Consensus formation in science modeled by aggregated bibliographic coupling (original) (raw)
Related papers
Co‐citation in the scientific literature: A new measure of the relationship between two documents
Journal of the American society for information …, 1973
Co-citation in the Scientific Literature: A New Measure of the Relationship Between Two Documents A new form of document coupling called co-citation is defined as the frequency with which two documents are cited together. The co-citation frequency of two scientific papers can be determined by comparing lists of citing documents in the Science Citation Index and counting identical entries. Networks of co-cited papers can be generated for specific scientific specialties, and an example is drawn from the literature of particle physics. Co-citation patterns are found to differ significantly from bibliographic coupling patterns, but to agree generally with patterns of direct citation. Clusters of co-cited papers provide a new way to study the specialty structure of science. They may provide a new approach to indexing and to the creation of SDI profiles.
Information Processing & Management, 1976
Abstraet-A self-consistent methodology is developed for determining citation based influence measures for scientific journals, subfields and fields. Starting with the cross citing matrix between journals or between aggregates of journals, an eigenvalue problem is formulated leading to a size independent intluence weight for each journal or aggregate. Two other measures, the influence per publication and the total influence are then defined. Hierarchical influence diagrams and numerical data are presented to display journal interrelationships for journals within the subfields of physics. A wide range in influence is found between the most influentiaJ and least influenti~ or peripheral journals.
Information Processing & Management, 1976
Abstraet-A self-consistent methodology is developed for determining citation based influence measures for scientific journals, subfields and fields. Starting with the cross citing matrix between journals or between aggregates of journals, an eigenvalue problem is formulated leading to a size independent intluence weight for each journal or aggregate. Two other measures, the influence per publication and the total influence are then defined. Hierarchical influence diagrams and numerical data are presented to display journal interrelationships for journals within the subfields of physics. A wide range in influence is found between the most influentiaJ and least influenti~ or peripheral journals.
The Temporal Structure of Scientific Consensus Formation
American sociological review, 2010
This supplement presents a sensitivity analysis for the data extraction method, based on the longest and most complicated search string-for the case of solar radiation and cancer. Our primary consideration in choosing a search string was maximizing the period covered. We added keywords such as -melanoma‖ to keywords such as -cancer‖ to extract more papers from more years and to capture changes in the nomenclature. Here we test the influence of specific search strings on the results, asking whether omission or inclusion of a single term can modify the results.
Theoretical and practical application of aggregated citations of cited articles
2013
Aggregated Citations of Cited Articles (ACCA) is a methodology for evaluation of scientific journals. ACCA is formulated based on a concept of discrete elemental system that is applicable to a number of fields such as physics, chemistry, etc. It considers journal as a discrete element system whose overall performance is measured only through the active articles and their citations. Evaluation of only the cited articles allows the journals to retain their originality in nature and variety in publication of documents, for which they are known, without affecting the ranking of the journal. The paper explains the theory and practical application of ACCA for the evaluation of the journals.
Word bibliographic coupling: Another way to map science field and identify core references
Proceedings of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 2019
This study investigates how to measure subject relationship based on bibliographic coupling strength. Since the 1960s, researchers use citation analysis methods to discover the relationship between different works and authors. However, how to apply citation-based methods in measuring the relationships between various subjects remains unknown. We propose a novel method to measure relationships between subjects based on bibliographic coupling strengths. Our dataset is composed of 7,692 articles published in 10 core information science journals from 2008 to 2017. The result shows that our method provides another viewpoint of exploring the development of science. Furthermore, our method can identify the core works in different subjects and help to judge how similar different subjects are.
Consensus-based journal rankings: A complementary tool for bibliometric evaluation
Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 2018
Annual journal rankings are usually considered a tool for the evaluation of research and researchers. Although they are an objective resource for such evaluation, they also present drawbacks: (a) the uncertainty about the definite position of a target journal in the corresponding annual ranking when selecting a journal, and (b) in spite of the nonsignificant difference in score (for instance, impact factor) between consecutive journals in the ranking, the journals are strictly ranked and eventually placed in different terciles/quartiles, which may have a significant influence in the subsequent evaluation. In this article we present several proposals to obtain an aggregated consensus ranking as an alternative/complementary tool to standardize annual rankings. To illustrate the proposed methodology we use as a case study the Journal Citation Reports, and in particular the category of Computer Science: Artificial Intelligence (CS:AI). In the context of the consensus rankings obtained by the different methods, we discuss the convenience of using one or the other procedure according to the corresponding framework. In particular, our proposals allow us to obtain consensus rankings that avoid crisp frontiers between similarly ranked journals and consider the longitudinal/temporal evolution of the journals.
Bibliographic coupling: A review
Information Storage and Retrieval
The theory and practical applications of bibliographic coupling are reviewed. The reviewer takes issue with the use of bibliographic coupling for information retrieval and automatic classification on logical grounds, and for reasons relating to uncontrolled citation practices. The usefulness of the procedure for the study of the science of science and bibliometrics is granted.
Bibliometrics as Weapons of Mass Citation La bibliométrie comme arme de citation massive
Chimia, 2010
The allocation of resources for research is increasingly based on so-called 'bibliometrics'. Scientists are now deemed to be successful on the sole condition that their work be abundantly cited. This worldwide trend appears to enjoy support not only by granting agencies (whose task is obviously simplified by extensive recourse to bibliometrics), but also by the scientists themselves (who seem to enjoy their status of celebrities). This trend appears to be fraught with dangers, particularly in the area of social sciences, where bibliometrics are less developed, and where monographs (which are not taken into account in citation indexes) are often more important than articles published in journals. We argue in favour of a return to the values of 'real science', in analogy to the much-promised return to a 'real economy'. While economists may strive towards a more objective evaluation of the prospects of a company, a market, or an industrial sector, we scientists can only base our appraisal on a responsible practice of peer review. Since we fear that decision-takers of granting agencies such as the FNRS, CTI, EPFL, ETHZ, ANR, CNRS, NIH, NSF, DOE, [1] etc. will be too busy to read our humble paper in Chimia, we appeal to scientists of all countries and disciplines to unite against the tyranny of bibliometrics.
Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, 2012
Many discussions have enlarged the literature in Bibliometrics since the Hirsh proposal, the so called h-index. Ranking papers according to their citations, this index quantifies a researcher only by its greatest possible number of papers that are cited at least h times. A closed formula for h-index distribution that can be applied for distinct databases is not yet known. In fact, to obtain such distribution, the knowledge of citation distribution of the authors and its specificities are required. Instead of dealing with researchers randomly chosen, here we address different groups based on distinct databases. The first group is composed by physicists and biologists, with data extracted from Institute of Scientific Information (ISI). The second group composed by computer scientists, which data were extracted from Google-Scholar system. In this paper, we obtain a general formula for the h-index probability density function (pdf) for groups of authors by using generalized exponentials in the context of escort probability. Our analysis includes the use of several statistical methods to estimate the necessary parameters. Also an exhaustive comparison among the possible candidate distributions are used to describe the way the citations are distributed among authors. The h-index pdf should be used to classify groups of researchers from a quantitative point of view, which is meaningfully interesting to eliminate obscure qualitative methods.