Reading_A new science of hapiness

https://www.wendangku.net/doc/7b9841367.html,/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1015832,00.html

The New Science of Happiness

By CLAUDIA WALLIS Sunday, Jan. 09, 2005

Sugary white sand gleams under the bright yucatan sun, aquamarine water teems with tropical fish and lazy sea turtles, cold Mexican beer beckons beneath the shady thatch of palapas—it's hard to imagine a sweeter spot than Akumal, Mexico, to contemplate the joys of being alive. And that was precisely the agenda when three leading psychologists gathered in this Mexican paradise to plot a new direction for psychology.

For most of its history, psychology had concerned itself with all that ails the human mind: anxiety, depression, neurosis, obsessions, paranoia, delusions. The goal of practitioners was to bring patients from a negative, ailing state to a neutral normal, or, as University of Pennsylvania psychologist Martin Seligman puts it, "from a minus five to a zero." It was Seligman who had summoned the others to Akumal that New Year's Day in 1998—his first day as president of the American Psychological Association (A.P.A.)—to share a vision of a new goal for psychology. "I realized that my profession was half-baked. It wasn't enough for us to nullify disabling conditions and get to zero. We needed to ask, What are the enabling conditions that make human beings flourish? How do we get from zero to plus five?"

Every incoming A.P.A. president is asked to choose a theme for his or her yearlong term in office. Seligman was thinking big. He wanted to persuade substantial numbers in the profession to explore the region north of zero, to look at what actively made people feel fulfilled, engaged and meaningfully happy. Mental health, he reasoned, should be more than the absence of mental illness. It should be something akin to a vibrant and muscular fitness of the human mind and spirit.

Over the decades, a few psychological researchers had ventured out of the dark realm of mental illness into the sunny land of the mentally hale and hearty. Some of Seligman's own research, for instance, had focused on optimism, a trait shown to be associated with good physical health, less depression and mental illness, longer life and, yes, greater happiness. Perhaps the most eager explorer of this terrain was University of Illinois psychologist Edward Diener, a.k.a. Dr. Happiness. For more than two decades, basically ever since he got tenure and could risk entering an unfashionable field, Diener had been examining what does and does not make people feel satisfied with life. Seligman's goal was to shine a light on such work and encourage much, much more of it.

To help him realize his vision, Seligman invited Ray Fowler, then the long-reigning and influential CEO of the A.P.A., to join him in Akumal. He also invited Hungarian-born psychologist Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi (pronounced cheeks sent me high), best known for exploring a happy state of mind called flow, the feeling of complete engagement in a creative or playful activity familiar to athletes, musicians, video-game enthusiasts—almost anyone who loses himself in a favorite pursuit. By the end of their week at the beach, the three had plans for the first-ever conference on positive psychology, to be held in Akumal a year later—it was to

become an annual event—and a strategy for recruiting young talent to the nascent field. Within a few months, Seligman, who has a talent for popularizing and promoting his areas of interest, was approached by the Templeton Foundation in England, which proceeded to create lucrative awards for research in positive psych. The result: an explosion of research on happiness, optimism, positive emotions and healthy character traits. Seldom has an academic field been brought so quickly and deliberately to life.

What Makes Us Happy So, what has science learned about what makes the human heart sing? More than one might imagine—along with some surprising things about what doesn't ring our inner chimes. Take wealth, for instance, and all the delightful things that money can buy. Research by Diener, among others, has shown that once your basic needs are met, additional income does little to raise your sense of satisfaction with life. A good education? Sorry, Mom and Dad, neither education nor, for that matter, a high IQ paves the road to happiness. Youth? No, again. In fact, older people are more consistently satisfied with their lives than the young. And they're less prone to dark moods: a recent survey by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found that people ages 20 to 24 are sad for an average of 3.4 days a month, as opposed to just 2.3 days for people ages 65 to 74. Marriage? A complicated picture: married people are generally happier than singles, but that may be because they were happier to begin with. Sunny days? Nope, although a 1998 study showed that Midwesterners think folks living in balmy California are happier and that Californians incorrectly believe this about themselves too. On the positive side, religious faith seems to genuinely lift the spirit, though it's tough to tell whether it's the God part or the community aspect that does the heavy lifting. Friends? A giant yes. A 2002 study conducted at the University of Illinois by Diener and Seligman found that the most salient characteristics shared by the 10% of students with the highest levels of happiness and the fewest signs of depression were their strong ties to friends and family and commitment to spending time with them. "Word needs to be spread," concludes Diener. "It is important to work on social skills, close interpersonal ties and social support in order to be happy."

