Some interpretations of the notions of "impact" or" influence" given in authoritative scientometric publications

For a better theoretical understanding of the notion of "impact" (introduced by E. Garfield in 1955) definitions and perceptions of the mentioned notion used in scientometrics literature have been analyzed. (The original concept of 'scientific impact' (that was initially named as mere “impact”), not of 'social impact' (or, more precisely, 'impact on society'), was under consideration.) The existing and used meanings of the term "impact" either are treated as a synonym of “influence” (the word that has no further definition!) or do not go beyond the concept of "strong impression", or coincide with the meaning of the term "pertinence", or refer to purely technical indicators. No unified definition is in operation. The existing and used meanings of the term "impact" either are treated as a synonym of “influence” (the word that has no further definition!) or do not go beyond the concept of "strong impression", or coincide with the meaning of the term "pertinence", or refer to purely technical indicators. No unified definition is in operation. The Table summarizes the above stated.

为从理论层面更深入地理解E·加菲尔德（E. Garfield）于1955年提出的“影响力（impact）”概念，本研究对科学计量学（scientometrics）文献中所采用的该概念的各类定义与认知展开了系统分析。（本次研究聚焦的是最初仅被称为“影响力”的“科学影响力（scientific impact）”概念，而非“社会影响力（或更准确地说，‘对社会的影响力’）”。）当前学界对“影响力”这一术语的通用含义，要么被视作“影响（influence）”的同义词（而“影响”一词本身并无明确定义），要么未超出“强烈印象”的范畴，要么与“关联性（pertinence）”的语义重合，或是仅指代纯粹的技术指标。目前尚无统一的定义被广泛采用。当前学界对“影响力”这一术语的通用含义，要么被视作“影响（influence）”的同义词（而“影响”一词本身并无明确定义），要么未超出“强烈印象”的范畴，要么与“关联性（pertinence）”的语义重合，或是仅指代纯粹的技术指标。目前尚无统一的定义被广泛采用。下表对上述内容进行了总结。