How to Improve the Impact of Journal Articles in Technology

Innovation Policy Evaluation: Bibliometric Analysis Based on Core

Journals in China

He Huang

1,*

, Ruyan Yang

and Fang Wen

School of Economics and Management, Inner Mongolia Normal University, Hohhot,

Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region, 010022, China

School of Public Administration, Inner Mongolia University, Hohhot, Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region, 010021, China

Youth College of Political Science, Inner Mongolia Normal University, Hohhot,

Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region, 010022, China

Keywords: Technology Innovation, Policy Evaluation, Impact of Journal Articles, Bibliometric Analysis.

Abstract: The rapid development of China's technology innovation has attracted worldwide attention and the technology

innovation policies has played an important role in this process. Simultaneously, more and more journal arti-

cles focus on China's technology innovation policy evaluation, but how to increase the impact of these journal

articles has not received enough attention. This paper constructs a theoretical framework based on citation

internationalization and method focalization of journal articles, and proposes three research hypotheses, and

carries out multiple linear regression and t-test on 73 China's core journal articles. The results show that higher

citation internationalization and method focalization have a significant effect on improving the impact of

journal articles; the impact of competitive type research (with high citation internationalization and high

method focalization) is significantly higher than that of loose type research (with low citation internationali-

zation and low method focalization). This study provides a clear theoretical framework for increasing the

impact of journal articles on policy evaluation, and reconfirms the promotion role of citation internationali-

zation in the field of policy evaluation.

1 INTRODUCTION

Technology has become the “primary productive

force” in the world (Qiu, 2012), and countries around

the world continue to increase policy support for tech-

nology innovation (Baumgartner, 2009). Since the

founding of the People's Republic of China, govern-

ments at all levels have continuously increased policy

support for technology innovation (Xue, 2018). The

policy theme has gradually shifted from a single pol-

icy to cooperation with the policies in other fields

(Peng, 2008), and the policy forms have also been ex-

panded to a variety of “plans, schemes, laws, regula-

tions, measures, guidelines and codes of conduct”.

The corresponding policy design has also begun to

change from “single policy” to “policy combination”

(Liu, 2017). In 1982, the Ministry of Finance of the

People's Republic of China issued the “Regulations

on Financial Treatment of Technology Development

and New Product Trial Expenses” (guan yu ji shu kai

fa he xin chan pin shi zhi fei yong de cai wu chu li gui

ding) (Fang, 2007), which can be described as China's

first technology innovation policy. With the promul-

gation of “the Law of the People's Republic of China

on Technology Progress” (zhong hua ren min gong he

guo ke xue ji shu jin bu fa) in 1993, the policy density

increased year by year. From 1985 to 2000, 151 poli-

cies were issued (Chen, 2004). With the enactment of

policies, theoretical research on technology innova-

tion is also increasing. A search on CNKI

(https://www.cnki.net/) with the title of “Technology

Innovation” yielded more than 100,000 results, with

more than 70,000 journal articles accounting for more

than half of them. In short, there are many journal ar-

ticles on the evaluation of China's technology innova-

tion policy, and how to improve the impact of these

journal articles becomes more and more important.

The first journal article on technology innovation

policy evaluation in China appeared in 1997, which

was an evaluation of Russia's technology innovation

policy (Li, 1997). Since 2007, the number of journal

articles in this field has increased steadily, indicating

430

Huang, H., Yang, R. and Wen, F.

How to Improve the Impact of Journal Articles in Technology Innovation Policy Evaluation: Bibliometric Analysis Based on Core Journals in China.

DOI: 10.5220/0011739100003607

In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Public Management, Digital Economy and Internet Technology (ICPDI 2022), pages 430-437

ISBN: 978-989-758-620-0

 2023 by SCITEPRESS – Science and Technology Publications, Lda. Under CC license (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0)

such studies has attracted more and more attention by

Chinese academia. It should be noted that there are

many aspects involved in technology innovation pol-

icies, and policy evaluation varies according to the

evaluation objectives, evaluation subjects, and evalu-

ation methods. In general, those evaluation includes

both “policy facts” and “policy values” (Xin, 2008).