Measuring Our Moods Of course, happiness is not a static state. Even the happiest of people—the cheeriest 10%—feel blue at times. And even the bluest have their moments of joy. That has presented a challenge to social scientists trying to measure happiness. That, along with the simple fact that happiness is inherently subjective. To get around those challenges, researchers have devised several methods of assessment. Diener has created one of the most basic and widely used tools, the Satisfaction with Life Scale. Though some scholars have questioned the validity of this simple, five-question survey, Diener has found that it squares well with other measures of happiness, such as

impressions from friends and family, expression of positive emotion and low incidence of depression.

Researchers have devised other tools to look at more transient moods. Csikszentmihalyi pioneered a method of using beepers and, later, handheld computers to contact subjects at random intervals. A pop-up screen presents an array of questions: What are you doing? How much are you enjoying it? Are you alone or interacting with someone else? The method, called

experience sampling, is costly, intrusive and time consuming, but it provides an excellent picture of satisfaction and engagement at a specific time during a specific activity.

Just last month, a team led by Nobel-prizewinning psychologist Daniel Kahneman of Princeton University unveiled a new tool for sizing up happiness: the day-reconstruction method. Participants fill out a long diary and questionnaire detailing everything they did on the previous day and whom they were with at the time and rating a range of feelings during each episode (happy, impatient, depressed, worried, tired, etc.) on a seven-point scale. The method was tested on a group of 900 women in Texas with some surprising results. It turned out that the five most positive activities for these women were (in descending order) sex, socializing, relaxing, praying or meditating, and eating. Exercising and watching TV were not far behind. But way down the list was "taking care of my children," which ranked below cooking and only slightly above housework.

That may seem surprising, given that people frequently cite their children as their biggest source of delight—which was a finding of a TIME poll on happiness conducted last month. When asked, "What one thing in life has brought you the greatest happiness?", 35% said it was their children or grandchildren or both. (Spouse was far behind at just 9%, and religion a runner-up at 17%.) The discrepancy with the study of Texas women points up one of the key debates in happiness research: Which kind of information is more meaningful—global reports of well-being ("My life is happy, and my children are my greatest joy") or more specific data on enjoyment of day-to-day experiences ("What a night! The kids were such a pain!")? The two are very different, and studies show they do not correlate well. Our overall happiness is not merely the sum of our happy moments minus the sum of our angry or sad ones.

This is true whether you are looking at how satisfied you are with your life in general or with something more specific, such as your kids, your car, your job or your vacation. Kahneman likes to distinguish between the experiencing self and the remembering self. His studies show that what you remember of an experience is particularly influenced by the emotional high and low points and by how it ends. So, if you were to randomly beep someone on vacation in Italy, you might catch that person waiting furiously for a slow-moving waiter to take an order or grousing about the high cost of the pottery. But if you ask when it's over, "How was the vacation in Italy?", the average person remembers the peak moments and how he or she felt at the end of the trip. The power of endings has been demonstrated in some remarkable experiments by Kahneman. One such study involved people undergoing a colonoscopy, an uncomfortable procedure in which a flexible scope is moved through the colon. While a control group had the standard procedure, half the subjects endured an extra 60 seconds during which the scope was held stationary; movement of the scope is typically the source of the discomfort. It turned out that members of the group that had the somewhat longer procedure with a benign ending found it less unpleasant than the control group, and they were more willing to have a repeat colonoscopy. Asking people how happy they are, Kahneman contends, "is very much like asking them about the colonoscopy after it's over. There's a lot that escapes them." Kahneman therefore believes that social scientists studying happiness should pay careful attention to people's actual

