基于Bookmetrix的G20国家图书影响力比较研究

杨思洛 邢欣 郑梦雪

摘 要：[目的/意义]对比分析G20国家图书影响力的现状，为我国提升图书国际影响力提供借鉴。[方法/过程]选择Springer收录的5个学科（化学、工程、医学、法律、历史）图书为样本，以Bookmetrix为数据源，在讨论指标覆盖率与相关性的基础上，从图书的产出数量、5类指标（下载量、引用量、提及量、读者量及评论量）以及合著关系3个方面展开比较分析。[结果/结论]研究发现：1）在指标覆盖率和相关性方面，整体情况与中、美、德等国家层面的表现类似。体现为图书的下载量覆盖率最高，读者量和引用量相关性值较高且稳定。2）中国的国际图书产出量与德国、美国、英国存在较大差距，但在指标均值、综合排名方面表现良好。3）在G20国家图书合著网络中，人文社科类图书国际合作强度明显低于理工类学科;美国、德国具有较高的科研合作实力与影响力;中国的国际合作具有一定基础，但整体影响力作用并不突出。

关键词：图书;影响力;Bookmetrix;G20

DOI：10.3969/j.issn.1008-0821.2019.07.018

〔中图分类号〕G250.252 〔文献标识码〕A 〔文章编号〕1008-0821（2019）07-0143-10

Abstract：[Purpose/Significance]This paper made a comparative analysis of the current situation of book influence in G20，and provided a reference for China to enhance the international influence of books.[Method/Process]This study selected the five subject books included in Springer as samples，which were chemistry，engineering，medicine，law and history，and used Bookmetrix as the data source of influence indicators.On the basis of discussing indicator coverage and correlation，this study made a comparative analysis of the similarities and differences of book influence in G20 from the following three aspects：the output of the book，the five types of indicators，which included downloads，citations，mentions，readers，and reviews，and the co-authorship relationship.[Result/Conclusion]The study found：①The coverage and correlation of the overall book indicators were similar to those of China，the United States，and Germany.The coverage of downloads was the highest，and the correlation between the readers and citations was high and stable.②Compared with Germany，the United States，and the United Kingdom，there was still a significant gap in the number of international books produced in China.However，China had performed well in terms of the average value of indicators and total ranking.③In the book co-authoring network of G20，the international cooperation intensity of humanities and social science books was significantly lower than that of science and engineering disciplines.The United States and Germany had high scientific research cooperation strength and influence.The international cooperation of China had a certain foundation，but the overall influence was not prominent.

Key words：book;influence;bookmetrix;G20

隨着全球化进程发展，各国学者竞相出版国际科研成果，以期提高自身及国家的科技地位和影响力。在此环境下，2017年我国国际科技论文总量相比2012年增长70%，居世界第二;同时被引量首次超过德国、英国，跃居世界第二[1]。可见，中国科技论文的产出与影响力在世界范围已具有举足轻重的地位，也因此备受学者与社会各界的关注。相较之下，学术图书作为科研成果的重要形式之一，其价值与影响力却缺乏足够的评价研究。在社交媒体与数字出版发展的新环境下，如何全面评价图书影响力显得尤为重要。传统的同行专家评议与引文分析等方法，虽有一定的可取之处，但无法综合反映图书影响力。而2010年Altmetrics的提出，为成果影响力评价提供了新的视角和方法[2-3]，相对于传统评价方法，Altmetrics表现出了全员可参与、数据来源广泛、评价结果及时全面、评价方法经济、操作性强等优点。