In term of research methods, the former focuses on

quantitative research, and the latter focuses on quali-

tative research. This paper focuses on quantitative re-

search which applying evaluation of “policy facts”.

In addition to the introduction, the structure of this

paper is arranged as follows. firstly, the research

questions are clarified on the basis of literature re-

view; secondly, the theoretical framework is con-

structed based on the citation internationalization and

method focalization and research hypotheses are pro-

posed; thirdly, the data are analyzed by multiple lin-

ear regression and t-test, and the research findings of

this paper are discussed based on the results; finally,

a brief conclusion is presented.

2 CONCEPT DEFINITION AND

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Concept Definition

“Technology Innovation” includes two dimensions:

“technology” dimension and “innovation” dimen-

sion. For the “technology” dimension, it also involves

two parts: “science” and “technology”. In terms of

public policy, science policy refers to policy for sci-

entific research, technology policy refers to policy for

technological application. However, the two dimen-

sions can be comprehensively summarized by the

term “technology innovation policy”. “Technology

innovation policy” in Chinese includes many aspects,

such as “enterprise technology innovation, scientific

research system, transformation of technology

achievements, technological talents, technology inno-

vation governance, technology finance” (Li, 2017). In

order to be consistent with the existing research,

“technology policy”, “innovation policy” and “tech-

nology innovation policy” (Zhou, 2011) are consid-

ered as synonymous categories. Similarly, “policy

evaluation”, “policy assessment” and “policy impact”

are also considered as synonymous categories.

2.2 Literature Review

The topic of this study is the impact of journal articles

and its impact factors, which has been extensively

studied by academia (Guo, 2006). Specifically, exist-

ing studies have extensively discussed the number of

citations (mainly on number of references), length

(number of pages), number of tables and figures

(Zhang, 2018), journal rank, author gender, and paper

title (Jian, 2011). In order to analyze the international

impact, the study examined the impact of journal ar-

ticles from the citation dimension.

The role of references in promoting the impact of

journal articles is a hot topic for multidisciplinary re-

search. It is found that the increase of references is a

trend for many disciplines. From 1970 to 2005, the

average number of citations in SCI journal articles in-

creased from 8.40 to 34.63 (Biglu, 2008). This trend

also emerged in Chinese technology journal articles,

with the average number of citations increasing from

5.98 in 1995 to 6.99 in 2000. A study carried out bib-

liometric analysis on 19 core journals in library and

information science and found that the average num-

ber of citations increased from 12.55 to 13.11 within

two years (Zheng, 2011). In the face of this trend, ac-

ademia has begun to pay attention to the role of cita-

tions in promoting the impact of journal articles. It is

worth considering whether high-impact journal arti-

cles also have more citations (Wang, 2016).

Early bibliometric analysis found that more

references in a journal article means the more proba-

bility they were cited (Webster, 2009; Mao, 2003).

Although the early research methods were rough, the

results were basically consistent with the later more

refined research results (Wang, 2016), and this rela-

tionship was confirmed by multidisciplinary research

(Xu, 2008). In addition, there are more diverse find-

ings on the relationship between the two, such as the

“inverted U-shaped” relationship (Chen, 2019), and

even a cubic polynomial relationship (Ge, 2015). Re-

cent studies have found that the proportion of foreign

literatures in citations, especially in English, has in-

creased year by year, becoming an important factor

affecting the impact of journal articles (Mou, 2018).

In the field of technology innovation policy evalua-

tion, does the proportion of citation of foreign litera-

ture (or “citation internationalization” (Gao, 1992))

also promote the impact of journal articles? It is not

difficult to see that exploring the role of citation in-

ternationalization in promoting the impact of journal

articles is a hot topic in current academia.

