請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件：
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/23500完整後設資料紀錄
| DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
|---|---|---|
| dc.contributor.advisor | 吳玲玲 | |
| dc.contributor.author | Chao-Jyun Chen | en |
| dc.contributor.author | 陳晁儁 | zh_TW |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2021-06-08T05:02:32Z | - |
| dc.date.copyright | 2010-08-20 | |
| dc.date.issued | 2010 | |
| dc.date.submitted | 2010-08-19 | |
| dc.identifier.citation | Alba, J., Lynch, J., Weitz, B., Janiszewski, C., Lutz, R., Sawyer, A., et al. (1997). Interactive home shopping: Consumer, retailer, and manufacturer incentives to participate in electronic marketplaces. Journal of Marketing, 61(3), 38-53.
Alexander, E. (1992). The Uncitedness Index. Surgical Neurology, 37(1), 69-70. Allison, P. D. (1980). Inequality and Scientific Productivity. Social Studies of Science, 10(2), 163-179. Allison, P. D., & Stewart, J. A. (1974). Productivity Differences among Scientists - Evidence for Accumulative Advantage. American Sociological Review, 39(4), 596-606. Anderson, C. (2006). The long tail : why the future of business is selling less of more (1st ed.). New York: Hyperion. Arjo, K., & Hendrik, P. v. D. (2001). Attention and the Art of Scientific Publishing: Tinbergen Institute. Bakos, J. Y. (1997). Reducing buyer search costs: Implications for electronic marketplaces. Management Science, 43(12), 1676-1692. Bane, A. F. Business periodicals ondisc: How full-text availability affects the library. Computers in Libraries, 15(5), 54. Biglu, M. H. (2008). The influence of references per paper in the SCI to Impact Factors and the Matthew Effect. Scientometrics, 74(3), 453-470. Bradford, S. C. (1948). Documentation. London,: C. Lockwood. Bridges, A. E., & Clement, R. T. (1997). Crossing the threshold of rocket mail: E-mail use by US humanities faculty. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 23(2), 109-117. Brynjolfsson, E., Hu, Y., & Smith, M. D. (2006). From niches to riches: Anatomy of the long tail. Mit Sloan Management Review, 47(4), 67-+. Butler, R. J. (2007). JRI, JF, and the Internet: Coauthors, new authors., and empirical research. Journal of Risk and Insurance, 74(3), 713-737. Cole, J. R., & Cole, S. (1972). The ortega hypothesis. [Book Chapter]. Science 178(4059), 368-375 (1972 October 27). 25 Ref. De Groote, S. L., & Dorsch, J. L. (2001). Online journals: impact on print journal usage. Bulletin of the Medical Library Association, 89(4), 372-378. Evans, J. A. (2008). Electronic Publication and the Narrowing of Science and Scholarship. Science, 321(5887), 395-399. Fischer, F., & Mandl, H. (2005). Knowledge convergence in computer-supported collaborative learning: The role of external representation tools. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 14(3), 405-441. Frank, R. H., & Cook, P. J. (1995). The winner-take-all society : how more and more Americans compete for ever fewer and bigger prizes, encouraging economic waste, income inequality, and an impoverished cultural life. New York: Free Press. Galliers, R. D., & Meadows, M. (2003). A Discipline Divided: Globalization and Parochialism in Information Systems Research. Communications of AIS, 2003(11), 108-116. Garfield, E. (1972). Citation Analysis as a Tool in Journal Evaluation - Journals Can Be Ranked by Frequency and Impact of Citations for Science Policy Studies. Science, 178(4060), 471-+. Garfield, E. (1996). The significant scientific literature appears in a small core of journals. Scientist, 10(17), 13-&. Garfield, E. (1998). I had a dream ... about uncitedness. Scientist, 12(14), 10-10. Ghosh, J. S. (1975). Uncitedness of articles in nature, a multidisciplinary scientific journal. Information Processing & Management, 11(5-7), 165-169. Hersh, W. R., & Rindfleisch, T. C. (2000). Electronic publishing of scholarly communication in the biomedical sciences. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 7(3), 324-325. 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), 16569-16572. Introna, L. D. (2003). Disciplining Information Systems: Truth and its regimes. European Journal of Information Systems, 12(3), 235-240. Introna, L. D., & Nissenbaum, H. (2000). Shaping the Web: Why the politics of search engines matters. Information Society, 16(3), 169-185. Kaminer, N., & Braunstein, Y. M. (1998). Bibliometric analysis of the impact of Internet use on scholarly productivity. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 49(8), 720-730. Lariviere, V., Archambault, E., & Gingras, Y. (2008). Long-term variations in the aging of scientific literature: From exponential growth to steady-state science (1900-2004). Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(2), 288-296. Lariviere, V., Gingras, Y., & Archambault, E. (2009). The Decline in the Concentration of Citations, 1900-2007. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60(4), 858-862. Lawrence, S. (2001). Free online availability substantially increases a paper's impact. Nature, 411(6837), 521-521. Loebbecke, C. (2007). RESEARCH IMPORTANCE IN THE INFORMATION SYSTEMS FIELD:ACITATION ANALYSIS. Twenty Eighth International Conference on Information Systems. Lotka, A. J. (1926). The frequency distribution of scientific productivity. Journal of the Washington Academy of Science. Macroberts, M. H., & Macroberts, B. R. (1987). Testing the Ortega Hypothesis - Facts and Artifacts. Scientometrics, 12(5-6), 293-295. Merton, R. K. (1968). The Matthew Effect in Science: The reward and communication systems of science are considered. Science, 159(3810), 56-63. Merton, R. K. (1973). The sociology of science : theoretical and empirical investigations. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Montgomery, C. H., & Sparks, J. L. (2000). The Transition to an Electronic Journal Collection: Managing the Organizational Changes. Serials Review, 26(3), 4. Morse, D. H., & Clintworth, W. A. Comparing patterns of print and electronic journal use in an academic health science library. Issues in Science & Technology Librarianship(28). Ng, K. H. (2009). Exploring new frontiers of electronic publishing in biomedical science. Singapore Medical Journal, 50(3), 230-234. Perkel, J. M. (2005). The future of citation analysis. Scientist, 19(20), 24-25. Polites, G. L., & Watson, R. T. (2009). Using Social Network Analysis to Analyze Relationships Among IS Journals. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 10(8), 595-636. Rainer, R. K., & Miller, M. D. (2005). Examining differences across journal rankings. Communications of the Acm, 48(2), 91-94. Rosen, S. (1981). The Economics of Superstars. American Economic Review, 71(5), 845-858. Rousseau, R. (1992). Concentration and Diversity of Availability and Use in Information-Systems - a Positive Reinforcement Model. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 43(5), 391-395. Rupp-Serrano, K., Robbins, S., & Cain, D. (2002). Canceling print serials in favor of electronic: criteria for decision making. Library Collections, Acquisitions, & Technical Services, 26(4), 369. Schwartz, C. A. (1997). The rise and fall of uncitedness. College & Research Libraries, 58(1), 19-29. Simon, H. A. (1955). On a Class of Skew Distribution Functions. Biometrika, 42(3-4), 425-440. Solla Price, D. d. (1976). A General Theory of Bibliometric and Other Cumulative Advantage Processes. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 27(5/6), 292-306. Sooryamoorthy, R. (2009). Collaboration and publication: How collaborative are scientists in South Africa? Scientometrics, 80(2), 419-439. Spencer, J. S., & Millson-Martula, C. (2006). Serials Cancellations in College and Small University Libraries: The National Scene. Serials Librarian, 49(4), 135-155. Stegmann, J., & Grohmann, G. (2001). Citation rates, knowledge export and international visibility of dermatology journals listed and not listed in the Journal Citation Reports. Scientometrics, 50(3), 483-502. Szava-Kovats, E. (2004). The false 'Ortega Hypothesis': a literature science case study. Journal of Information Science, 30(6), 496-508. Tenopir, C., & Graham, C. (2001). Electronic journals: how user behaviour is changing. [Conference Paper]. Online Information 2001 Proceedings, 175-181. van Dalen, H. P., & Klamer, A. (2005). Is science a case of wasteful competition? Kyklos, 58(3), 395-414. Vaughan, K. T. L. (2003). Changing use patterns of print journals in the digital age: Impacts of electronic equivalents on print chemistry journal use. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 54(12), 1149-1152. Walstrom, K. A., & Hardgrave, B. C. (2001). Forums for information systems scholars: III. Information & Management, 39(2), 117-124. Walstrom, K. A., Hardgrave, B. C., & Wilson, R. L. (1995). Forums for Management-Information-Systems Scholars. Communications of the Acm, 38(3), 93-107. Wormell, I. (1998). Informetric analysis of the international impact of scientific journals: How 'international' are the international journals? Journal of Documentation, 54(5), 584-605. Yang, S., Ma, F., Song, Y., & Qiu, J. (2010). A longitudinal analysis of citation distribution breadth for Chinese scholars. [10.1007/s11192-010-0245-1]. Scientometrics. Zhao, D. Z., & Logan, E. (2002). Citation analysis using scientific publications on the Web as data source: A case study in the XML research area. Scientometrics, 54(3), 449-472. Zuckerman, H. (1977). Scientific elite : Nobel laureates in the United States. New York: Free Press. | |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/23500 | - |