experiences rather than just survey their reflections. That, he feels, is especially relevant if research is to inform quality-of-life policies like how much money our society should devote to parks and recreation or how much should be invested in improving workers' commutes. "You cannot ignore how people spend their time," he says, "when thinking about well-being." Seligman, in contrast, puts the emphasis on the remembering self. "I think we are our memories more than we are the sum total of our experiences," he says. For him, studying moment-to-moment experiences puts too much emphasis on transient pleasures and displeasures. Happiness goes deeper than that, he argues in his 2002 book Authentic Happiness. As a result of his research, he finds three components of happiness: pleasure ("the smiley-face piece"), engagement (the depth of involvement with one's family, work, romance and hobbies) and meaning (using personal strengths to serve some larger end). Of those three roads to a happy, satisfied life, pleasure is the least consequential, he insists: "This is newsworthy because so many Americans build their lives around pursuing pleasure. It turns out that engagement and meaning are much more important."

Can We Get Happier? One of the biggest issues in happiness research is the question of how much our happiness is under our control. In 1996 University of Minnesota researcher David Lykken published a paper looking at the role of genes in determining one's sense of satisfaction in life. Lykken, now 76, gathered information on 4,000 sets of twins born in Minnesota from 1936 through 1955. After comparing happiness data on identical vs. fraternal twins, he came to the conclusion that about 50% of one's satisfaction with life comes from genetic programming. (Genes influence such traits as having a sunny, easygoing personality; dealing well with stress; and feeling low levels of anxiety and depression.) Lykken found that circumstantial factors like income, marital status, religion and education contribute only about 8% to one's overall well-being. He attributes the remaining percentage to "life's slings and arrows."

Because of the large influence of our genes, Lykken proposed the idea that each of us has a happiness set point much like our set point for body weight. No matter what happens in our life—good, bad, spectacular, horrific—we tend to return in short order to our set range. Some post-tsunami images last week of smiling Asian children returning to school underscored this amazing capacity to right ourselves. And a substantial body of research documents our tendency to return to the norm. A study of lottery winners done in 1978 found, for instance, that they did not wind up significantly happier than a control group. Even people who lose the use of their limbs to a devastating accident tend to bounce back, though perhaps not all the way to their base line. One study found that a week after the accident, the injured were severely angry and anxious, but after eight weeks "happiness was their strongest emotion," says Diener. Psychologists call this adjustment to new circumstances adaptation. "Everyone is surprised by how happy paraplegics can be," says Kahneman. "The reason is that they are not paraplegic full time. They do other things. They enjoy their meals, their friends. They read the news. It has to do with the allocation of attention."

In his extensive work on adaptation, Edward Diener has found two life events that seem to knock people lastingly below their happiness set point: loss of a spouse and loss of a job. It takes five to

eight years for a widow to regain her previous sense of well-being. Similarly, the effects of a job loss linger long after the individual has returned to the work force.

When he proposed his set-point theory eight years ago, Lykken came to a drastic conclusion. "It may be that trying to be happier is as futile as trying to be taller," he wrote. He has since come to regret that sentence. "I made a dumb statement in the original article," he tells TIME. "It's clear that we can change our happiness levels widely—up or down.'' Lykken's revisionist thinking coincides with the view of the positive-psychology movement, which has put a premium on research showing you can raise your level of happiness. For Seligman and like-minded researchers, that involves working on the three components of happiness—getting more pleasure out of life (which can be done by savoring sensory experiences, although, he warns, "you're never going to make a curmudgeon into a giggly person"), becoming more engaged in what you do and finding ways of making your life feel more meaningful.