In addition, this study also explores the promotion

effect of method focalization on the impact of journal

articles. Focalization means the degree of attention to

a certain matter, and the higher the degree of focali-

zation, the higher the degree of attention (Johanson,

2000). Similarly, the method focalization means that

How to Improve the Impact of Journal Articles in Technology Innovation Policy Evaluation: Bibliometric Analysis Based on Core Journals

in China

431

methods for policy evaluation are used relatively ac-

curate. However, to be “accurate” instead of “inaccu-

rate” requires the comparison of research methods.

For policy evaluation, research methods are compara-

ble only under similar research paradigms (Wu,

2011). In short, policy evaluation focuses on the de-

gree of realization of policy objectives (Zhao, 2014),

and the methods used can be divided into two catego-

ries: one is based on the comparison of results, which

evaluates the policy effect by constructing an index

system, such as PMC index method, AHP method

(Liu, 2011), ISM method (Zhang, 2017); the other is

based on the causality relationship test, and classical

methods widely used are inferential statistics such as

multiple linear regression method. Such a diversity of

research methods shows a high degree of freedom of

choice for policy evaluation methods. But the ques-

tion is whether the more diverse the choice of policy

evaluation methods, the better, or the opposite? In

other words, if a policy evaluation focuses more on

targeted methods, will research have a higher impact?

To sum up, a theoretical framework could be con-

structed from the perspectives of citation internation-

alization and method focalization. Bibliometric anal-

ysis on the journal articles of China's technology in-

novation policy evaluation by the framework can not

only expand the classical research in the field of bib-

liometric analysis on policy evaluation, but also pro-

vide a clear and feasible path for increasing the im-

pact of journal articles on China's technology innova-

tion policy evaluation.

3 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

AND RESEARCH HYPOTHESES

This study constructs a theoretical framework based

on citation internationalization and method focaliza-

tion (Fig. 1). As shown in the figure, if both interna-

tionalization and focalization are high, it is competi-

tive type research; if only the internationalization is

high, it is imitative type research; if only the focaliza-

tion is high, it is autonomous type research; if both

internationalization and focalization are low, it is

loose type research. In a word, there are four types of

research based on internationalization and focaliza-

tion. To explore the relationship between citation in-

ternationalization, method focalization and research

impact, three research hypotheses are proposed:

• H1. The citation internationalization in tech-

nology innovation policy evaluation has a significant

influence on its impact;

• H2. The method focalization of technology inn

ovation policy evaluation has a significant influ-

ence on its impact;

• H3. The impact of competitive research is sig-

nificantly higher than those of other types.

Impacts of Journal Articles

Competitive type

Low

High

Autonomous

type

Imitative

type

Loose type

Figure 1: The theoretical framework of the study.

4 RESEARCH DESIGN AND

RESEARCH METHODS

The data of this study are extracted from CNKI

(https://www.cnki.net/), which is the most compre-

hensive academic database in China. In order to en-

sure the representativeness and quality of the journal

articles, the literature sources are limited to the “A

Guide of the Core Journals in China” and “Chinese

Social Science Citation Index” (CSSCI), and 137

journal articles were obtained (Table 1). In order to

ensure the comparability of the samples, the journal

articles were screened as follows. Introductory jour-

nal articles, review articles and theoretical research ir-

relevant to technology innovation policy evaluation

were excluded; short articles, qualitative evaluation

articles and substandard articles were excluded, and

73 journal articles were finally obtained.

Specific screening criteria are as follows. Intro-

ductory journal articles were mainly about introduc-

tion of policies in developed countries, but did not

evaluate the effect of policies, which is not in line

with the theme of this study; similarly, review articles

and theoretical research journal articles did not in-

volve the evaluation of policy effects and were ex-

cluded; short articles were only 1 page short and no

more than 2 pages, and their research methods were

relatively weak; qualitative evaluation journal articles

were very different in research methods and were also

excluded. In addition, some articles' published journal

could not retrieve the comprehensive impact factor

score, were classified as substandard journal articles.

ICPDI 2022 - International Conference on Public Management, Digital Economy and Internet Technology

432

Table 1: Data retrieval conditions and results.

