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。
| 参考文献管理软件：Zotero、Mendeley 和 EndNote× | 引文分析× | |
|---|---|---|
| 领域 | 研究技能 | 研究技能 |
| 方法族 | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| 起源年份≠ | 1989 (EndNote original); 2006 (Zotero); 2008 (Mendeley acquired by Elsevier) | 1955 (citation indexes); 1975 (Impact Factor); 2005 (H-index) |
| 提出者≠ | Zotero (George Mason University, 2006); Mendeley (Elsevier, 2008 acquisition); EndNote (Clarivate, 1988 original; acquired 2016) | Eugene Garfield (Citation Indexes, 1955); Jorge Hirsch (H-index, 2005) |
| 类型 | Tool | Tool |
| 开创性文献≠ | Zotero project team (2024). Zotero: Free reference management software. https://www.zotero.org link ↗ | 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≠ | reference manager, citation software, Zotero, Mendeley | citation metrics, bibliometric analysis, citation tracking |
| 相关 | 4 | 4 |
| 摘要≠ | Zotero, Mendeley, and EndNote are the three most widely used reference management applications. Each helps researchers organize bibliographic references, annotate articles, and generate formatted citations and bibliographies. Zotero (launched 2006 by George Mason University) is free and open-source; Mendeley (acquired by Elsevier in 2008) offers a freemium model; EndNote (originally developed in 1989, now owned by Clarivate) is commercial. All three integrate with word processors and support multiple citation styles. Choosing between them depends on budget, collaboration needs, storage requirements, and preferred features. | 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 ↗ |
|
|