WoS apresenta valores de FI em torno de 58% maiores. Conclui-se que tanto a WoS como a Scopus proporcionam visibilidade à produção científica brasileira em Medicina Tropical, embora esta seja menor do que a de países com tradição de pesquisa. A indexação influencia a visibilidade da produção científica de diferentes formas. / This research work analyzes the brazilian scientific production of Tropical Medicine in the databases Web of Science and Scopus. The research work employed quantitative methods with bibliometric approach. The collection was made in Web of Science and Scopus, on july 31 of 2013, looking for results about the brazilian scientific production in Tropical Medicine. Regarding coverage, Scopus showed an average of 12,5% of articles and 11,2% of journals more than WoS. Average 83,6% of journals are commons in the two databases, and the most part of scientific production of each is concentrated them. The Scopus has 27% more citations than WoS, however, was superior only in second half time of period. The English language was accounted with average 80% of registers in the two databases, and the Portuguese and Spanish has smallest percentage, only because the multilingual of many articles. The predominance of the American (39,3%), English (26,5%) and Dutch journals (9,1%) was apparent in the study. The Scopus was account average 80% of brazilian journals more than WoS. Inside productivity nucleus, identified by the application of Bradford’s Law, the brazilian journals are responsible by 62% of scientific production of area. The dispersion was showed that dynamic between two databases is same. Average 64% of the journals are published by public institutions, irrespective of country origin. The English language has 82% of total journals. Collective Health (28,8%) and Parasitology (23%) are the categories of Capes more identified inside Tropical Medicine area. Scopus database was accounted average 166,8% of citations more than WoS, but WoS has showed FI values around the 58% greatest. In conclusion, WoS and Scopus provide visibility for the Brazilian scientific production in Tropical Medicine, although smaller than countries with research tradition. The indexing has influenced in the visibility of scientific production, of differently ways. / El trabajo se constituye como un estudio comparativo entre dos bases de datos multidisciplinares internacionales. Tiene como objetivo analisar la producción cientifica brasileña en Medicina Tropical, en las bases de datos Web of Science y Scopus en el día 31 de julio de 2013. La metodología es cuantitativa, con abordaje bibliometrica. La colecta de los datos fue hecha buscándo resultados de la producción cientifica brasileña en Medicina Tropical. Entre los resultados, sobre la cobertura, Scopus presentó una media de 12,5% de artículos y 11,2% de publicaciones que la Web of Science. Alrededor de 83% de las publicaciones son las mismas que las dos bases de datos, y la mayoría de la producción científica del estudio se concentra en estas. Scopus ha obtenido 27% más citas que WoS, sin embargo ellas hajan sido superiores sólamente en la segunda mitad del período. Los artículos en inglés superan en 80% en las dos bases de datos, los idiomas portugués y español tienen porcentajes mucho menores, debido al multilinguismo de algunos artículos. El predomínio de publicaciones de origen estadunidense (39%), inglesa (26,5%) y holandesa (9,1%) es evidénte en el estudio. Scopus tiene más de 80% de las publicaciones brasileñas que WoS. En el núcleo de productividad, obtenido a través de la aplicación de la Ley de Bradford, las publicaciones brasileñas son responsables por 62% de la producción cientifica del área. La dispersión observada ha mostrado que la dinámica entre las dos bases de datos es practicamente idéntica. Aproximadamente 64% de las publicaciones son editadas por instituciones públicas, independiente del país de origen. El inglés constituye 82% del idioma de las publicaciones. Salud Pública (28,8%) y Parasitología (23%), fueron las categorías más identificadas en el área de Medicina Tropical según la Capes. Considerase que Web of Science y Scopus han proporcionado visibilidad a la producción cientifica brasileña en Medicina Tropical, sin embargo esta es menor que la de los países con tradición en investigación cientifica. La indización ha influenciado la visibilidad de la producción cientifica, de formas diferentes.

Analisa a produção científica brasileira em Medicina Tropical nas bases de dados Web of Science e Scopus. Trata-se de um estudo quantitativo com abordagem bibliométrica, cuja coleta foi feita nas bases Web of Science e Scopus, no dia 31 de julho de 2013, buscando-se resultados da produção científica brasileira em Medicina Tropical. Os resultados mostram que a Scopus apresentou uma média de 12,5% de artigos e 11,2% de periódicos a mais do que a Web of Science. Cerca de 83,6% dos periódicos são os mesmos nas duas bases de dados. Grande parte da produção científica de cada uma está concentrada nesses. A Scopus obteve 27% de citações a mais do que a WoS, embora elas tenham sido superiores apenas na segunda metade do período. O idioma inglês registrou cerca 80% das ocorrências nas duas bases de dados, e os idiomas português e espanhol aparecem em percentuais muito menores, em função do multilinguismo de alguns artigos. A predominância dos periódicos de origem estadunidense (39,3%), inglesa (26,5%) e holandesa (9,1%) fica evidente na pesquisa. A Scopus contabiliza 80% de periódicos brasileiros a mais do que a WoS. Dentro do núcleo de produtividade, localizado pela aplicação da Lei de Bradford, os periódicos brasileiros são responsáveis por 62% da produção científica da área. A dispersão verificada mostrou que a dinâmica entre as duas bases é praticamente idêntica. Cerca de 64% dos periódicos são publicados por instituições públicas, independente do país de origem. Os periódicos em inglês representam 82% do total. Saúde Coletiva (28,8%) e Parasitologia (23%) foram as categorias da Capes mais identificadas dentro da Medicina Tropical. A Scopus contabilizou cerca de 166,8% citações a mais que a WoS, mas a WoS apresenta valores de FI em torno de 58% maiores. Conclui-se que tanto a WoS como a Scopus proporcionam visibilidade à produção científica brasileira em Medicina Tropical, embora esta seja menor do que a de países com tradição de pesquisa. A indexação influencia a visibilidade da produção científica de diferentes formas. / This research work analyzes the brazilian scientific production of Tropical Medicine in the databases Web of Science and Scopus. The research work employed quantitative methods with bibliometric approach. The collection was made in Web of Science and Scopus, on july 31 of 2013, looking for results about the brazilian scientific production in Tropical Medicine. Regarding coverage, Scopus showed an average of 12,5% of articles and 11,2% of journals more than WoS. Average 83,6% of journals are commons in the two databases, and the most part of scientific production of each is concentrated them. The Scopus has 27% more citations than WoS, however, was superior only in second half time of period. The English language was accounted with average 80% of registers in the two databases, and the Portuguese and Spanish has smallest percentage, only because the multilingual of many articles. The predominance of the American (39,3%), English (26,5%) and Dutch journals (9,1%) was apparent in the study. The Scopus was account average 80% of brazilian journals more than WoS. Inside productivity nucleus, identified by the application of Bradford’s Law, the brazilian journals are responsible by 62% of scientific production of area. The dispersion was showed that dynamic between two databases is same. Average 64% of the journals are published by public institutions, irrespective of country origin. The English language has 82% of total journals. Collective Health (28,8%) and Parasitology (23%) are the categories of Capes more identified inside Tropical Medicine area. Scopus database was accounted average 166,8% of citations more than WoS, but WoS has showed FI values around the 58% greatest. In conclusion, WoS and Scopus provide visibility for the Brazilian scientific production in Tropical Medicine, although smaller than countries with research tradition. The indexing has influenced in the visibility of scientific production, of differently ways. / El trabajo se constituye como un estudio comparativo entre dos bases de datos multidisciplinares internacionales. Tiene como objetivo analisar la producción cientifica brasileña en Medicina Tropical, en las bases de datos Web of Science y Scopus en el día 31 de julio de 2013. La metodología es cuantitativa, con abordaje bibliometrica. La colecta de los datos fue hecha buscándo resultados de la producción cientifica brasileña en Medicina Tropical. Entre los resultados, sobre la cobertura, Scopus presentó una