請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/23931完整後設資料紀錄
| DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
|---|---|---|
| dc.contributor.advisor | 黃慕萱 | |
| dc.contributor.author | Fu-Jung Chen | en |
| dc.contributor.author | 陳馥蓉 | zh_TW |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2021-06-08T05:12:41Z | - |
| dc.date.copyright | 2011-08-10 | |
| dc.date.issued | 2011 | |
| dc.date.submitted | 2011-08-02 | |
| dc.identifier.citation | 中華民國圖書館學會(民100)。網路資源。民100年1月20日,取自:http://www.lac.org.tw/
方靜如(民91)。我國大學圖書館網站網頁連結引用之研究。未出版之碩士論文,國立政治大學圖書資訊研究所,臺北市。 王梅玲(民94年)。英美與亞太地區圖書資訊學教育。臺北市:文華圖書館管理。 林利真(民96)。我國電機電子領域期刊文章合著之研究。未出版之碩士論文,國立臺灣大學圖書資訊學研究所,臺北市。 袁大鈺(民98)。跨領域學術社群之智識網絡結構初探:以臺灣科技與社會研究為例。未出版之碩士論文,國立臺灣大學圖書資訊學研究所,臺北市。 張郁蔚(民98)。以直接引用、書目耦合及共同作者探討圖書資訊學跨學科之變遷。未出版之碩士論文,國立臺灣大學圖書資訊學研究所,臺北市。 曹超(民98)。2002~2007年國外對搜尋引擎檢索結果研究綜述。圖書情報知識,1,90-96。 曾元顯(民99,5月)。世界大學網路排名-分析與應用。評鑑雙月刊,25,42-46。 黃元鶴(民97,3月)。運用書目計量學分析兩岸三地創新系統的知識生產、流動與擴散:以資料探勘領域為例。大學圖書館,12(1),72-95。 黃慕萱(民83)。引用文獻初探。在當代圖書館事業論集:慶祝王振鵠教授七秩榮慶論文集(頁807-816)。臺北市:正中。 黃慕萱、何蕙菩(民96)。圖書資訊學知識來源與知識擴散學科之研究。圖書資訊學刊,5(1/2),1-30。 寧波大學圖書館。世界主要圖書館學情報學院系名錄。民100年1月21日,取自:http://lib.nbu.edu.cn/info/nav/libinfo/schools.htm#de 劉軍(民98)。整體網分析講義:UCINET軟件實用指南。上海:格致出版社。 潘燕桃、程煥文(民93)。世界圖書館學教育進展。北京:北京圖書館。 蔡明月(民92)。資訊計量學與文獻特性。臺北市:編輯館。 Allen, T. J., & Cohen, S. I. (1969). Information Flow in Research and Development Laboratories. Administrative Science Quarterly,14(1), 12-19. Anselin, L. (1995). Local indicators of spatial association-LISA. Geographical analysis, 27(2), 93-115. Barabasi, A.-L. (2003). Linked : how everything is connected to everything else and what it means for business, science, and everyday life. New York: Plume. Bjorneborn L., & Ingwersen P. (2004). Toward a basic framework for webometrics. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 55(14), 1216-1227. Bjorneborn, L. (2004). Small-world link structures across an academic web space : a library and information science approach. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Royal School of Library and Information Science, Denmark-Copenhagen. Borgman, C. L. (1990). Scholarly communication and bibliometrics. Newbury Park: Sage Publications. Borner, K., Penumarthy, S., Meiss, M., & Ke, W. (2006). Mapping the diffusion of scholarly knowledge among major US research institutions. Scientometrics, 68(3), 415-426. Campbell, D. (1969). Ethnocentrism of disciplines and the fish-scale model of omniscience. Interdisciplinary relationships in the social sciences, 328-348. CCHS-CSIC Cybermetrics Lab (2010). World Universities' ranking on the Web. Retrieved August 8, 2010, from http://www.webometrics.info/ Chen, C., & Hicks, D. (2004). Tracing Knowledge Difusion. Scientometrics, 59(2), 199-211. Crane, D. (1972). Invisible colleges: diffusion of knowledge in scientific communities. Chicago :: University of Chicago Press. Cronin, B., & Pearson, S. (1990). The export of ideas from information science. Journal of information science,16(6), 381-391. EBSCO Publishing (2010). Title Lists: July/August 2010. Retrieved October 12, 2010, from http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/search?vid=1&hid=12&sid=0d88fa43-b2e2-40d3-a248-f3d3a18df4d0%40sessionmgr11 Eden, L., Levitas, E., & Martinez, R. (1997). The production, transfer and spillover of technology: comparing large and small multinationals as technology producers. Small Business Economics, 9(1), 53-66. Elgohary, A. (2008). Arab universities on the web: a webometric study. The Electronic Library, 26(3), 374-386. ESRI (2010). ArcGIS: A Complete Integrated System. Retrieved September 3, 2010, from http://www.esri.com/software/arcgis/index.html