Title keywords Preliminary results Elimination Final result

Innovation policy + evaluation 32

11 21

Innovation policy + assessment 27

12 15

Innovation policy + effect 10

2 8

Innovation policy + impact 23

11 12

technology policy + assessment 8

7 1

technology policy + evaluation 11

5 6

technology policy + effect 4

2 2

technology policy + impact 22

14 8

Total 137 64 73

Note: Journal sources include: A Guide of the Core Journals in China” and “Chinese Social Science Citation

Index” (CSSCI); retrieval time is January 1, 2020.

Table 2: Statistics of the basic characteristics of the research objects (n=73).

Mean

value

Standard

deviation

Minimum

value

Maximum

value

Variable type Data sources

act score 3.252 3.328 0.321 18.047 Ratio variable Calculation

Length (page) 7.397 3.226 3 18 Ratio variable Text statistics

ear

)

5.219 3.702 1 17 Ratio variable Calculation

Internationalization score 0.334 0.239 0 0.857 Ratio variable Calculation

Focalization score 0.918 0.277 0 1 Dumm

variable Code

and excluded from the study. In summary, the 73 final

journal articles all used quantitative methods to eval-

uate the effects of technology innovation policies in a

certain field, region or period

For the coding of each variable, the study ensured

high reliability and efficiency as much as possible.

For the evaluation of the impact of journal articles,

the impact score was used for calculations (Huang,

2020). For the method focalization, the research

methods mentioned in the journal articles were coded.

Overall, among the methods used in these journal ar-

ticles, the most methods are more than 3, and the least

methods are only 1. In this paper, those with three or

more methods were considered as having a low de-

gree of focalization, whereas those with less than

three methods were considered as having a high de-

gree of focalization. For the citation internationaliza-

tion, the proportion of English citations was calcu-

lated based on the statistics of the number of citations

in all languages. In order to increase the reliability of

data coding and reduce the error caused by the sub-

jective factors of the researcher, the coding process

was simultaneously conducted by two researchers.

According to the coding standard, two researchers

coded 73 journal articles respectively to form the ini-

tial coding, and then retested the initial coding results.

The retested results showed that the consistency of

coding are more than 80%, showing high reliability.

In this study, multiple linear regression and t-test

were used to analyze the data. In multiple linear re-

gression, the dependent variable was the impact

score, and the independent variables were the citation

internationalization and the method focalization. To

ensure the robustness of the results, the study also in-

troduced two control variables, article length (number

of pages) and article age (time interval from publica-

tion to 2020). Then, t-test was used to examine the

impact difference between different research types.

5 RESULTS

5.1 Basic Characteristics of the

Research Objects

From the basic characteristics (Table 2), the highest

impact score was 18, the lowest was only 0.3, while

the mean was 3.3. This means that a journal article

with an impact score of higher than 3.3 can be con-

sidered as having a relatively high impact, and vice

versa, low impact. In terms of length, the shortest was

3 pages, the longest was 18 pages, and the mean was

8 pages. In terms of age, the shortest was 1 year, the

longest was 17 years, and the mean was 6 years. In

terms of the citation internationalization, 13 journal

articles did not have any English references, the low-

est score of internationalization was 0, and the highest

score was 0.86. In terms of the method focalization,

only 6 journal articles had low focalization, which

was less than 9%, and most journal articles had rela-

tively high method focalization.

How to Improve the Impact of Journal Articles in Technology Innovation Policy Evaluation: Bibliometric Analysis Based on Core Journals

in China

433

Table 3: Multiple linear regression results (n=73).

Model 1 Model 2

Model 3

Page 0.072 0.059

[1.875] [1.637]

Age 0.008 0.015

[0.233] [0.464]

Internationalization score 1.221

***

1.051

[3.093] [2.513]

Focalization score 0.893

0.912

[2.619] [2.678]

Constant 0.230 -0.427 -0.900

[0.547] [-1.169] [-1.741]

2.33 7.38

4.47

0.062 0.174 0.208

0.036 0.151 0.162

BIC 192.763 183.496 189.006

Note

: Dependent variables were processed with logarithm during regression analysis; the value above the brackets is the stand-

ardized beta coefficients, and the value in the brackets is the t value; *, **, *** indicates significant differences at the levels of

0.1, 0.05, and 0.001, respectively.