media de 12,5% de artículos y 11,2% de publicaciones que la Web of Science. Alrededor de 83% de las publicaciones son las mismas que las dos bases de datos, y la mayoría de la producción científica del estudio se concentra en estas. Scopus ha obtenido 27% más citas que WoS, sin embargo ellas hajan sido superiores sólamente en la segunda mitad del período. Los artículos en inglés superan en 80% en las dos bases de datos, los idiomas portugués y español tienen porcentajes mucho menores, debido al multilinguismo de algunos artículos. El predomínio de publicaciones de origen estadunidense (39%), inglesa (26,5%) y holandesa (9,1%) es evidénte en el estudio. Scopus tiene más de 80% de las publicaciones brasileñas que WoS. En el núcleo de productividad, obtenido a través de la aplicación de la Ley de Bradford, las publicaciones brasileñas son responsables por 62% de la producción cientifica del área. La dispersión observada ha mostrado que la dinámica entre las dos bases de datos es practicamente idéntica. Aproximadamente 64% de las publicaciones son editadas por instituciones públicas, independiente del país de origen. El inglés constituye 82% del idioma de las publicaciones. Salud Pública (28,8%) y Parasitología (23%), fueron las categorías más identificadas en el área de Medicina Tropical según la Capes. Considerase que Web of Science y Scopus han proporcionado visibilidad a la producción cientifica brasileña en Medicina Tropical, sin embargo esta es menor que la de los países con tradición en investigación cientifica. La indización ha influenciado la visibilidad de la producción cientifica, de formas diferentes.

本研究利用書目計量學與引用文獻分析法分析引用1998年至2008年資訊科學重要期刊之特性。四種代表性期刊分別為Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology、Information Processing and Management、Journal of Information Science以及Journal of Documentation，研究樣本取自WOS資料庫，共計9579篇書目資料。希冀藉由分析探討引用資訊科學文獻之分佈現象與主題範疇，以觀察其他學科與資訊科學學科的互動關係。 本研究結果歸納如下：(1)資訊科學期刊被引用文獻篇數數量隨年代增長。(2)研究型文章為引用資訊科學期刊文獻最主要的資料類型。(3)本研究不完全符合布萊德福與布萊德福-齊夫定律，但可經由布萊德福-齊夫定律圖解，觀察出核心期刊有七種，核心期刊主題以圖書館學與資訊科學為主。 (4)引用資訊科學期刊文獻之學科大類分佈情況，以引用圖書館學門以及科學類為主，JOD是圖書館學門重要的參考期刊。(5)期刊及圖書主題分佈以被圖書資訊學主題和資訊檢索引用最多。(6)高被引用文獻以JASIST所佔比例最多，顯示JASIST是高生產力與高品質兼具的期刊，是資訊科學最重要且最受關注的文獻來源。(7)高被引主題以全球資訊網最多，其次為線上資訊檢索以及搜尋。(8)高被引作者共21位，目前皆任職於學校機構，以從事資訊科學、資訊研究領域為主，研究主題則是資訊檢索、資訊計量學等為多。這21位核心作者可以說是目前資訊科學界的核心領導作者。 本研究結果可應用於館藏發展與管理之參考，界定重要的期刊與圖書文獻來源，有助於圖書館或相關研究單位規劃、建立完整的資訊科學研究架構，以支援研究。同時，可將本研究之分析應用於資訊科學領域研究者，提供投稿之參考、了解目前研究主流以及未來的發展趨勢等，並可提供於資訊科學期刊編輯者，讓其了解該期刊之表現，適時調整，作為期刊長期追蹤的參考。 / Through bibliometric approach and citation analysis, this study analyzed the related disciplines and subjects of literature citing the important Information Science journals during 1998 to 2008. The four leading Information Science journals are Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Information Processing and Management, Journal of Information Science, and Journal of Documentation. A total of 9579 bibliographic data were from WOS database. Results show that：(1) The cited times of Information Science journals increased steadily. (2) Journal article is the main documentation type citing Information Science journals. (3)The distribution of literature citing Information Science journals does not exactly fit Bradford’s Law and Bradford-Zipf Law. However, by observation on Bradford-Zipf Law graph, there are seven core journals. The chief fields of core journals are Library Science & Information Science, and Information Science. (4) Primary disciplines of literature citing Information Science journals are Library Science & Information Science, and Science. JOD is the important reference journal in Library Science & Information Science discipline. (5) The subjects of journals and books highly citing Information Science journals are Library Science & Information Science, and Information Retrieval. (6) JASIST is highly cited, showing that it is both a high productivity and high quality journal. (7) The highly cited subject is World Wide Web, and followed by information retrieval and search. (8) The highly cited authors, who mainly serve in college and most of whom hold the post in the related Information Retrieval and Information Study departments, defined in this study amount to 21. Most of them specialize in information retrieval and informetrics. Finally, the results of this study can be applied to collection development and management, and identify the core journal and books. It assists libraries or information centers in planning and establishing complete research framework on Information Science.

