文章以WoS和Scopus两大引文索引库中2013年体育科学类收录的期刊为主要研究对象，以相应的期刊引文报告中的数据为参照，比较分析了三大主要评价指标在叠加收录期刊间的相关性，探讨了未叠加收录期刊的划分合理性。结果显示，对自然科学和社会科学期刊的严格划分以及注重收录高质量期刊是导致WoS体育科学类期刊少于Scopus的主要原因。两大数据库有关体育科学期刊的引文数据参照性强，影响因子与新兴指标的相关性较高，可替换性强。但在优秀体育期刊间的比较以及跨学科期刊间比较时，新兴指标显示出一定优势。两大期刊引文报告对于体育学者在申报课题、论文投稿以及科学研究中具有重要的参考价值。我国仍缺乏类似的综合性多学科引文数据库及评价报告。%Using journals indexed in the Sport Sciences category in WoS and Scopus database in 2013 as research ob-jects and the corresponding data in the Journal Citation Reports as a reference, this paper compared and ana-lyzed the correlation of the three main evaluation indexes in the superimposed journals and discussed the reason-ableness of non-superimposed journal division. The results showed that the strict division of natural science journals and social science journals and a focus on high-quality journals are main causes that sport science journals in WoS are lesser than those in Scopus. In both databases, the citation data reference of sports science journals is strong, the correlation between influential factors and new indexes is high and the replacement ability is strong. But comparison between the excellent sports journals and comparison between interdisciplinary jour-nals show that the new index has some advantages. For sports scholars, the two Journal Citation Reports have important reference value in their research grant application, paper submission and scientific research. China is still short of similar comprehensive multidisciplinary citation database and evaluation reports.
展开▼
