A Methodology Based on the Measurement of' the Value Created by Library Institution and the Information Resources in Social Sciences and Humanities: Citation Analysis Findings - II

Yıl 2013, Cilt: 27 Sayı: 1, 25 - 51, 01.01.2013

Oya Gürdal Tamdoğan

Öz

The main focus of the article is to answer the question of how to evaluate the process of information production, which is being dwelled on lately in literature, in relation to nationalrealities more sufficiently through citation analysis. In this respect, within the framework of the limitations of the study, the articles 296 articles, 7.804 citations included in national and international bibliographic databases and the ones not included 191 articles and 4.620 citations because of different reasons in the realities of country are evaluated in two different sets of data 1st and the 2nd set and the acquired findings are presented. Therefore, in the study of citation analysis, 487 of 12.424 articles are analyzed. However, one of the supposed facts which are foreseen at the beginning of the study is revealed that though 60,78% of the articles take place in bibliographic control resources, 39,21 % of the articles do not exist. In other words, 39,21% of the papers, which are qualified as the results of the information production process, is not available in both national and the international level. 1.085 citations archive records, web sites etc. out of 12.424 citations are not evaluated; because such references are not expected to exist in the library collection. In this direction, 11.339 citations are analyzed and investigated by their availability in the printed collections and accessibility in the e-collections of Ankara University libraries. 11.339 citations acquired from the articles of social sciences academic staff at Ankara University revealed the following results: 5.684 50,14% out of' 11.339 citations are found in printed/electronic/ printed+e-collections . 3.333 29,39% of' the citations are available in the printed collections. 2.351 20,73% of the citations are accessible in the e-collections

Anahtar Kelimeler

information production, information resources, library institution, citation analysis, bibliometric studies, collection, method, methodology

Sosyal Bilimler ve İnsan Bilimlerinde Bilgi Kaynaklarının ve Kütüphane Kurumunun Yarattığı Değeri Ölçmeye Dayalı Bir Metodoloji: Atıf Analizi Bulguları - II

Öz

Makalenin odaklandığı ana unsur, literatürde de son zamanlarda üzerinde ağırlıkla durulan atıf analizi yoluyla ulusal bilgi üretimi sürecinin, ulusal gerçeklerde, daha yeterli biçimde nasıl değerlendirilebile­ceği sorusuna mümkün olabildiğince yanıt bulmaktır. Bu doğrultuda araştırmada, çalışma sınırlılıkları çerçevesinde göreli biçimde, ulusal ve uluslararası bibliyografik veritabanlarına giren 296 makale, 7.804 atıf ve ülke gerçeklerinde çeşitli sebeplerle giremeyen makaleler 191 makale ve 4.620 atıf , iki ayrı bilgi kümesinde birinci küme ve ikinci küme olarak analiz edilmiş ve elde edilen bulgular sunulmuştur. Böylece atıf analizi çalışmasında, toplam 487 makalenin 12.424 atıfı değerlendirilmiştir. Bunun yanı sıra araştırmanın başında varsayılan bir gerçek daha ortaya çıkmıştır ki, o da araştırma sınırlılıkları ile birlikte ve buna karşın üretilen makalelerin %60,78’i bibliyografik denetim araçlarında yer alırken; %39,21’i yer almamaktadır. Bir başka deyişle bilimsel bilgi üretimi sürecinin ürünü niteli­ğindeki çıktıların %39,21’i ulusal ve uluslararası düzeyde kolay erişilebilir değildir.12.424 atıftan, kütüphane dermesinde varolması beklenmeyen 1.085 atıf arşiv belgeleri, web siteleri vb. çıkarılmıştır. Bu doğrultuda Ankara Üniversitesi sosyal bilimler alanında tam zamanlı çalı­şan akademik personelin makalelerindeki 11.339 atıfın Ankara Üniversitesi kütüphanelerinin basılı ve elektronik dermesinde erişilebilirlik durumu araştırılmıştır. Atıfların 5.684’ü %50,14 basılı/elektronik/ basılı+elektronik dermede bulunmuştur. Atıfların 3.333’ü %29,39 basılı dermede, 2.351’i %20,73 elektronik dermede erişilebilir durumdadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

bilgi üretimi, bilgi kaynakları, kütüphane kurumu, atıf analizi, bibliyometrik çalışmalar, derme, yöntem, metodoloji

