본 연구는 동시출현단어 분석을 사용하여 2000년대와 2010년대 목록 분야 연구동향 및 지적구조 분석을 수행하고, 두 시기의 차이점을 비교하였다. 목록 분야는 독자적인 연구 영역을 확고히 구축하고 있었으며, 2000년대와 2010년대 연구동향 및 지적구조에 많은 차이점이 발견되었다. 첫째, 논문 수에 있어서는 2000년대에 비해 2010년대에는 연간 평균 4.2편이 감소하였으나, 저자키워드 수는 큰 차이는 나지 않았다. 연대별 키워드 출현빈도는 22.2%의 키워드만이 두 시기에 모두 3회 이상 나타났으며, 77.8%의 키워드들은 한 시기에만 3회 이상 나타났다. 둘째, 지적구조에 있어서 살펴보면, 2000년대에는 3단계 군집을 보여주어 2단계 군집으로 표현된 2010년대에 비해 보다 복잡한 형태의 네트워크를 형성하였다. 셋째, 각 군집의 특성 변화를 살펴본 결과, 일부 변화가 적은 연구주제들이 있기는 하지만, 많은 연구주제들이 더욱 활발히 진행되거나 세분되었으며, 감소하기도 하는 변화가 있었다. 이러한 연구의 결과는 목록 분야의 시대적 흐름과 함께 지적구조를 시각적으로 파악할 수 있게 하며, 미래의 모습을 예측하여 관련 교육과 연구를 준비할 수 있다는 점에서 의의가 있다.
본 연구는 동시출현단어 분석을 사용하여 2000년대와 2010년대 목록 분야 연구동향 및 지적구조 분석을 수행하고, 두 시기의 차이점을 비교하였다. 목록 분야는 독자적인 연구 영역을 확고히 구축하고 있었으며, 2000년대와 2010년대 연구동향 및 지적구조에 많은 차이점이 발견되었다. 첫째, 논문 수에 있어서는 2000년대에 비해 2010년대에는 연간 평균 4.2편이 감소하였으나, 저자키워드 수는 큰 차이는 나지 않았다. 연대별 키워드 출현빈도는 22.2%의 키워드만이 두 시기에 모두 3회 이상 나타났으며, 77.8%의 키워드들은 한 시기에만 3회 이상 나타났다. 둘째, 지적구조에 있어서 살펴보면, 2000년대에는 3단계 군집을 보여주어 2단계 군집으로 표현된 2010년대에 비해 보다 복잡한 형태의 네트워크를 형성하였다. 셋째, 각 군집의 특성 변화를 살펴본 결과, 일부 변화가 적은 연구주제들이 있기는 하지만, 많은 연구주제들이 더욱 활발히 진행되거나 세분되었으며, 감소하기도 하는 변화가 있었다. 이러한 연구의 결과는 목록 분야의 시대적 흐름과 함께 지적구조를 시각적으로 파악할 수 있게 하며, 미래의 모습을 예측하여 관련 교육과 연구를 준비할 수 있다는 점에서 의의가 있다.
This study aims to analyze and to demonstrate the research trends and intellectual structure in the field of catalog in the 2000s and 2010s through co-word analysis. The field of catalog had firmly established its own research area and Many differences were found in research trends and intellectual ...
This study aims to analyze and to demonstrate the research trends and intellectual structure in the field of catalog in the 2000s and 2010s through co-word analysis. The field of catalog had firmly established its own research area and Many differences were found in research trends and intellectual structures in the 2000s and 2010s. First, the average number of articles decreased by 4.2 in the 2010s compared to the 2000s, but the number of author keywords was not significantly different. Only 22.2% of keywords appeared more than three times in both periods, and 77.8% of keywords appeared more than three times in one period. Second, in terms of intellectual structure, the 2000s, represented by three-level clusters, formed a more complex network than the 2010s, represented by two-level clusters. Third, as a result of examining the changes in the characteristics of each cluster, there were some research topics with few changes, but many research topics were more actively progressed or subdivided, and decreased. The results of this study are meaningful in that they can visually grasp the intellectual structure along with the trend of the age of catalogue, and can prepare for related education and research by predicting the future.
