公開同儕評論網絡與書目計量網絡相關性之探討—以Behavioral and Brain Sciences期刊為例

Abstract

本研究探討公開同儕評論網絡與書目計量網絡之間的相關性，研究對象是於2011年至2020年之間於Behaviroal and Brain Science期刊發表目標文章和公開同儕評論（Open peer commentary）文章的作者。研究目的包含：（1）探討公開同儕評論網絡的特性；（2）探討公開同儕評論網絡與其他學術關係的相關性。研究方法採用社會網絡分析法，使用社會網絡指標分析公開同儕評論網絡，並使用R程式的指數隨機圖模型對不同網絡之間的相關性進行分析。在資料蒐集方面，首先蒐集學者的公開同儕評論關係，進一步使用具有公開同儕評論關係的節點，至Scopus資料庫蒐集引用、合著、作者共被引、作者書目耦合關係。透過不同關係之間的相關性分析，討論兩學者之間在不同關係的產生是否有跡可循，並探討公開同儕評論關係對學術社群的知識交流意義。研究發現，公開同儕評論網絡節點之間沒有明顯關係互惠性，公開同儕評論在有引用關係的情況下，對連結的產生為負相關；公開同儕評論與合著網絡沒有相關；公開同儕評論、引用、合著網絡在有作者共被引、作者書目耦合這兩種智識關係的情況下，對連結的產生有相關。研究貢獻則能提供不同於書目計量的角度，對學術社群之間有關公開同儕評論方面的學術交流，提供不同的觀點。

One of the few publication venues where open peer commentary has been successfully implemented is Behavioral and Brain Sciences (BBS), a highly regarded, highly interdisciplinary journal published by Cambridge University Press. The open commentary in BBS was proposed to address the drawbacks of traditional peer review. It also presented a novel scholarly communication. One wonder whether open commentary is predicated on other means of formal scholarly communication, such as collaboration and citation. Another possible factor that might influence commentary are the intellectual affinity of two researchers, which can be defined either by author co-citation or author bibliographic coupling. To address these questions, a social network analytical approach was taken where five networks were created: the open commentary network, inter-citation network, co-author network, author co-citation network, and author bibliographic coupling networks. ERGMs were then performed to test their relationships. The results show that there is no obvious relationship reciprocity between nodes in the open peer commentary network. Surprisingly, the open peer commentary network was found to be negatively correlated with the inter-citation network. Furthermore, no significant correlation was found between the commentary network with either co-author network. However, the author-co-citation network and author bibliographic coupling networks were found to be correlated with the open commentary network, co-author network and inter-citation networks.