Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Alone or together: examples from history research

  • Published:
Scientometrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Individualistic nature of research in the humanities is a common fact, as well as the notion that boundaries in humanities are poorly defined. Using citation analysis we have to take into account differences in citation practices not only between humanities and sciences but also within narrower fields of humanities. In the current study we observe differences between publication behaviour of historians and archaeologists, examine some aspects of citation practices in those fields, and show their effect on visibility.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Archambault, E., Vignola-Gagne, E., Cote, G., Lariviere, V., & Gingras, Y. (2006). Benchmarking scientific output in the social sciences and humanities: The limits of existing databases. Scientometrics, 68(3), 329–342.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buchanan, A. L., & Herubel, J. P. V. M. (2011). Journal of Scholarly Publishing, 42(2), 160–181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, K. (2004). The construction of the Taiwan humanities citation index. Online Information Review, 28(6), 410–419.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cullars, J. M. (1998). Citation characteristics of English-language monographs in philosophy. Library and Information Science Research, 20(1), 41–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duff, W., Craig, B., & Cherry, J. (2004). Historians’ use of archival sources: Promises and pitfalls of the digital age. The Public Historian, 26(2), 7–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • European Reference Index for the Humanities (ERIH). Retrieved October 10, 2010 from http://www.esf.org/research-areas/humanities/erih-european-reference-index-for-the-humanities.html.

  • Garfield, E. (1979). Most-cited authors in the arts and humanities 1977–1978. Current Content, 32, 5–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garfield, E. (1980). Is information retrieval in the arts and humanities inherently different from that in science? The effect that ISI’s citation index for the arts and humanities is expected to have on future scholarship. Library Quarterly, 50(1), 40–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garfield, E. (1982). Arts and humanities journals differ from natural and social sciences journals—but their similarities are surprising. Current Content, 47, 5–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giménez-Toledo, E., & Román-Román, A. (2009). Assessment of humanities and social sciences monographs through their publishers: A review and a study towards a model of evaluation. Research Evaluation, 18(3), 201–213.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giménez-Toledo, E., Román-Román, A., & Maria Dolores, A.-P. (2007). From experimentation to coordination in the evaluation of Spanish scientific journals in the humanities and social sciences. Research Evaluation, 16(2), 137–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glänzel, W. (2000). Science in scandinavia: A bibliometric approach. Scientometrics, 48(2), 121–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glänzel, W. (2001). National characteristics in international scientific co-authorship. Scientometrics, 51(1), 69–115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Helm, T. E. (2000). What are you assessing? College Teaching, 48(3), 90–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herubel, J. P. (2007). Musings on disciplinary morphology and nomenclature in the humanities and social sciences: Implications for book selection. Journal of Scholarly Publishing, 39(1), 54–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herubel, J. P. (2008a). Acknowledging Clio’s Lesser children: The importance of journals for historical research and scholarship. Journal of Scholarly Publishing, 39(3), 241–256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herubel, J. P. (2008b). Historical scholarship, periodization, themes, and specialization: Implications for research and publication. Journal of Scholarly Publishing, 39(2), 144–155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herubel, J. P. (2009). Situating Clio’s influence in humanities and social science monographs. Disciplinary affiliations and historical scholarship. Journal of Scholarly Publishing, 41(1), 56–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herubel, J. P. V. M., & Goedeken, E. A. (2001). Using the arts and humanities citation index to identify a community of interdisciplinary historians: An exploratory bibliometric study. Serials Librarian, 41(1), 85–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hider, P. M. (1996). Three bibliometric analyses of anthropology literature. Behavioral & Social Sciences Librarian, 15(1), 1–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huang, M., & Chang, Y. (2008). Characteristics of research output in social sciences and humanities: From a research evaluation perspective. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(11), 1819–1828.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Humanities indicators. Retrieved October 10, 2010 from http://www.humanitiesindicators.org/humanitiesData.aspx.

  • Jones, C., Champman, M., & Woods, P. C. (1972). The characteristics of the literature used by historians. Journal of Librarianship, 4(3), 137–156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kousha, K., & Thelwall, M. (2009). Google book search: Citation analysis for social science and the humanities. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60(8), 1537–1549.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lariviere, V., Gingras, Y., & Archambault, E. (2006). Canadian collaboration networks: A comparative analysis of the natural sciences, social sciences and the humanities. Scientometrics, 68(3), 519–533.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewison, G. (2001). Evaluation of books as research outputs in history of medicine. Research Evaluation, 10(2), 89–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Linmans, A. J. M. (2010). Why with bibliometrics the humanities does not need to be the weakest link indicators for research evaluation based on citations, library holdings, and productivity measures. Scientometrics, 83, 337–354.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moed, H. F. (2005). Citation analysis in research evaluation. Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moed, H. F., Luwei, M., & Nederhof, A. J. (2002). Towards research performance in the humanities. Library Trends, 50(3), 498–520.

