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.
Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:CHENGCHI/G0093155008 |
Creators | 陳薇竹, Chen, Wei-Chu |
Publisher | 國立政治大學 |
Source Sets | National Chengchi University Libraries |
Language | 中文 |
Detected Language | English |
Type | text |
Rights | Copyright © nccu library on behalf of the copyright holders |
Page generated in 0.0063 seconds