• 中国科学学与科技政策研究会
  • 中国科学院科技战略咨询研究院
  • 清华大学科学技术与社会研究中心
ISSN 1003-2053 CN 11-1805/G3

›› 2021, Vol. 39 ›› Issue (3): 0-0.

• 专稿 •    

谁在主导预印本的发展

王智琦,陈悦   

  1. 大连理工大学
  • 收稿日期:2021-01-20 修回日期:2021-03-02 出版日期:2021-03-15 发布日期:2021-05-28
  • 通讯作者: 陈悦

Who is leading the development of preprints?

  • Received:2021-01-20 Revised:2021-03-02 Online:2021-03-15 Published:2021-05-28
  • Contact: CHEN Yue

摘要: 从预印本的科研工作者主体的视角揭示了主导预印本发展的力量。以Web of Science(WoS)数学领域五个子学科期刊2015年发表的15313篇arXiv论文和43669篇非arXiv(non-arXiv)论文作为研究对象,综合运用文献计量学、补充计量学和数理统计等科学计量学理论方法,从活跃国家和机构、作者学术年龄、预印本影响力及作者选择编好四个维度对arXiv和non-arXiv论文进行了对比分析。结果表明,与其他预印本发表活跃国家相比,我国学者对预印本的接受程度显著偏低;发表预印本的科研工作者以年轻人为主导,我国预印本作者学术年龄年轻化程度最为明显;预印本影响力具有国别特征,我国预印本影响力特征最为特殊,即相比读者优势,我国预印本的引用优势更为突出,且WoS使用量显著偏高;作者对预先进行自存档的论文的选择具有选择偏好。我国学界应提高利用预印本进行科学交流的意识,积极应对并引领科学交流方式的变革,建设国际国内预印本双循环科学交流模式,既要加入国际学术交流,又要注重科研成果的内循环。

关键词: 预印本, 作者分析, 学术年龄, 影响力评价, 作者选择偏好, 科学计量学

Abstract: This paper reveals the dominant force in the development of preprint from the perspective of the preprint authors. By comprehensively using the bibliometrics, altmetrics and statistics methods, an empirical analysis of the 15313 arXiv and 43669 non-arXiv papers in Mathematics is conducted from four dimensions: the active countries and institutions for preprint publishing, the authors’ academic age, the scholarly and social impact of preprints and self-selection bias of preprints, and results show that: (a) The level of the uptake of preprints varies considerably across countries/regions and organizations: the United States, France, Germany, China, and the United Kingdom are active supporters of the preprint publishing, while the adoption of preprints by researchers in China is relatively low; (b) Preprint publishing is mainly driven by young academic age researchers, especially in China, where the proportion of young researchers among preprint authors is significantly higher than the word average; (c) Preprints impact is characterized by the authors’ countries, among which China shows the most special pattern, that is the usage counts in WoS are significantly higher than the citation counts of preprints, which is contrary to the overall trend of the world; (d) Preprint authors tend to deposit a preprint version of journal papers published in journals with higher impact factor than those with lower impact factor.

Key words: preprints, author analysis, academic age, impact evaluation, self-selection bias, scientometrics