    Google Scholar 

  • Must, Ü. (1999). Estonian historical science in the 1990s. Research Evaluation, 8(2), 77–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Must, Ü. (2011). Alone or together—examples from history research. In Proceedings of the ISSI 2011 conference. 13th International conference of the International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics,(Vol. 2, pp. 595–604), Durban South Africa, July 4–7 2011, Leiden University and University of Zululand.

  • Nederhof, A. J. (2006). Bibliometric monitoring of research performance in the social sciences and the humanities: A review. Scientometrics, 66(1), 81–100.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Nederhof, A. J., & Noyons, E. C. M. (1992). International comparison of departments’ research performance in the humanities. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 43(3), 249–256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nederhof, A. J., & Zwaan, R. A. (1991). Quality judgements of journals as indicators of research performance in the humanities and the social and behavioural sciences. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 42(5), 332–340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nederhof, A. J., Zwaan, R. A., De Bruin, R. E., & Dekker, P. J. (1989). Assessing the usefulness of bibliometric indicators for the humanities and the social and behavioural sciences: A comparative study. Scientometrics, 15(5–6), 423–435.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Russian Index for Science Citation (RISC). Retrieved October 10, 2010 from http://eLIBRARY.RU.

  • Serbian Citation Index. Retrieved October 10, 2010 from http://scindeks.nb.rs/static/about.aspx?lang=en.

  • Sahiner, M., & Tonta, Y. (2006). Arts and humanities literature: Bibliometric characteristics of contributions by Turkish authors. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 57(8), 1011–1022.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Šipka P. (2005). The Serbian citation index: Context and content, In Proceedings of ISSI (pp. 710–711), Stockholm, Sweden, July 24–28 2005, ISSI and Karolinska Univ. Press, Stockholm .

  • Solow, R. M., Franklin, P., Jones, C. C., D’Arms, J., & Oakley, F. (2002). Making the humanities count: The importance of data. Cambridge: American Academy of Arts & Sciences.

    Google Scholar 

  • Su, X. N., Han, X. M., & Han, X. N. (2001). Developing the Chinese social science citation index. Online Information Review, 25(6), 365–369.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Su, X.N., Han, X.M., Han, X.N. (2009) Sustainable humanities report from the committee on the national plan for the future of the humanities Amsterdam University Press Commissie National Plan Toekomst Geesteswetenschappen/Amsterdam University Press.

  • Torres-Salinas, D., & Moed, H. F. (2009). Library catalog analysis as a tool in studies of social sciences and humanities: An exploratory study of published book titles in economics. Journal of Informetrics, 3(1), 9–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Webster, B. M. (1998). Polish sociology citation index as an example of usage of national citation indexes in scientometric analysis of social sciences. Journal of Information Science, 24(1), 19–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • White, H. D., Boell, S. B., Yu, H., Davis, M., Wilson, C. S., & Cole, F. T. H. (2009). Libcitations: A measure for comparative assessment of book publications in the humanities and social sciences. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60(6), 1083–1096.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winclawska, B. M. (1996). Polish sociology citation index (principles for creation and the first results). Scientometrics, 35(3), 387–391.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yalcin, H. (2010). Bibliometric profile of journal of national folklore (2007–2009). Milli Folklor, 85, 205–211.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, L., Rousseau, R., & Glaenzel, W. (2011). Document-type country profiles. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62(7), 1403–1411.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

An extended version of a paper presented at the 13th International Conference on Scientometrics and Informetrics, Durban (South Africa), 4–7 July 2011 (Must, Ü. Alone or together—examples from history research. Proceedings of the ISSI 2011 Conference. 13th International Conference of the International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics (Vol. 2, pp. 595–604.), Durban, South Africa, 4–7 July 2011, Leiden University and University of Zululand

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Archimedes Foundation, Research Cooperation Centre, Väike Turu 8, 51013, Tartu, Estonia

    Ülle Must

Authors
  1. Ülle Must
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ülle Must.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Must, Ü. Alone or together: examples from history research. Scientometrics 91, 527–537 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-011-0596-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-011-0596-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation