| Summary: | 碩士 === 國立政治大學 === 圖書資訊與檔案學研究所 === 99 === This study aims to analyze the citing phenomenon of the doctoral dissertations written in 2001-2010 on the topic of history of Republic of China. Specific research questions include: the number and research subjects of dissertations; the number, form types, content types, core journals, half-life, languages, publication locations, repositories of cited literature.
The findings are as follows. The most productive institute for the research of the R.O.C. history was National Chengchi University. Dissertations guided by two or more advisors account for 17%. The majority of research subjects of dissertations were social, political and cultural. Furthermore, the majority of sub-subjects of social research dissertations were social movements and women. The average citations of single dissertation were 317. The most cited form type of citations was Books (62.56%), followed by continuous publications (18.62%), and unpublished papers or manuscripts (9.50%). The most cited content type of cited books was monograph (54.67%), followed by compilation of historical materials and records (9.54%), and biographical materials (6.79%). The core journals about the R.O.C. history research were difficult to observe, because of the diversity of research topics and that single journal may largely cited by single dissertation. The half-life of cited books was 20.4 years, cited continuous publications was 25.02 year, and cited newspapers was 64.3 years. The main language of cited literature was Chinese (88.76%), followed by English (7.41%), and Japanese (3.71%). The main publication locations of cited Books were Taiwan and Mainland China, together accounting for 85.01%. The main repository of cited unpublished manuscripts and records were Academia Historica, followed by Archives, Institute of Modern History, Academia Sinica, Kuomintang Party Records
Archives, and Taiwan Historica.
The suggestions of this study are as follows. Developing standard academic citation format in the field of history. Encouraging archives repositories to open manuscripts and records in multi-ways. Enhancing cooperation and resources integration of libraries and archives. Expanding the scope of citation analysis in the field of history. Investigating the behavior of historical researchers by qualitative research methods.
|
|---|