There are numerous ways to do that, they argue. At the University of California at Riverside, psychologist Sonja Lyubomirsky is using grant money from the National Institutes of Health to study different kinds of happiness boosters. One is the gratitude journal—a diary in which subjects write down things for which they are thankful. She has found that taking the time to conscientiously count their blessings once a week significantly increased subjects' overall satisfaction with life over a period of six weeks, whereas a control group that did not keep journals had no such gain.

Gratitude exercises can do more than lift one's mood. At the University of California at Davis, psychologist Robert Emmons found they improve physical health, raise energy levels and, for patients with neuromuscular disease, relieve pain and fatigue. "The ones who benefited most tended to elaborate more and have a wider span of things they're grateful for," he notes. Another happiness booster, say positive psychologists, is performing acts of altruism or kindness—visiting a nursing home, helping a friend's child with homework, mowing a neighbor's lawn, writing a letter to a grandparent. Doing five kind acts a week, especially all in a single day, gave a measurable boost to Lyubomirsky's subjects.

Seligman has tested similar interventions in controlled trials at Penn and in huge experiments conducted over the Internet. The single most effective way to turbocharge your joy, he says, is to make a "gratitude visit." That means writing a testimonial thanking a teacher, pastor or grandparent—anyone to whom you owe a debt of gratitude—and then visiting that person to read him or her the letter of appreciation. "The remarkable thing," says Seligman, "is that people who do this just once are measurably happier and less depressed a month later. But it's gone by three months." Less powerful but more lasting, he says, is an exercise he calls three blessings—taking time each day to write down a trio of things that went well and why. "People are less depressed and happier three months later and six months later."

Seligman's biggest recommendation for lasting happiness is to figure out (courtesy of his website, https://www.wendangku.net/doc/7b9841367.html,) your strengths and find new ways to deploy them. Increasingly, his work, done in collaboration with Christopher Peterson at the University of Michigan, has focused on defining such human strengths and virtues as generosity, humor, gratitude and zest

and studying how they relate to happiness. "As a professor, I don't like this," Seligman says, "but the cerebral virtues—curiosity, love of learning—are less strongly tied to happiness than interpersonal virtues like kindness, gratitude and capacity for love."

Why do exercising gratitude, kindness and other virtues provide a lift? "Giving makes you feel good about yourself," says Peterson. "When you're volunteering, you're distracting yourself from your own existence, and that's beneficial. More fuzzily, giving puts meaning into your life. You have a sense of purpose because you matter to someone else." Virtually all the happiness exercises being tested by positive psychologists, he says, make people feel more connected to others.

That seems to be the most fundamental finding from the science of happiness. "Almost every person feels happier when they're with other people," observes Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi. "It's paradoxical because many of us think we can hardly wait to get home and be alone with nothing to do, but that's a worst-case scenario. If you're alone with nothing to do, the quality of your experience really plummets."

But can a loner really become more gregarious through acts-of-kindness exercises? Can a dyed-in-the-wool pessimist learn to see the glass as half full? Can gratitude journals work their magic over the long haul? And how many of us could keep filling them with fresh thankful thoughts year after year? Sonja Lyubomirsky believes it's all possible: "I'll quote Oprah here, which I don't normally do. She was asked how she runs five miles a day, and she said, 'I recommit to it every day of my life.' I think happiness is like that. Every day you have to renew your commitment. Hopefully, some of the strategies will become habitual over time and not a huge effort."

But other psychologists are more skeptical. Some simply doubt that personality is that flexible or that individuals can or should change their habitual coping styles. "If you're a pessimist who really thinks through in detail what might go wrong, that's a strategy that's likely to work very well for you," says Julie Norem, a psychology professor at Wellesley College and the author of The Positive Power of Negative Thinking. "In fact, you may be messed up if you try to substitute a positive attitude." She is worried that the messages of positive psychology reinforce "a lot of American biases" about how individual initiative and a positive attitude can solve complex problems.

Who's right? This is an experiment we can all do for ourselves. There's little risk in trying some extra gratitude and kindness, and the results—should they materialize—are their own reward.