本研究試圖從研究資訊社會之期刊文獻進行觀察，借此瞭解資訊社會相關議題研究與各學科領域之間的關係，並得知資訊社會對各領域發展的影響以及深入瞭解資訊社會的研究內涵和未來發展趨勢。故針對書目資料庫中的出版頻率、出版語言、期刊出版國別、期刊來源、被引次數、學科主題類別和文獻類型欄位，進行各項書目資料的數據分析。 　　本研究以書目計量學的方法分析1963年至2011年間，資訊社會期刊文獻之特性，借此瞭解資訊社會相關研究的學科主題範疇及其未來發展趨勢。研究樣本取自WOK所涵蓋的SCIE、SSCI與A&HCI三大資料庫，針對書目資料進行期刊文獻的分佈分析，以界定出資訊社會文獻之核心期刊，並應用高生產力期刊、高被引用期刊、影響係數與被JCR收錄的狀況，深入了解這些核心期刊之學科主題範疇與驗證核心期刊之品質。透過對資訊社會文獻之學科主題分佈狀況及變化分析，藉此瞭解資訊社會之相關研究為何種學科以及哪些學科受資訊社會影響最深。最後，整合分析與判斷資訊社會相關研究議題之研究領域與發展趨勢。 　　研究結果歸納如下：（一）資訊社會之文獻分佈相當分散，但仍有其核心期刊。（二）資訊社會期刊文獻分佈大致符合布萊德福定律，但與布萊德福-齊夫定律曲線並不完全吻合。（三）核心期刊與前十名核心期刊的文獻類型皆以期刊文章為主。（四）核心期刊的學科主題分類以資訊科學與圖書館學為主。（五）核心區之期刊品質值得信任。（六）資訊科學與圖書館學是探討資訊社會文獻最主要的學科主題。（七）資訊社會文獻正處於蓬勃發展階段。（八）教育與教育研究、經濟學、管理學這三個學科主題，未來將會成為探討資訊社會相關研究最多的學科主題。（九）資訊社會文獻之出版國別以英國居首，出版語言以英文為主。 　　本研究結果可讓資訊社會相關研究人員瞭解過去、目前與未來探討資訊社會議題的學科領域，以供他們在資訊充裕的大海中挑選出更適合、更熱門、更具影響力的期刊與文獻。同時，亦可作為圖書館的館藏發展與管理之參考。 / The purpose of this research is to find out the relationship between the discussions of the Information Societies within various disciplines, development of the information society, the research content of the Information Society and its future trends. We adopt the frequencies of the publication, publication languages, journal countries of publications, journal sources, time-cited, disciplines of subject categories and document type field from the bibliographic database as analyst component. 　　This study analyzes the characteristics of Information Society literatures from 1963 to 2011 by a Bibliometric Approach. These data are retrieved from SCIE, SSCI and A&HCI database which were covered by WOK. This research focuses on the distribution analysis of the journal literatures in order to define the core journals of this field. In addition, include the highly productive journals, cited journal, impact factor and the collected status by JCR to verify the quality of the previous stated core journals. Through analyzing the distributions and changes of the disciplines, we have a full screen on what subjects the information society related and what affections influenced by these subjects areas. Through integration and determination, this study reveals the future trends of the Information Society. 　　The results of the research as follow: (1) The distribution of information society is quite dispersed, but core journals still available. (2) The distribution of the Information Society journals are roughly fits Bradford Law, but not fully consistent with Bradford-Zipf’s S-shaped curve. (3) The document type covered most by the core journal and top ten core journals are articles (4) Information Science and Library Science is the main discipline in core journal area. (5) The qualities of the core journals are reliable. (6) Information Science and Library Science covered most of the disciplines in the literatures of information society. (7) Information Society’s literatures are under a flourishing development (8) Education and Educational research, Economics and Management will cover most of the disciplines to explore the information society. (9) UK is the major countries of information society publication and English is the most often used language. 　　Finally, the results of this research provide a full screen on researchers in order to understand the past, current and future of the information society issues, to pick out more suitable, more popular and more influential journals and literatures. Furthermore, this study can be used as reference to the library's collection development and management.