Faba-Perez, C., Zapico-Alonso,F., & Guerrero-Bote,V. (2005). Comparative Analysis of Webometric Measurements in Thematic Environments, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 56(8), 779-785. Genest, C., & Thibault, C. (2001). Investigating the concentration within a research community using joint publications and co-authorship via intermediaries. Scientometrics, 51(2), 429-440. Getis, A., & Ord, J. K. (1992). The analysis of spatial association by use of distance statistics. Geographical analysis, 24(3), 189-206. Gladwell, M. (2000). The tipping point : how little things can make a big difference. Boston: Little, Brown. Glanzel, W. (2002). Coauthorship patterns and trends in the sciences (1980-1998): A bibliometric study with implications for database indexing and search strategies. Library Trends, 50(3), 461-473. Goffman, W., & Newill, V. (1964). Generalization of Epidemic Theory: An Application to the Transmission of Ideas. Nature, 204, 225-228. Google Maps. Retrieved March 25, 2011, from http://maps.google.com/ GPS Visualizer (2011). Geocoder: Convert street addresses to coordinates. Retrieved March 25, 2011, from http://www.gpsvisualizer.com/geocoder/ H.W. Wilson Company (2010). WilsonWeb Journal Directory. Retrieved October 10, 2010, from http://vnweb.hwwilsonweb.com/hww/Journals/searchAction.jhtml?sortBy=ptf&dbSelected=OMNIS,&_requestid=109465 Hagstrom, W. O. (1965). The scientific community. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press. Heffner, A. G. (1981). Funded research, multiple authorship, and subauthorship collaboration in four disciplines. Scientometrics, 3(1), 5-12. Ingwersen, P. (1998). The Calculation of Web Impact Factors, Journal of Documentation, 54(2), 236-243. Jalal, S., Biswas, S., & Mukhopadhyay, P. (2010). Web-based ranking and link analysis of Central Universities in India: A webometric analysis. Information Studies, 16(1), 3-26. Katz, J. (1992). Bibliometric assessment of intranational university-university collaboration. University of Sussex. Katz, J. (1994). Geographical proximity and scientific collaboration. Scientometrics, 31(1), 31-43. Katz, J., & Martin, B. (1997). What is research collaboration? Research Policy, 26, 1-18. Kiss, I., Broom, M., Craze, P., & Rafols, I. (2010). Can epidemic models describe the diffusion of topics across disciplines? Journal of Informetrics, 4(1), 74-82. Kretschmer, H. (2004). Author productivity and geodesic distance in bibliographic co-authorship networks, and visibility on the Web. Scientometrics, 60(3), 409-420. Kuhn, T. S. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Kuhn, T. S. (1977). The essential tension : selected studies in scientific tradition and change. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Lancaster, F. W., & Smith, L. C. (1979). Science, Scholarship and the Communication of Knowledge. Library Trends, 27(3), 367-388. Lewison, G., Rippon, I., & Wooding, S. (2005). Tracking knowledge diffusion through citations. Research Evaluation, 14(1), 5-14. Merton, R.K. (1942). Science and technology in a democratic order. Journal of Legal and Political Sociology, 1, 115–126. Merton, R.K. (1957). Priorities in scientific discovery: a chapter in the sociology of science. American Sociological Review, 22, 635–659 Meyer, T., & Spencer, J. (1996). A citation analysis study of Library Science: Who cites librarians? College & Research Libraries, 57(1), 23-33. Mitchell, A. (2005). The ESRI Guide to GIS Analysis. California: ESRI Press. Moran, P. (1948). The interpretation of statistical maps. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series B (Methodological), 10, 243-251. MyGeoPosition.com. Retrieved March 25, 2011, from http://www.mygeoposition.com/ Newman, M. E. J. (2004). Coauthorship networks and patterns of scientific collaboration. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 101(suppl. 1), 5200-5205. Odda, T. (1979). On properties of a well-known graph or what is your Ramsey number? Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 328, 166-172. Ortega, J. L., & Aguillo, I. F.(2007). Interdisciplinary relationships in the Spanish academic web space: A Webometric study through networks visualization. International Journal of Scientometrics, Informetrics and Bibliometrics, 11(1), paper4. Ortega, J. L., Aguillo, I. F., Cothey, V., & Scharnhorst, A. (2008). Maps of the academic web in the European Higher Education Area — an exploration of visual web indicators. Scientometrics, 74(2), 295-308. Oxford Reference Online (2009) . A Dictionary of Geography. Retrieved May 20, 2010,from http://www.oxfordreference.com/views/GLOBAL.html?authstatuscode=202 Packer, A. L., & Meneghini, R. (2006). Articles with authors affiliated to Brazilian institutions published from 1994 to 2003 with 100 or more citations: I-the weight of international collaboration and the role of the networks. Anais da Academia Brasileira de Ciencias,78(4). Payne N. & Thelwall, M. (2007). A longitudinal study of academic webs: Growth and stabilisation . Scientometrics,71(3). Payne N., & Thelwall, M.(2008). Do academic link types change over time?. Journal of Documentation,64(5). Peritz, B. (1981). Citation Characteristics in Library Science: Some Further Results from a Bibliometric Survey. Library Research, 3(1), 47-65. Pierce, S. (1999). Boundary crossing in research literatures as a means of interdisciplinary information transfer. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 50(3), 271-279. Pravdić, N., & Oluić-Vuković, V. (1986). Dual approach to multiple authorship in the study of collaboration:scientific output relationship. Scientometrics, 10(5), 259-280. Price, D. J. D. S. (1963). Little science, big science (pp. 87-89). New York: Columbia University Press. Pritchard, A. (1969). Statistical bibliography or bibliometrics? Journal of documentation, 25(4), 348-349. ProQuest (2009). LISAguide. Retrieved October 10, 2010, from http://csaweb110v.csa.com/ids70/snippets/bix.php?SID=21f97n5l32qc1p1im6qdkip095&SF=BROWSE_BIX|lisa-set-c|jn Rinia, E., van Leeuwen, T., Bruins, E., van Vuren, H., & van Raan, A. (2002). Measuring knowledge transfer between fields of science. Scientometrics, 54(3), 347-362. Scott, J. (2000). Social network analysis : a handbook (2nd ed.). London: SAGE Publications. Shi, X., Adamic, L. A., Tseng, B. L., & Clarkson, G. S. (2009). The impact of boundary spanning scholarly publications and patents. PloS one, 4(8), e6547. Smith, A. (1999). ANZAC webometrics: exploring Australasian Web structures. In Proceedings of Information Online and On Disc 99: Strategies for the next millennium. Sydney, Australia, 19-21 January 1999. Sydney: ALIA, 159-181. Sorenson, O., & Fleming, L. (2004). Science and the diffusion of knowledge. Research Policy, 33(10), 1615-1634. Steele, T. W., & Stier, J. C. (2000). The impact of interdisciplinary research in the environmental sciences: A forestry case study. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 51(5), 476. T.D. Wilson (2010). World list of schools and departments of information science, information management and related disciplines. Retrieved January 24, 2011, from http://informationr.net/wl/ Tang, R. (2004). Evolution of the interdisciplinary characteristics of information and library science. Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 41(1), 54-63. Thelwall M. (2007). Bibliometrics to Webometrics. journal of Information Science, 34(4), 1–18. Thelwall M., & Smith, A. (2002). Interlinking between Asia-Pacific University Web sites. Scientometrics, 55(3), 363-376. Thelwall, M., & Tang, R. (2003). Disciplinary and linguistic considerations for academic Web linking: An exploratory hyperlink mediated study with Mainland China and Taiwan. Scientometrics, 58(1), 155-181. Thelwall, M., & Zuccala A. (2008). A university-centred European Union link analysis. Scientometrics, 75(3). Thelwall, M., Klitkou, A., Verbeek, A., Stuart, D., & Vincent, C. (2010). Policy-relevant webometrics for individual scientific fields. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 61(7), 1464-1475. Thomson Reuters (2010a). World Journal Citation Reports. Retrieved October 10, 2010, from http://thomsonreuters.com/products_services/science/science_products/a-z/journal_citation_reports?parentKey=591283 Thomson Reuters (2010b). Master Journal List. Retrieved October 10, 2010, from http://science.thomsonreuters.com/mjl/ Ucinet (2010). Overview. Retrieved August 15, 2010, from http://www.analytictech.com/Ucinet/ Urata, H. (1990). Information flows among academic disciplines in Japan. Scientometrics, 18(3), 309-319. US News (2009). Best Library Information Science Programs. Retrieved January 22, 2011, from http://grad-schools.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-graduate-schools/top-library-information-science-programs Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1994). Social network analysis: Methods and applications. New York: Cambridge University Press. Wilkinson, D., Harries, G., Thelwall, M., & Price, L. (2003). Motivations for academic Web site interlinking: Evidence for the Web as a novel source of information on informal scholarly communication. Journal of information science, 29(1), 49. Wong, D. W. S., & Lee, J. (2005). Statistical analysis of geographic information with ArcView GIS and ArcGIS. Hoboken, N.J.: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Yi, K. & Jin, T. (2008). Hyperlink Analysis for the Visibility of Canadian library and information science school Websites. Online Information Review, 32 (3), 325-347. | |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/23931 | - |
| dc.description.abstract | 本研究結合書目計量與網路計量方法,以SSCI之9種圖書資訊領域期刊探討圖書資訊領域近五年(2006-2010)機構之間透過合著、引文顯現的知識擴散現象,並觀察機構於網際網路上的知識與資訊擴散情況。在分析與呈現方式上,本研究運用社會網絡分析與空間分析,分別從社會空間與地理空間討論跨機構的知識與資訊的交流與傳播。
研究結果顯示,在合著方面,跨機構合著為趨勢,2所機構合著為主要型態;合著網絡之核心機構為北卡羅來納大學(University of North Carolina)資訊與圖書館學學校和馬里蘭大學(University of Maryland)資訊研究學院。在引文方面,跨機構引用數逐年遞增,且有頻繁引用特定機構的情況;引文網絡之核心機構為印地安那大學(Indiana University)圖書館與資訊科學學校和北卡羅來納大學資訊與圖書館學學校。在網路連結方面,機構外連數差異懸殊,核心機構為美國國立衛生研究院(National Institutes of Health, NIH)美國國家醫學圖書館、美國國會圖書館、賓州州立大學(Pennsylvania State University)資訊科學與科技學院。無論合著、引文、網路連結,其關係網絡各別皆由頻繁互動機構串連組成,而以強成分劃分之引文與網連網絡更可用以解釋知識擴散。此外,合著、引文、網連機構知識擴散於地理空間上各別皆呈群聚分佈,機構合著與引文高密度區為英國、美國,網路連結為美國。 在合著、引文、網路連結的整體比較方面,本研究發現合著與引文擴散網絡呈正相關,網連與其他兩者則無相關;而網連為三者網絡中密度較高者,但合著與引文密度隨時間增加;此外,三者網絡主要機構國別為美國,機構類型於合著與引文網絡多為學院、網連則為圖書館,北卡羅來納大學和賓州州立大學的圖資系所整體而言對圖資領域知識擴散最具貢獻。另研究發現,三者知識擴散熱區為美國,且皆以擴散至鄰近機構為主,網連擴散距離最遠,合著與引文隨時間漸突破空間限制。 | zh_TW |
| dc.description.abstract | This study combined Bibliometrics with Webometrics to explore knowledge diffusion through coauthorship and citation among institutions of Library and Information Science (LIS) in recent five years (2006-2010) by examining LIS institutions from 9 LIS journals in SSCI database, and to observe knowledge and information diffusion among institutions on websites (web linkage). Social Network Analysis and Spatial Analysis were applied to measure the knowledge interflow and dissemination among institutions in this study.