5.2 Multiple Linear Regression Results

In this study, multiple linear regression was used for

data analysis. A total of 3 models were constructed:

model 1 included 2 control variables, model 2 in-

cluded 2 independent variables, and model 3 included

all variables (Table 3). From model 1 to model 3, R

increased from 0.06 to 0.21, and the adjusted R

in-

creased from 0.04 to 0.16, indicating that model 3 has

better fit and explanatory power. Only the F values of

model 2 and model 3 passed the significance test, in-

dicating that the results are still robust after control-

ling the length and age of journal articles.

The results show that higher citation internation-

alization and method focalization have a significant

effect on improving the impact of journal articles, es-

pecially after controlling the length and age of journal

articles. More importantly, the standardized beta co-

efficients of the two variables were almost the same.

The above results show that high citation internation-

alization and high method focalization can indeed im-

prove the impact of journal articles, which confirms

the hypothesis H1 and hypothesis H2.

In order to examine the impact difference between

different types research, t-test was used for analyza-

tion. First, journal articles were classified into two

categories of higher and lower internationalization

based on the median citation internationalization

score. Second, the two categories of the citation inter-

nationalization were combined with the types of

method focalization. Although there were four com-

binations in theory, unfortunately, the data showed

that there were only 2 types in 73 journal articles, 35

loose types and 38 competitive types. The results of

t-test showed that the t value between the two types

was 1.33, and there was a significant difference in im-

pact scores of journal articles at the level of 0.1. This

showed that the impact of competitive type research

was significantly higher than that of loose type re-

search, which partially proves the hypothesis H3.

6 RESEARCH FINDINGS AND

ACADEMIC CONTRIBUTIONS

6.1 4 Specific Paths can be Pointed for

Improving the Impact of Journal

Articles

In technology innovation policy evaluation, at least

two factors must be considered in order to improve

the impact of journal articles. On the one hand, we

should try to increase the method focalization, rather

than pursue the diversity and complexity of methods.

On the other hand, it is necessary to increase English

references in order to have dialogue with mainstream

articles. Although this study only confirms that the

impact of competitive type research is higher than

that of loose type research, and the differences be-

tween the other types have not been tested. To put it

in another way, the paper proves a specific path for

improving the impact of journal articles on policy

evaluation.

It should be noted that the four types of research

have different requirements for researchers. To con-

duct imitative research, researchers need to pay more

attention to international mainstream literature; to

ICPDI 2022 - International Conference on Public Management, Digital Economy and Internet Technology

434

conduct autonomous research, researchers need to be

familiar with various policy evaluation methods, and

be able to accurately use relevant methods to conduct

research; if both dialogue with the international main-

stream literature and more accurate methods can be

used, the impact of journal articles will be higher, but

the requirements for researchers will also be higher.

If the literature is cited within Chinese academia and

the evaluation methods are complex and diverse, such

a study is a waste of academic resources. Of the 73

journal articles in this study, 13 journal articles did

not cite any English literatures, but did not use too

many methods, not too much affecting the impact of

journal articles.

6.2 Promotion Role of Citation

Internationalization is Reconfirmed

in Policy Evaluation

The number of citations in journal articles has always

been an important part of bibliometric analysis. As

early as the 1980s, international journal articles con-

ducted bibliometric analysis on 8,251 citations in the

medical field, and found that the average citations per

article were between 13 and 27, with English citations

up to 91% (Bböttiger, 1983). A study in China con-

ducted bibliometric analysis on the journals of 38 uni-

versities (Natural Science Edition) in 2003 and found

that the average number of citations per article was

8.08. During the same period, the international jour-

nal articles showed that the average number of cita-

tions per article was 11 (Pardo, 2001). In addition, a

comparative study of citation bibliometric analysis on

5,683 journals in 59 countries and regions, and found

that the average number of citations per article in in-

ternational journals was 28, and that in Chinese jour-

nals was 14 (Jin, 2002). However, this comparison

does not seem to be generalized. For example, in tech-

nology journals, biology has the most citations per ar-

ticle, 12.73, while physics has the lowest, only 9.52

(Mao, 2003). The average number of citations per ar-

ticle in this study is 17.62±11.16, so at least in the

field of technology innovation policy evaluation, the

number of citations in Chinese journal articles is not

inferior to international journal articles.

