方法对比
并排查看您选择的方法；存在差异的行会高亮显示。
| 基于VOSviewer的引文分析× | 引文分析× | |
|---|---|---|
| 领域≠ | 科学计量学 | 研究技能 |
| 方法族 | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| 起源年份≠ | 1955 (citation analysis); 2010 (VOSviewer software) | 1955 (citation indexes); 1975 (Impact Factor); 2005 (H-index) |
| 提出者≠ | Eugene Garfield (citation analysis); Nees Jan van Eck & Ludo Waltman (VOSviewer) | Eugene Garfield (Citation Indexes, 1955); Jorge Hirsch (H-index, 2005) |
| 类型≠ | Bibliometric workflow | Tool |
| 开创性文献≠ | van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2010). Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics, 84(2), 523–538. DOI ↗ | Hirsch, J. E. (2005). An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 102(46), 16569–16572. DOI ↗ |
| 别名≠ | citation analysis with VOSviewer, VOSviewer citation mapping, visual citation analysis, VOSviewer-based citation network analysis | citation metrics, bibliometric analysis, citation tracking |
| 相关≠ | 6 | 4 |
| 摘要≠ | VOSviewer-assisted citation analysis combines established citation analysis methodology with the visual mapping capabilities of VOSviewer, a free bibliometric software developed at Leiden University. Researchers export bibliographic records from databases such as Web of Science or Scopus, import them into VOSviewer, and generate citation networks that reveal which documents, authors, or journals are most influential and how intellectual influence flows across a field. | Citation analysis is the systematic study of how scholarly works are cited by subsequent research, used as a proxy for research impact and influence. Founded formally by Eugene Garfield in 1955 (introducing citation indexes), the field encompasses metrics ranging from simple citation counts to sophisticated indices like the H-index (Hirsch, 2005) and field-normalized indicators. Citation analysis is used to evaluate researcher productivity, track influence of ideas, assess journal quality, and detect research trends. While citation counts are not perfect measures of quality (high citation does not equal high quality; time lag in citation accumulation), they provide valuable quantitative data for research evaluation alongside peer review and expert assessment. |
| ScholarGate数据集 ↗ |
|
|