The major findings were summarized as follows. The tendency of inter-institution coauthorship was increasing, and the main pattern of coauthorship was two-institution collaboration. The core institutions in the coauthorship network were the School of Information and Library Science, University of North Carolina (UNC), and the College of Information Studies, University of Maryland (UMD). In the aspect of citation, the number of inter-institution citation has grown over time with a frequent intension citing specific institutions. The core institutions in citation network were the School of Information and Library Science, University of North Carolina, and the School of Library and Information Science, Indiana University. On the perspective of web linkage, the outdegrees of institutions differed significantly. The core institutions in web linkage network were the United States National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health (NIH), the Library of Congress (US), and the College of Information Sciences and Technology, Pennsylvania State University. For the three methods (coauthorship, citation, and web linkage), the networks were all formed by institution-pairs that cooperated more, cited more, or linked more; meanwhile, the subgroups divided by strong component analysis could provide higher explanatory power to the diffusion of the networks of coauthorship and citation. In addition, it has been identified that the spatial distribution patterns of the three methods were all clustered in certain geographical space; moreover, the high-density areas of coauthorship and citation were both in England and the United State, while the web linkage was in the United State. Compared among the three methods, the correlation between diffusion networks of coauthorship and citation appeared positive, but the network of web linkage had no correlation with the other two. On the other hand, the web linkage network had relatively higher connection density than the other two networks, but the densities of the other two networks had grown over time. Furthermore, the core institutions of the three methods’ networks were all in the United State. As to the type of core institutions, the main core institutions of both coauthorship network and citation network were schools or colleges, but those of web linkage network were libraries. The most contributed institutions in LIS knowledge diffusion were the LIS schools in the University of North Carolina and the Pennsylvania State University. Findings also revealed that the three methods’ hot spots of knowledge diffusion were all in the United State, and spreaded to geographically-adjacent institutions. Among them, web linkage had the longest average distance, but the other two could break the limitation of geographical space gradually with time. | en |
| dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2021-06-08T05:12:41Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 ntu-100-R97126009-1.pdf: 20324573 bytes, checksum: bd9e9641f29e652f7612677a915b1ea3 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2011 | en |
| dc.description.tableofcontents | 目 次