Web of science数据库分析

摘要：本文主要使用了百度、谷歌等搜索引擎和Web of science数据库对包信和院士的研究内容及其研究成果进行了分析，通过百度、谷歌、个人主页对包信和院士的基本信息进行了解；通过Web of science数据库对包信和院士的研究方向、引文数据、合作者、基金资助机构、出版物进行了了解。并对其2014年5月的一篇文章进行了深入的分析。 一、基本信息 包信和，理学博士，研究员，博士生导师、中科院院士、物理化学家，中国科学院大连化学物理研究所研究员，现任中科院沈阳分院院长，复旦大学常务副校长，兼任中国科学技术大学化学物理系主任。 他的个人工作经历为： 1989年至1995年获洪堡基金资助，在德国马普学会Fritz-Haber研究所任访问学者，1995年应聘回国。 1995年至2000年在中科院大连化学物理研究所工作。 2000年8月至2007年3月任大连化学物理研究所所长。 2003年3月起任中国科技大学化学物理系系主任。 2009年3月起任沈阳分院院长。 2009年当选为中国科学院院士。 2015年9月经教育部研究决定，任命包信和为复旦大学常务副校长 其次在大连化学物理研究所的个人介绍和包信和院士的课题组主页里搜集了对其研究方向的简介： 包信和研究员主要从事表面化学与催化基础和应用研究。发现次表层氧对金属银催化选择氧化的增强效应，揭示了次表层结构对表面催化的调变规律，制备出具有独特低温活性和选择性的纳米催化剂，解决了重整氢气中微量CO造成燃料电池电极中毒失活的难题。发现了纳米催化体系的协同限域效应，研制成碳管限域的纳米金属铁催化剂和纳米Rh-Mn催化剂，使催

化合成气转化的效率成倍提高。在甲烷活化方面，以分子氧为氧化剂，实现了甲烷在80℃条件下直接高效氧化为甲醇的反应；创制了Mo/MCM-22催化剂，使甲烷直接芳构化制苯的单程收率大幅度提高。 二、研究成果分析 利用Web of Science搜索包老师的文章，总共搜索到497篇文章，对检索报告创建引文报告，如图2.1所示。文章被引总频次达到12804次，平均每篇文章被引25.76次，h-index值为56，表示在包老师所发的文章中，每篇被引用了至少56次的论文总共有56篇左图为每年出版的文献数图标，2000年以来，每年出版的文献数量基本稳定，在30篇左右，研究状态保持稳定。其中2015年发表文章篇数最高，2015年是个高产年。 根据每年的引文数图标可以看出，每年的引文数不断上升，表明其发表的文章是有生命力、有价值的。也表明每年发文的质量不断在上涨。 图2.1创建引文报告 对检索结果进行分析。图2.2是对作者进行分析，得到如下图所示的结果，可以看到合作者的信息，其中与293名作者有过合作。其中合作最多的为韩秀文老师（大连化物所）、马丁老师(北京大学)。

Web of Science数据库的检索与利用

Web of Science 数据库的检索与利用 解放军医学图书馆杜永莉 一、引文检索概述 （一）基本概念 1. 引文（Citation）：文献中被引用、参考的文献(Cited Work),也称施引文献，其作者称为被引著者（Cited Author）。 2. 来源文献（Source）：提供引文的文献本身称为来源文献，其作者称为引用著者（Citing Author）。 3. 引文索引（Citation Index）：通过搜集大量来源文献及其引文，并揭示文献之间引用与被引用关系的检索工具。 4. 引文检索：是以被引用文献为检索起点来查找引用文献的过程。 （二）引文的历史回顾 引文的创始人Dr.Eugene Garfield博士是美国科学信息研究所（ISI）的创始人，现在仍然是科学信息研究所的名义董事长，还是美国信息科学协会的前任主席、The Scientist 董事会的主席、Research America董事会的成员。另外他还是文献计量学的创始人。 Dr.Garfield于1955年在Science上发表了具有化时代意义的学术论文：“Citation Indexes for Science: A New Dimension in Documentation through Association of Ideas.”他在这篇文章中描述科研人员可以利用引文加速研究过程、评估工作影响、跟踪科学趋势；阐明引文是学术研究中学术信息获取的重要工具。1957 他创建了美国科学信息研究所(Institute for Scientific Information， ISI)。

