论文部分内容阅读
王嘉凌等同志在“就《中文核心期刊评价指标权重的分析与思考》一文与何荣利先生商榷”的文章中认为:“由于在相同文献密度差ΔM 的情况下存在文献量的差别,因此,用文献密度差ΔM 不能比较核心效应的强弱,应该用文献聚散度ΔM_n比较较为恰当”。王文引进相对值ΔM_n 的基本思路是对的,但测定结果与核心期刊的基本特征存在不相符合之处,而且出现许多相同的结果,不便于核心效应强弱的比较。相比之下.用文献密度差ΔM 比较核心效应更加直观可见。
Wang Jia Ling and other comrades in the “on the” Chinese core journals evaluation index weight analysis and thinking, “a paper with Mr. Rongrong question” in the article: “because of the same document density difference [Delta] M there is a literature volume difference, therefore , Literature density difference ΔM can not compare the strength of the core effect, the vergence of the document should be more appropriate ΔM_n ”. Wang Wen introduced the relative value of ΔM_n basic idea is right, but the determination of the core journals with the basic characteristics of the existence of inconsistencies, and many of the same results, not conducive to the comparison of the strength of the core. In contrast, comparing the core effects with literature density differences, ΔM, is more intuitive.