本研究旨在應用書目計量學方法分析1900年至2007年間，輸送現象文獻之特性，藉以探討輸送現象之發展情形。研究樣本取自SCIE資料庫，計104854篇相關書目資料。期望本研究結果能提供輸送現象學界與圖書館或資料單位參考，協助其做有效之館藏規劃及期刊資訊服務。 本研究結果歸納如下：(1)輸送現象文獻成長狀況目前呈穩定成長狀態，1965年後之文獻累積成長曲線符合指數成長。(2)輸送現象文獻之主要出版國為美國、英國、荷蘭、瑞士、德國、日本等國。台灣文獻出版量之排名則為第22名。(3)英文為輸送現象文獻最重要之寫作語文，德文、法文、俄文、日文依序於後。(4)輸送現象文獻之出版類型以期刊文章為主，佔總文獻之91.37%。(5)本研究不符合布萊德福定律，但符合布萊德福-齊夫定律曲線，求得之核心期刊有八種，分別為美國及英國所出版。(6)以高被引期刊、影響係數以及被資料庫收錄情況等方式，驗證布萊德福分區法所求之核心期刊品質，發現核心期刊品質值得信任。(7)以洛卡定律最小平方法求得n值為-2.5141(平等法)、-2.5389(第一作者法)，c值為0.7488(平等法)、0.7546(第一作者法)，進一步利用K-S檢定法加以檢定，證明洛卡定律並不適用於本研究。(8)本研究之作者生產力分佈不符合普萊斯平方根定律與80/20定律。(9)印度理工學院為輸送現象文獻重要的生產機構；台灣則為國立成功大學。總生產力台灣排名世界第22。(10)美國、法國、德國、日本、俄羅斯為相關研究機構最多的國家；英國、美國、荷蘭、瑞士則為最具吸收他國研究成果的學術傳播環境。 本研究最後依據研究發現之結果，提出以下建議：(1)本研究之各項研究成果，可作為圖書資訊界館藏發展與管理之參考。(2)輸送現象產業界應加強對於研究的重視。(3)輸送現象相關研究人員，應具備英文、德文、法文、俄文等外語能力。(4)資料庫公司應提升書目資料精確性，以利研究。(5)定期對輸送現象文獻進行分析，有助於輸送現象相關研究人員瞭解該領域之研究發展。 / This study analyzed the characteristics of transport phenomenon literature during 1900-2007 by a bibliometric approach. A total of 104854 bibliographic data were retrieved from SCIE database. The results attempt to have a better understanding of the developments and trends on transport phenomenon reaserch. The results of the present study reveal that: (1) Transport Phenomenon literature increased steadily. The growth curve during 1965-2007 fits exponential growth. (2)USA, UK, Netherlands, Switzerland, Germany and Japan are the major countries of Transport Phenomenon publications. Taiwan ranked 22. (3)English is the most often used language. German ranked number two and the third most often used language is French. (4)Journal article is the major of publication and accounted for 91.37% of total publication. (5)The journal article distribution doesn't fit Bradford Law. However, it fits the typical Bradford-Zipf’s S-shaped curve. (6)Core journals are found to be associated with highly cited times and high impact factor. (7)For only counting first author, Lotka’s law is found to be inapplicable to author productivity distribution with n=-2.5389, c=0.7488. The K-S test also explored the invalidity of observed distribution at 0.01 level of significance. (8) Author productivity distribution also does’t fit Price Square Root Law and 80/20 Rule. (9) Indian Institute of Technology is the most important institute of Transport Phenomenon publications. In Taiwan, National Cheng Kung University published the most Transport Phenomenon literature and it ranked 22. (10)USA, French, Germany, Japan and Russia have the most relevant research institutions than other countries.