In terms of the citation internationalization, the

average value of the results of this study is 0.33,

which is very close to the 0.35 of similar studies (Hu,

2007). It shows that the current efforts of China's

technology innovation policy evaluation in citation

internationalization are equal with most studies. In

terms of absolute numbers, the average number of

English language citations in the field of technology

innovation policy evaluation is 8, which is 3 more

than in the field of library and information (Wang,

2017). For this phenomenon, some researchers call

for citing Chinese journals more (Yang, 2012), but

some researchers believe that Chinese authors can

better grasp research hotspots by citing English jour-

nal articles (Zhang, 2020). Regardless of fields, if cit-

ing English journal articles has become a trend for im-

proving impact of journal articles, the citation in Eng-

lish should not be ignored. At least in the field of pol-

icy evaluation, to obtain high impact journal articles,

it is necessary to cite more international mainstream

literatures.

The study also found that the high internationali-

zation increases the impact of journal articles signifi-

cantly for those with high method focalization. More

specifically, the increase of citation internationaliza-

tion is limited for journal articles with low method fo-

calization. It means that the method focalization is

less relevant to the increase of the impact of journal

articles if the citation internationalization is low.

However, for journal articles with high citation inter-

nationalization, the more complex and inaccurate the

method is, the lower the impact of journal articles.

7 CONCLUSIONS

Based on the above research results, there are two im-

portant paths to increase the impact of journal articles

in China's technology innovation policy evaluation:

one is the citation internationalization, and the other

is the method focalization. If researchers want to pro-

duce high-impact results, they should consider both.

It is less difficult to increase the citation internation-

alization, but more difficult to increase the method fo-

calization. Although this study reveals the path of in-

creasing the impact of research on technology inno-

vation policy evaluation, the specific increasing

methods still needs to be explored in practice.

This study also has some limitations. First, based

on the theoretical framework, only competitive and

loose types are tested in the comparison of the four

types. The comparisons between the other types

needs to be examined in subsequent research. Second,

this study only selects policy evaluation journal arti-

cles in technology innovation policy, and the compar-

ison of other types of policy research in terms of cita-

tion internationalization and method focalization has

not been conducted. In addition, due to the complex-

ity of research method coding, the sample of this

study is only 73 journal articles, which is small com-

pared with hundreds or thousands of existing studies.

If efficient and accurate coding rules can be devel-

How to Improve the Impact of Journal Articles in Technology Innovation Policy Evaluation: Bibliometric Analysis Based on Core Journals

in China

435

oped, large amounts of journal articles can be effec-

tively compared in terms of research method, and the

theoretical framework of this study will be more use-

ful, which is also the focus of future research.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Our thanks go to prof. Xi Guo for his helpful discus-

sions on this topic.

This work is supported by grand 20YJC630046

Ministry of Education of the People's Republic of

China Humanities and Social Sciences Research

Youth Fund Project: Research on the Stability of

Grassland Ecological Protection Policies in Inner

Mongolia - Based on the Government Attention The-

ory. This work partially supported by grant

2019STWM005 of the Special Project for Ecological

Civilization Construction of Inner Mongolia Normal

University in 2019.

REFERENCES

A. M. Wang, Analysis of foreign language citations in core

journals of library and information, Library and Infor-

mation Service, 61(S1), pp. 144-147+158 (2017).

B. H. Jin, J. Feng, X. Y. Zhu, etc., International comparison

of quantitative indicators of SCI journals, Chinese Jour-

nal of Scientific and Technical, 13(2), pp. 89-94 (2002).