This study aims to analyze and to demonstrate the research trends and intellectual structure in the field of catalog in the 2000s and 2010s through co-word analysis. The field of catalog had firmly established its own research area and Many differences were found in research trends and intellectual structures in the 2000s and 2010s. First, the average number of articles decreased by 4.2 in the 2010s compared to the 2000s, but the number of author keywords was not significantly different. Only 22.2% of keywords appeared more than three times in both periods, and 77.8% of keywords appeared more than three times in one period. Second, in terms of intellectual structure, the 2000s, represented by three-level clusters, formed a more complex network than the 2010s, represented by two-level clusters. Third, as a result of examining the changes in the characteristics of each cluster, there were some research topics with few changes, but many research topics were more actively progressed or subdivided, and decreased. The results of this study are meaningful in that they can visually grasp the intellectual structure along with the trend of the age of catalogue, and can prepare for related education and research by predicting the future.
Kim, Jeong-Hyen (2011). An analytical study on research trends of resource organization in Korea: 1970-2010. Journal of Korean Library and Information Science Society, 42(3), 149-164. https://doi.org/10.16981/kliss.42.3.201109.149
Park, Ok-Nam (2011). Knowledge structures in knowledge organization research: 2000-2011. Journal of the Korean Biblia Society for Library and Information Science, 22(3), 247-267. https://doi.org/10.14699/kbiblia.2011.22.3.247
Oh, Se-Hoon (2005). A study on the research trends of library & information science in Korea by analyzing Journal articles and the Cited Literatures. Journal of Korean Society for Information Management, 22(3), 379-408. https://doi.org/10.3743/kosim.2005.22.3.379
Yoo, Sarah. (2010). A diagnostic analysis of metadata R&D status in Korea. Journal of the Korean Society for Library and Information Science, 44(2), 405-426. https://doi.org/10.4275/kslis.2010.44.2.405
Lee, Jae-Yun (2006a). A study on the network generation methods for examining the intellectual structure of knowledge domains. Journal of the Korean Society for Library and Information Science, 40(2), 333-355. https://doi.org/10.4275/kslis.2006.40.2.333
Lee, Jae-Yun (2006b). Centrality measures for bibliometric network analysis. Journal of Korean Society for Information Management, 40(3), 191-214. https://doi.org/10.3743/KOSIM.2006.23.4.215
Lee, Jae-Yun (2006c). Centrality measures for bibliometric network analysis. Journal of the Korean Society for Library and Information Science, 40(3), 191-214. https://doi.org/10.4275/KSLIS.2006.40.3.191
Lee, Jae-Yun (2013). A comparison study on the weighted network centrality measures of tnet and WNET. Journal of Korean Society for Information Management, 30(4), 241-264. https://doi.org/10.3743/kosim.2013.30.4.241
Cho, Jane (2011). A study for research area of library and information science by network text analysis. Journal of the Korean Society for Information Management, 28(4), 65-83. https://doi.org/10.3743/kosim.2011.28.4.065
Choi, Ye-Jin (2019). A study of major areas and components in education to develop information organization ability. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Ewha Womans University, Seoul, Korea.
Choi, Ye-Jin, & Chung, Yeon-Kyoung (2016). A study on the intellectual structure of meatdata research by using co-word analysis. Journal of Korean Society for Information Management, 33(3), 63-83. https://doi.org/10.3743/kosim.2016.33.3.063
Liu, G. Y., Hu, J. M., & Wang, H. L. (2012). A co-word analysis of digital library field in China. Scientometrics, 91(1), 203-217. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-011-0586-4
AI-Helper
※ AI-Helper는 부적절한 답변을 할 수 있습니다.