Kaynakça

• Al, U. ve Tonta, Y. (2004). Atıf analizi: Hacettepe Üniversitesi Kütüphanecilik Bölümü tezlerinde atıf yapılan kaynaklar. Bilgi Dünyası, 5(1), 19-47.
• Archambault, E. ve Vignola-Gagne, E. (2004). The use ofbibliometrics in the social sciences and humanities. Science-metrix finalreport. Prepared for the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRCC). Montreal, Science-Metrix. 10 Şubat 2009 tarihinde http://www. science-metrix.com/pdf/SM_2004_008_SSHRC_Bibiiometrics_Sociai_Science.pdf adresinden erişildi.
• Beile P. M., Boole, D. N., ve Kiffingsworth, E. K. (2004). A microscope or a mirror?: A question of study validity regarding the use of dissertation citation analysis for evaluating research collections. The Journal ofAcademic Librarianship, 30(5), 347-353.
• Bensman, S. J. (1985). Journal collection management as a cumulative advantage process. College & Research Libraries, 46(1), 13-29.
• Brazzeal, B. ve Fowler, R. (2005). Patterns of information use in graduate research in forestry: A citation analysis of master’s theses at Mississippi State University. Science & Technology Libraries, 26(2), 91-106.
• Broadus, R. (1977). The applications of citation analyses to library collection building. Advances in Librarianship, 7, 299-335.
• CHASS - Council for the Humanities, Arts and Social Sciences. (2005). Measures of quality and impact of publicly funded research in the humanities, arts and social sciences. CHASS Occasional Paper 2. Canberra: CHASS.
• East, J. W. (2006). Ranking journals in the humanities: An Australian case study. Australian Academic and Research Libraries, 37(1), 3-16.
• Edwards, S. (1999). Citation analysis as a collection development tool: A bibliometric study of polymer science theses and dissertation. Serials Review, 25(1), 11-20.
• Enger, K. B. (2009). Using citation analysis to develop core book collections in academic libraries. Library & Information Science Research, 31(2), 107-112.
• Glânzel, W. (1996). A bibliometric approach to social sciences: National research performance in 6 selected social science areas, 1990-1992. Scientometrics, 35(3), 291-307.
• Gürdal Tamdoğan, O. (2009). Enformasyon zincirinde bilgi erişim sistemleri, bilgi erişim sürecinde kütüphane kurumu ve diğer bilgi merkezleri. TürkKütüphaneciliği, 23(1), 151­ 168.
• Haddow, G. (2008). Quality Australians journals in the humanities and social sciences. Australian Academic and Research Libraries, 39(2), 79-91.
• Hicks, D. (1999). The difficulty of achieving full coverage of international social science literature and the bibliometric consequences. Scientometrics, 44(2), 193-215.
• Hoffmann, K. ve Doucette, L. (2012). A review of citation analysis methodologies for collection management. College & Research Libraries, 73(4), 321-335.
• Iivonen, M., Nygren, U., Valtari, A. ve Heikkilâ, T. (2009). Library collections contribute to doctoral studies: Citation analysis of dissertations in the field of economics and administration. Library Management, 30(3), 185-203.
• Kayongo, J. ve Helm, C. (2012). Relevance of library collections for graduate student research: A citation analysis study of doctoral dissertations at Notre Dame. College & Research Libraries, 73(1), 47-67.
• Kelland, J. L. ve Young, A. P. (1994). Citation as a form of library use. Collection Management, 19 (1-2), 81-100.
• Line, M. (1978). Rank lists based on citations and library uses as indicators of journal usage at individual libraries. Collection Management, 2(4), 313-116.
• MacRoberts, M. H. ve MacRoberts, B. R. (1989). Problems of citations analysis: A critical review. Journal ofthe American SocietyforInformation Science, 40(5), 342-349.
• McCain, K. W. ve Bobick, J. E. (1981). Patterns of journal use in a departmental library: A citation analysis. Journal ofthe American Society for Information Science, 32(4), 257-267.
• Nederhof, A. J. ve Zwaan, R. A. (1991). Quality judgments of journals as indicators of research performance in the humanities and the social and behavioral sciences. Journal ofthe American SocietyforInformation Science, 42(5), 332-340.
• Nederhof, A. J., Zwaan, R. A., De Bruin, R. E. ve Dekker, P. J. (1989). Assessing the usefulness of bibliometric indicators for the humanities and the social and behavioral sciences: A comparative study. Scientometrics, 15(5-6), 423-435.
• Pancheshnikov, Y. (2007). A Comparison of literature citations in faculty publications and student theses as indicators of collection use and a background for collection management at a university library. Journal of'Academic Librarianship, 33(6), 674-683.
• Smith, L. (1981). Citation analysis. (1981). Library Trends, 30(1981), 83-106.
• Uzun, A. (1998). A scientometric profile of social sciences research in Turkey. The International Information & Library Review, 30(3), 169-184.
• Walcott, R. (1994). Local citation studies: A short cut to local knowledge. Science & Technology Libraries, 14(3), 1-14.
• Webster, B. M. (1998). Polish sociology citation index as an example of usage of national citation indexes in scientometric analysis of social sciences. Journal ofInformation Science, 24(1), 19-32.
• White, H. D., Boell, S., Yu, H., Davis, M., Wilson, C. S. ve Cole, F. T H. (2009). Libcitations: A measure for comparative assessment of book publications in the humanities and social sciences. Journal ofthe American Societyfor Information Science & Technology, 60(6), 1083-1096.
• Winclawska, B. M. (1996). Polish Sociology Citation Index (Principles for creation and the first results). Scientometrics, 35(3), 387-391.