本研究旨在應用書目計量學方法分析1900年至2013年間，女性研究文獻之特性，藉以探討女性研究之發展情形。研究樣本取自WOS資料庫（包含三個子資料庫SSCI、SCIE和A&HCI），計16,852篇相關書目資料。期望本研究結果能提供女性研究學界與圖書館或資料單位參考，協助其做有效之館藏規劃及期刊資訊服務。 本研究結果歸納如下：(1) 女性研究文獻篇數與年代是成正比的狀況，較符合指數成長模式。進一步以指數迴歸預測成長篇數的話，顯示女性研究文獻有成長減緩的趨勢。(2)女性研究文獻之主要出版國為美國、英國、加拿大、荷蘭、德國等國。 (3)英文為女性研究文獻最重要之寫作語文。(4)女性研究文獻之出版類型以期刊文章為主，佔總文獻之62.86%。(5)女性研究廣泛應用於各學科，主題領域前五名分別為心理學相關、女性研究（狹義）、歷史、文學及教育與教育研究。 (6) 女性研究之文獻分布相當分散，但仍有其核心期刊。(7)本研究符合布萊德福定律，但不符合布萊德福-齊夫定律曲線。(8) 高生產力期刊與高被引期刊的主題明顯分散。 (10) 洛卡定律、普萊斯平方根定律、80/20 定律不適用於本研究。(11) 研究機構的生產力分散，大學校院為主要研究機構，機構下的系所分布以心理學系所最多。(12) 美國與英國為相關研究機構最多的國家，也是延攬他國學術成果的最多的國家。 本研究最後依據研究發現之結果，提出以下建議：(1)本研究之各項研究成果，可作為圖書資訊界館藏發展與管理之參考。(2)女性研究相關研究人員，應具備跨主題領域的合作研究能力且法文、德文、西班牙文等外語能力。(4)資料庫公司應提升書目資料精確性，以利研究。(5)定期對女性研究文獻進行分析，有助於女性研究相關研究人員瞭解該領域之研究發展。 / The purpose of the study is to understand the contents, relations, development, and trends between various disciplines of “women’s studies.” This study analyzes the characteristics of women’s studies literature during 1900-2013 by bibliometric approach, collecting analytical components such as the frequencies of the publication, publication languages, countries of publications, journal sources, cited times, disciplines of subject categories and document type from three major sub-databases of Web of Science services: SCIE, SSCI, and A&HCI. A total of 16,852 bibliographic records were retrieved from the databases. The results of the present study are as follows. (1) The growth pattern of women’s studies literature during 1900-2013 generally fits exponential growth, but the growth has been slowed down since 2011. (2) United States, United Kingdom, Canada, Netherlands and Germany are five major countries of women’s studies publications. (3) English is the most often used language. (4) Journal articles are the major type of women’s studies publications, accounting for 62.86% of total publications. (5) Women’s studies are scattered in multiple disciplines, with five subjects significantly contributing to the literature count: psychology and its related disciplines, women’s studies (in narrow definition), history, literature, and education and educational research. (6) Despite of the scattered distribution of women’s studies literature, core journals of women’s studies still can be identified. (7)The distribution of journal articles fits Bradford Law, but it does not fit the typical Bradford-Zipf’s S-shaped curve. (8) The journal subjects of highly productive journals and highly cited journals vary. (9) Author distribution is counted by single authorship and collaborative authorship; the results show that author distribution neither fits Lotka’s law, Square Root Law or 80/20 Rule. (10) Academic institutions are major producers of women’s studies, with departments in universities and colleges concerning psychology and its related disciplines being the main contributors to the publications. (11) Most productive research institutions are distributed over United States, United Kingdom, Canada, Australia and Turkey. The findings of the study may provide better understanding of the past, current and future of women’s studies, and serve as references to identify more suitable, popular and influential journals and literature for both research purposes and library collection development and management.