1961 年， ISI 推出了 Science Citation Index ， SCI 。一种5卷印刷型刊物，包括613种期刊140万条引文的索引。1966年，ISI发布磁带形式的数据，1989年推出CD-ROM 光盘版，1992年ISI为汤姆森科技信息集团接管（Thomson Scientific），1997年推出系列引文数据库（Web of Science)，2001年建立具有跨库检索功能的（ISI Web of Knowledge）。 20世纪30年代中期，另外一个著名计量学家布拉德福（S.C.Bradford)在对大量的期刊分布进行研究之后，得出了布拉德福定律(二八定律），揭示出各学科核心期刊的存在，这些核心期刊组成了所有学科的文献基础,重要论文会发表在相对较少的核心期刊上；因此从文献学的角度,没有必要将已经出版的所有期刊全部收录，从数据库的质量上说，则需要有一套科学的流程筛选高质量期刊，为读者提供高质量的学术信息。 Garfield 博士从建立引文数据库开始，经过几十年的时间，建立了一整套期刊筛选的工作流程，每年从全球出版的学术期刊中，筛选出各学科中质量高、信息量大、使用率高的核心期刊。由于这套流程对期刊一些客观指数的长期跟踪，衍生出了另外两个数据库：期刊引证报告（Journal Citation Reports，JCR)和基本科学计量指标（Essential Science Indicators）。 （三）引文的作用 了解某一课题发生、发展、变化过程；查找某一重要理论或概念的由来；跟踪当前研究热点；了解自已以及同行研究工作的进展；查询某一理论是否仍然有效，而且已经得到证明或已被修正；考证基础理论研究如何转化到应用领域；评估和鉴别某一研究工作在世界学术界产生的影响力；发现科学研究新突破点；了解你的成果被引用情况；引文检索为科研人员开辟了一条新颖、实用的检索途径；同时为文献学、科学学、文献计量学等分析研究提供参考数据，如衡量期刊质量、测定文献老化程度、观察学科之间的渗透交叉关系、评价科研人员的学术水平，引文数据库是不可缺少重要工具。 二、Web of Science的检索途径 （一）科学引文索引简介

Web of Science使用方法

Web of Science系统 在科技发展与竞争力 分析中应用 周宁丽 2012.10

内容提纲 1.WOS及其功能简介 2.科技文献检索以及分析概念与术语 3.WOS文献检索功能及其利用 4.WOS文献分析功能及其应用 5.WOS引文分析功能及其应用

1. WOS 及其功能简介 ?WOS 简介 WOS（Web of Science)数据库是汤森路透科技集团创建的WOK（ISI web of Knowledge）信息平台中的一个系统。 ?WOS 数据资源 3个引文数据库：Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED) --1900-至今 （涵盖8,200种核心期刊） Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI) --1996-至今（涵盖2,800种核心期刊） Conference Proceedings Citation Index -Science (CPCI-S) --1990-至今（涵盖60,000个会 议录） 1个化学数据库: Current Chemical Reactions (CCR-EXPANDED) --1986-至今 ?WOS 主要功能 1.收录、引用、主题文献检索 2.文献与引文统计分析 3. 文献管理与跟踪 ?WOS 学科领域 （1）自然科学、工程技术、生物医 学等150 多个学科领域 （2）人文社科50多个学科领域

2. 1 科技文献收引检索概念 ?科技论文收录检索 选用权威的文献检索系统（如：WOS、ISTP、EI、PUMED、 SCOPAS、CSCD、CSSCI），对其数据库系统收录所发表的期刊、会议文献进行检索 ?科技论文引文检索 利用权威的文献检索系统（如：WOS、ISTP、EI、PUMED、 SCOPAS、CSCD、CSSCI），对其数据库系统收录的期刊、会议文献的引用频次进行查询，对其引文进行检索 ?课题（主题）文献检索 利用权威的文献检索系统（如：WOS、ISTP、EI、PUMED、 SCOPAS、CSCD、CSSCI），对某学科、研究主题进行相关文献检索