中文摘要 i 英文摘要 iii 目次 v 表目次 vii 圖目次 ix 第壹章 緒論 1 第一節 問題陳述 1 第二節 研究目的與問題 5 第三節 研究範圍與限制 6 第四節 名詞解釋 8 第貳章 文獻回顧 11 第一節 知識擴散概述 11 第二節 合著與知識擴散之研究 24 第三節 引文與知識擴散之研究 28 第四節 網路連結與知識擴散之研究 34 第參章 研究設計與實施 41 第一節 研究方法與設計 41 第二節 研究工具與對象 50 第三節 研究步驟 57 第四節 資料處理與分析 59 第肆章 研究結果 63 第一節 跨機構合著之知識擴散分析 63 第二節 跨機構引文之知識擴散分析 87 第三節 跨機構網路連結之知識擴散分析 107 第四節 合著、引文、網路連結跨機構知識擴散之比較 120 第伍章 結論與建議 143 第一節 結論 143 第二節 建議 150 第三節 進一步研究之建議 154 參考書目 157 附錄 本研究之機構一覽表 167 表目次 表3-1 本研究之圖書資訊領域9種期刊 53 表3-2 本研究之合著、引文、網路連結矩陣之機構數 55 表4-1 2006-2010年合著數、合著率及合著率成長率 64 表4-2 2006-2010年合著機構個數之文章篇數 66 表4-3 合著網絡之程度核心性、中介核心性前五名機構(有價矩陣) 68 表4-4 合著網絡之程度核心性前五名機構(二元矩陣) 71 表4-5 合著網絡成分比較表 74 表4-6 合著機構平均最近鄰居分析 82 表4-7 2006-2010年被引用數、平均被引用數及圖資領域引用數 88 表4-8 引文網絡之外連程度核心性前五名機構(有價矩陣) 91 表4-9 引文網絡之外連程度核心性前五名圖資領域機構(有價矩陣) 91 表4-10 引文網絡之外連程度核心性前五名機構(二元矩陣) 94 表4-11 引文網絡成分比較表 97 表4-12 引文機構平均最近鄰居分析 102 表4-13 網路連結網絡之外連程度核心性前五名機構 110 表4-14 網路連結網絡之外連程度核心性前五名校院系所 111 表4-15 網路連結網絡成分比較表 113 表4-16 網路連結機構平均最近鄰居分析 116 表4-17 合著、引文、網路連結關係之網絡密度比較表 120 表4-18 合著、引文、網路連結關係之最短路徑比較表 122 表4-19 合著、引文、網路連結網絡之集中化程度比較表 123 表4-20 合著、引文、網路連結網絡之連結平均數與最大值 127 表4-21 合著、引文、網路連結十個網絡圖之前五名機構比較表 129 表4-22 合著、引文、網連關係之QAP相關性分析 132 表4-23 合著、引文、網路連結關係之Moran’s I 分析表 134 表4-24 合著、引文、網路連結關係之General G分析表 135 表4-25 合著、引文、網路連結關係之平均地理距離比較表 141 圖目次 圖2-1 點資料之分佈型態 20 圖2-2 英國、加拿大、澳洲之大學的跨國合作 22 圖2-3 Erdos之合著關係 26 圖2-4 知識流動模式 28 圖2-5 美國頂尖機構被引數及其空間分佈圖 32 圖2-6 美國頂尖機構引文關係空間分佈圖 33 圖2-7 美國頂尖機構引文與地理距離之Log圖 33 圖2-8 領結模式 35 圖2-9 日晷模式 35 圖3-1 本研究之合著、引文、網路連結矩陣之機構數 56 圖4-1 2006-2010年合著率折線圖 64 圖4-2 2006-2010年合著文章作者之跨機構、機構內比例 65 圖4-3 2006-2010年合著機構個數折線圖 66 圖4-4 University of North Carolina資訊與圖書館學學校合著網絡圖 69 圖4-5 University of Maryland資訊研究學院合著網絡圖 70 圖4-6 合著網絡成分圖 73 圖4-7 從最大成分抽離University of North Carolina後之網絡圖 75 圖4-8 合著機構派系之群聚圖 77 圖4-9 合著機構K核心網絡圖(部分) 79 圖4-10 機構空間分佈圖-合著 81 圖4-11 核密度圖-合著 83 圖4-12 美國東部合著熱區 83 圖4-13 合著關係空間分佈圖 84 圖4-14 跨機構合著與地理距離之折線圖 86 圖4-15 機構於年份區間之跨機構引用數分佈圖 89 圖4-16 引文網絡主要外連機構之個體網絡圖 92 圖4-17 引文網絡弱成分圖 95 圖4-18 引文機構派系之群聚圖 98 圖4-19 引文機構K核心網絡圖(部分) 100 圖4-20 機構空間分佈圖-引文 102 圖4-21 核密度圖-引文 103 圖4-22 引文關係空間分佈圖 104 圖4-23 跨機構引文與地理距離之折線圖 106 圖4-24 網路連結網絡弱成分圖 112 圖4-25 網路連結機構派系之群聚圖 113 圖4-26 網路連結機構K核心網絡圖 114 圖4-27 網路連結抽離最大K核心網絡圖 115 圖4-28 核密度圖-網連 117 圖4-29 網連關係空間分佈圖 118 圖4-30 跨機構網連與地理距離之折線圖 119 圖4-31 圖書資訊領域機構合著網絡圖 125 圖4-32 圖書資訊領域機構引文網絡圖 126 圖4-33 圖書資訊領域機構網路連結網絡圖 127 圖4-34 圖書資訊領域機構合著熱區 136 圖4-35 圖書資訊領域機構引文熱區 137 圖4-36 圖書資訊領域機構網路連結熱區 138 圖4-37 合著、引文、網路連結關係與地理距離之折線圖 139 圖4-38 引文、網路連結機構相距8,500-10,500公里距離之連線圖 141 | |
| dc.language.iso | zh-TW | |
| dc.subject | 跨機構研究 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 書目計量 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 網路計量 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 知識擴散 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 社會網絡分析 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 空間分析 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | Bibliometrics | en |
| dc.subject | Spatial Analysis | en |
| dc.subject | Social Network Analysis (SNA) | en |
| dc.subject | knowledge diffusion | en |
| dc.subject | inter-institution research | en |
| dc.subject | Webometrics | en |
| dc.title | 圖書資訊領域2006-2010年跨機構知識擴散之研究 | zh_TW |
| dc.title | A Study on Inter-institution Knowledge Diffusion
of Library and Information Science in 2006-2010 | en |
| dc.type | Thesis | |
| dc.date.schoolyear | 99-2 | |
| dc.description.degree | 碩士 | |
| dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 吳明德,唐牧群 | |
| dc.subject.keyword | 書目計量,網路計量,跨機構研究,知識擴散,社會網絡分析,空間分析, | zh_TW |
| dc.subject.keyword | Bibliometrics,Webometrics,inter-institution research,knowledge diffusion,Social Network Analysis (SNA),Spatial Analysis, | en |
| dc.relation.page | 205 | |
| dc.rights.note | 未授權 | |
| dc.date.accepted | 2011-08-02 | |
| dc.contributor.author-college | 文學院 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.author-dept | 圖書資訊學研究所 | zh_TW |
| 顯示於系所單位: | 圖書資訊學系 | |
文件中的檔案:
| 檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| ntu-100-1.pdf 未授權公開取用 | 19.85 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。