C. Pardo, M. Reolid, M. -V. Delicado, et al., Nursing re-

search in Spain: bibliometric analysis of references of

research journal articles in the decade 1985-1994, Jour-

nal of Advanced Nursing, 35(6), pp. 933-943 (2001).

D. S. Mao and J. J. Zhou, The relationship between the

number of references and the quality of journal articles,

Chinese Journal of Scientific and Technical Periodi-

cals, 14(1), pp. 34-36 (2003).

D. S. Mao and J. J. Zhou, The relationship between the

number of references and the quality of journal articles,

Chinese Journal of Scientific and Technical Periodi-

cals, 14(1), pp. 34-36 (2003).

F. R. Baumgartner, C. Breunig, C. Green-Pedersen, et al.,

Punctuated Equilibrium in comparative perspective,

American Journal of Political Science, 53(3), pp.603-

619 (2009).

F. C. Liu and Y. T. Sun, The course of, trend in and proposal

for evolution from S&T policies to innovation policies:

based on the empirical analysis of China's 289 innova-

tion policy documents, China Soft Science, 5, pp. 34-42

(2007).

G. B. Lu and F. H. Zeng, Review of China's science and

technology innovation policies to build an innovation

oriented country, Science & Technology Progress and

Policy, 8, pp. 1-4 (2007).

G. D. Webster, P. K. Jonason, T. O. Schember, Hot topics

and popular journal articles in Evolutionary Psychol-

ogy: analyses of title words and citation counts in Evo-

lution and Human Behavior, 1979-2008, Evolutionary

Psychology, 7(3), pp. 348-362 (2009).

H. T. Fang and Y. Zhang, A review of China's financial and

taxation policies supporting technology innovation

(1978-2006), Forum on Science and Technology in

China, 9, pp. 10-16 (2007).

H. D. Zhou, Science and technology policy studies: evolu-

tion, differentiation, and convergence, Science of Sci-

ence and Management of S.& T., 32(11), pp. 5-13

(2011).

H. Guo and Y. T. Pan, Average impact factor score: a new

indicator for evaluating the quality of academic journal

articles, Acta Editologica, 6, pp. 475-477 (2006).

H. T

. Wang, Z. Y. Tan and T. Chen. Research on the factors

affecting papers' citation frequency, Studies in Science

of Science, 34(2), pp. 171-177 (2016).

H. Huang, Do internationalization and focalization increase

the impact of journal articles? Journal of Intelligence,

39(8), pp. 203-207 (2020).

J. S. Peng, W. X. Sun and W. G. Zhong, The evolution of

Chinese technological and innovational policies and the

empirical research on the performance(1978-2006), Sci-

entific Research Management, 4, pp. 134-150 (2008).

J. M. Li, Russian technology policy and its impact on econ-

omy, The Journal of World Economy, 8, pp. 43-47

(1997).

J. S. Zheng, An analysis on the development of the core

journals on library and information science based on

bibliometrics, Information and Documentation Ser-

vices, 4, pp. 108-111 (2011).

J. L. Liu, The appraisal study on public science and tech-

nology policy based on the factual dimension, Economy

and Management, 25(8), pp. 17-22 (2011).

L. Xue, A review and reflection on 40 years of reform and

development of China's STI policy, Studies in Science

of Science, 36 (12), pp. 2113-2115 (2018).

L. Zhang, W. T. Yang, Y. You, etc., Fuzzy evaluation and

verification of influencing factors of paper citation fre-

quency in journalism and communication: an empirical

analysis based on 16 CSSCI journals, Publishing Re-

search, 5, pp. 65-69 (2018).

L. Jian, J. He and J. Zhou, Document factors impacting on

the citation of an article: multi-fields view, Library and

Information Service, 55(20), pp. 32-35 (2011).

L. S. Gao, J. B. Zheng, H. Y. Chen, etc., On the references

of technology journal articles, Acta Editologica, 3, pp.

166-170 (1992).

L. Johanson, Viewpoint operators in European languages,

in Tense and Aspect in the Languages of Europe, eds.