Web of Science 各种标号详解

web of Science数据库几个标识（DOI、UT、IDS Number、ISSN、ISBN）的含义 无论是检索机构还是文章作者，对于web of Science数据库记录格式中出现的DOI、UT、IDS Number、ISBN ISSN等英文标识不尽了解，经咨询ＩＳＩ公司及相应的检索后，把这些标识的意思做简要说明。 （1）DOI（Digital Object Unique Identifier）：对象唯一标识符 传统方式是采用URL对因特网上数字资源进行标识，用户点击URL链接即可访问对应的数字资源。然而URL所代表的只是数字资源的物理位置，并不是数字资源本身，一旦资源的物理位置发生变化，原来的URL将成为―死链‖。因此，仅仅使用URL来代表数字对象和链接已经不能适应分布式动态环境的要求。数字对象唯一标识符（Digital Object Unique Identifier）由此产生，它并非只是一个不重复的字符串，真正有用的唯一标识标符系统应该是一套包括名称空间、唯一标识符、命名机构、命名登记系统和解析系统5 个部分的完整体系。 简要地说，对所标识的数字对象而言，DOI相当于人的身份证，具有唯一性。保证了在网络环境下 对数字化对象的准确提取，有效地避免重复。一个网络对象（各种数字资源）一个编号例如——DOI:10.1134/S1061920808010020 （2）UT（Unique Article Identifier）是文章的唯一识别符——收录号 UT –Unique Article Identifier字段是ISI (现在公司名称Thomson Reuters)分配给一篇文章的唯一识别符。可以唯一地识别一条参考文献。它没有显示在Web of Science文章的全记录页里，当输出记录保存为HTML格式时，可以看到UT字段文章的唯一标识符。一篇文章一个编号 例如——UT ISI:000259889100041 （3）IDS Number——检索号 Thomson Reuters Document Solution? 编号。此号码是识别期刊和期号的唯一编号，用于订阅Document Solution 中的文献的全文。一本期刊每一期发表的文章都是一个IDS号。一个期刊的一期对应一个编号 例如——IDS Number:358AR （4）ISSN 国际标准期刊号(International Standard Serial Number)，是标识定期出版物（如期刊）和电子出版物的唯一编号，共八位。一个期刊一个编号 （5）ISBN 国际标准书号(International Standard Book Number) 是一种机器读取的唯一标识符，可准确无误地标识书籍。 例如——ISBN：7-5023-4424-1