| dc.description.abstract | 近年來，網際網路的興起和資訊科技的進步改變了學者的資訊搜尋行為，學者瀏覽期刊文章的行為，逐漸轉變為關鍵字搜尋和超連結點選。學者搜尋相關文獻的行為改變之後，學術文章的被引集中程度也跟著改變。而網際網路對學術文章被引集中程度的影響有兩種不同的理論解釋：贏者全拿推測科技的進步會讓文章被引次數的差距變大，高被引文章的會不斷被引用，文章被引的集中程度上升。而長尾理論則推測網路的力量會讓學者搜尋文章的範圍變大，文章被引的集中程度下降。本研究選擇資管領域的文章，利用多種指標分析網路興起前後的文章被引集中程度，並透過觀察逐年的文章被引集中程度瞭解細微變化和整體趨勢。研究結果顯示，文章被引集中程度逐年下降，且網路興起後的文章被引集中程度下降較大。 | zh_TW |
| dc.description.abstract | In recent years, the advance of information technology and Internet changed the information seeking behavior of scholars. Browsing within journals was replaced by searching and online-following as a way to locate related articles. As soon as the information seeking habit changed, citation concentration of articles changed as well. There are two different theories for the Internet’s impact on citation concentration. Winner-takes-all predicts the advance of IT will enlarge the gap of citation received between highly cited articles and other articles. Highly cited articles are more likely to be cited again. The citation distribution becomes more concentrated. On the other hand, Long Tail predicts Internet would broaden the search scope of articles. The citation concentration would be less concentrated. This study use many indexes to analysis citation concentration of IS field articles. We observe the trend of citation concentration overtime to detect tiny changes. The research results show that citation concentration is less concentrated. The decline of citation concentration is more obvious in the post-web period. | en |
| dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2021-06-08T05:02:32Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 ntu-99-R97725026-1.pdf: 1338124 bytes, checksum: b8ff78649d7895bc391d8371e9c2ea82 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2010 | en |
| dc.description.tableofcontents | 1 Introduction 1
1.1 Background 1 1.2 Motivation 2 2 Literature Review 5 2.1 Development of Online Availability 5 2.2 Concentration of Scientific Literature 6 2.3 Winner-takes-all & the Long Tail 9 3 Research Method 12 3.1 Data Source 12 3.2 Define IS Journal 13 3.3 Analysis of the Source Articles 17 3.3.1 Citation Concentration 17 3.3.2 Two analysis approaches 19 3.4 Analysis of the Citing-Articles 20 3.4.1 Sampling 20 3.4.2 Age of Citation 21 3.4.3 Knowledge Export 22 4 Results 25 4.1 Background Data 25 4.2 Results of the Source Articles 30 4.2.1 Approach 1 –Overall Difference between two periods 30 4.2.2 Approach 2 –Trend 34 4.3 Results of the Citing-Articles 44 4.3.1 Age of citation 44 4.3.2 Knowledge Export 47 4.4 Supplement-Percentage of lowly cited articles 52 5 Conclusion 54 5.1 Discussion 54 5.2 Limitations 59 5.3 Further research 60 References 62 Appendix 66 | |
| dc.language.iso | en | |
| dc.subject | 被引分析 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 長尾理論 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 贏者全拿 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 被引集中度 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | winner-takes-all | en |
| dc.subject | citation analysis | en |
| dc.subject | citation concentration | en |
| dc.subject | Long Tail | en |
| dc.title | 線上可獲性對資管領域文章被引集中度的影響 | zh_TW |
| dc.title | Examining the Impact of Online Availability on Information Systems Articles’ Citation Concentration | en |
| dc.type | Thesis | |
| dc.date.schoolyear | 98-2 | |
| dc.description.degree | 碩士 | |
| dc.contributor.coadvisor | 黃慕萱 | |
| dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 唐牧群 | |
| dc.subject.keyword | 長尾理論,贏者全拿,被引集中度,被引分析, | zh_TW |
| dc.subject.keyword | Long Tail,winner-takes-all,citation concentration,citation analysis, | en |
| dc.relation.page | 71 | |
| dc.rights.note | 未授權 | |
| dc.date.accepted | 2010-08-19 | |
| dc.contributor.author-college | 管理學院 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.author-dept | 資訊管理學研究所 | zh_TW |
| 顯示於系所單位： | 資訊管理學系 | |
文件中的檔案：
| 檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| ntu-99-1.pdf 未授權公開取用 | 1.31 MB | Adobe PDF |
系統中的文件，除了特別指名其著作權條款之外，均受到著作權保護，並且保留所有的權利。