Ö. Dahl., (Berlin: de Gruyter, 2000), pp.27-187.

L. X. Zhao, Research on theoretical method of innovation

policy evaluation—based on the evaluation framework

of public policy evaluation Studies in Science of Sci-

ence, 32(2), pp. 195-202 (2014).

L. E. Bböttiger, Reference lists in medical journals—lan-

guage and length, Journal of Internal Medicine, 21

4(1).

pp. 73-77 (1983).

ICPDI 2022 - International Conference on Public Management, Digital Economy and Internet Technology

436

L. L

. Hu, L. B. Liu and J. Li, Statistical analysis of refer-

ences in 26 university journals, Journal of Tianjin Uni-

versity of Commerce, 3, pp. 66-69 (2007).

L. J. Yang and X. Y. Wan, The impact of cite habits to the

citations of journal articles in China—a case study of

information science, Information Science, 30(7), pp.

1093-1096 (2012).

M. H. Biglu, The impact of references per article in the SCI

to Impact Factors and the Matthew Effect, Scientomet-

rics, 74(3), pp. 453-470 (2008).

Q. F. Xu, X. D. Kang and C. B. Zhang, Study on some fac-

tors affecting paper's citation counts in multi-journal

comparative perspective, Journal of Intelligence, 37(2),

pp. 147-153 (2018).

R. Z. Liu, Y. X. Gong, Review and reflection: the misuse

of quantitative research in public administration, Jour-

nal of Public Management, 17(1), pp. 152-158+176

(2020).

S. C. Qiu and H. H. Cui, A modern review of “Technology

is the Primary Productive Force”, Productivity Re-

search, 9, pp. 78-79+89 (2012).

W. L. Wang, B. You, P. Zhang, et al., Implications on edit-

ing of the highly cited papers in Sci-Tech journals, Acta

Editologica, 28(6), pp. 572-574 (2016).

X. D. Chen and P. Hu, Empirical study on innovation policy

performance in China, Studies in Science of Science, 1,

pp. 108-112 (2004).

X. W. Xin, Public policy evaluation: systems & procedures,

Chinese Public Administration, 2, pp. 58-62 (2008).

X. Y. Mou, K. L. Gong, J. Xie, etc., Contributing factors of

citations: an empirical study of library and information

science in China, Documentation, Information &

Knowledge, 4, pp. 43-52 (2018).

X. Wu and R. Wei, Hesperian social policy evaluation: phil-

osophical foundation, methodology, content and para-

digm, Journal of Northeastern University (Social Sci-

ence), 13(4), pp. 328-334 (2011).

Y. Chen, C. Song, J. S. Zhou, etc., Study on the factors af-

fecting the citation frequency of papers from the per-

spective of bibliometrics—comment on the relationship

between usage and citation, Journal of Intelligence,

38(4), pp. 96-104 (2019).

Y. G. Zhang and H. T. Qi, The quantitative evaluation re-

search of Mass Entrepreneurship and Innovation—

based on ten Dual Innovation Policies of 2017, Journal

of Intelligence, 37(3), pp. 158-164+186 (2017).

Y. G. Zhang, C. C. Song, Y. N. Wang and Y. Qi, Research

on the effect of science and technology innovation pol-

icy based on web search data, Soft Science, 32(09), pp.

24-29 (2018).

Z. Li, Hot spots and discussion on China's science and tech-

nology innovation policies, Studies in Science of Sci-

ence, 35(2), pp. 177-182 (2017).

Z. Q. Ge, L. Miao, D. L. Zhao, etc., A preliminary study on

the quantitative relationship between the number of ref-

erences in technology journals and some citation indi-

cators, Acta Editologica, 27(5), pp. 423-425 (2015).

Z. J. Zhang and L. P. Yu, Can the foreign-language refer-

ences improve the influence of academic journals? Li-

brary Tribune, 1, pp. 1-7 (2020).

How to Improve the Impact of Journal Articles in Technology Innovation Policy Evaluation: Bibliometric Analysis Based on Core Journals

in China

437