Web of Science(SCI,SSCI,AHCI,CPCI)数据库资源介绍

Web of Science (SCIE,SSCI,AHCI,CPCI) 登录https://www.wendangku.net/doc/7b9841367.html, 资源简介： Web of Science 是汤森路透科技集团（Thomson Reuters）的产品，Web of Science 包括著名的三大引文索引数据库(SCIE,SSCI,A&HCI)。本馆开通试用的数据库如下： 科学引文索引（Science Citation Index Expanded，简称SCIE），被公认为世界范围最权威的科学技术文献的索引工具，能够提供科学技术领域最重要的研究成果。提供8600多种涵盖176 个学科的世界一流学术科技期刊的文献信息。 社会科学引文索引（Social Sciences Citation Index，简称SSCI），收录3100多种涵盖56个学科的世界一流学术性社会科学期刊的文献信息。 艺术与人文引文索引（Arts & Humanities Citation Index，简称A&HCI），收录艺术与人文学科领域内1,600多种学术期刊，数据可回溯至1975年。同时还从Web of Science 收录的8,000多种科技与社会科学期刊中，筛选出与艺术人文相关的学术文献。 会议论文引文索引（Conference Proceedings Citation Index，简称CPCI），汇聚了全球最重要的学术会议信息，包括专著、丛书、预印本以及来源于期刊的会议论文，提供了综合全面、多学科的会议论文资料。其内容分为两个版本：Conference Proceedings Citation Index - Science (CPCI-S，原ISTP）；Conference Proceedings Citation Index - Social Science & Humanities (CPCI-SSH，原ISSHP）。 Web of Science (SCIE,SSCI,A&HCI,CPCI)数据库的特色 利用Web of Science可以快速检索科研信息，可以全面了解有关某一学科、某一课题的研究信息。在提供文献的书目与文摘信息的同时，Web of Science(SCIE,SSCI,AHCI,CPCI)设置了"引文索引"（Citation Index），提供该文献所引用的所有参考文献信息以及由此而建立的引文索引，揭示了学术文献之间承前启后的内在联系，帮助科研人员发现该文献研究主题的起源、发展以及相关研究。还可通过Email和RSS定制主题及引文跟踪服务，随时把握最新研究动态,跟踪国际学术前沿。 Web of Science收录各学科领域中权威、有影响力的期刊，由于其严格的选刊标准和引文索引机制，使得Web of Science(SCIE,SSCI,AHCI,CPCI)在作为文献检索工具的同时，也成为文献计量学和科学计量学的最重要基本评价工具之一。 免费学习资源： 数据库使用指南下载：https://www.wendangku.net/doc/7b9841367.html,/productraining/

web of science课题检索技巧

点击查看更多应用技巧 应用技巧 1.1怎样了解某研究课题的总体发展趋势？ 检索结果告诉我们找到了152篇“侯建国”院士的文章。（如果有重名的现象，请参考我们随后提供的有关作者甄别工具的应用技巧。） 1．访问Web of Science数据库检索论文 请访问：https://www.wendangku.net/doc/7b9841367.html,，进入ISI Web of Knowledge平台；选择Web of Science数据库，(以下图示为WOK4.0版新界面)。 示例：如果我们希望检索“中国科技大学”“侯建国”院士在Science Citation Index (SCI)中收录文章的情况。 2．生成引文报告 在检索结果界面上，通过右侧的生成引文报告功能，您可以快速了解该课题的总体研究趋势，并且找到本课题的国际影响力年代变化情况。

结论：通过Web of Science提供的强大的引文报告功能，您可以点击创建引文报告，自动生成课题引文报告，从而提高您的科研效率。 3 利用分析功能了解课题发展趋势 除了自动创建引文报告之外，您也可以利用分析功能生成论文出版年的图式。并且，利用分析功能您可以任意查看某些出版年的论文情况。

结论：通过Web of Science提供的强大的引文报告功能，您可以点击创建引文报告，自动生成课题引文报告，对总体趋势一览全局。而分析功能可以让您更清晰的了解本课题论文每年的发文量，分属于哪些学科，主要集中在哪些国家地区，以哪些语种发表，哪些机构或哪些作者是本课题的引领者，收录本课题论文最多的期刊和会议有哪些等详细信息。

点击查看更多应用技巧 应用技巧 1.2 如何找到某个课题的综述文献？ 在科学研究过程中往往需要从宏观上把握国内外在某一研究领域或专题的主要研究成果、最新进展、研究动态、前沿问题或历史背景、前人工作、争论焦点、研究现状和发展前景等内容，如何快速获取这些信息呢？您可以通过检索综述性文献来方便高效地找到信息。 1．访问Web of Science数据库检索课题 请访问：https://www.wendangku.net/doc/7b9841367.html,，进入ISI Web of Knowledge平台；选择Web of Science数据库。如：我们想快速找到有关2007年诺贝尔物理奖获奖课题“巨磁电阻效应-Giant Magnetoresistance”的综述文献。 2．精炼检索结果 在检索结果界面上，通过左侧的精炼检索结果功能您可以快速的了解该课题涉及的学科、文献类型、作者、机构、国家等，甚至通过文献类型选项锁定该课题的高质量综述文献。