Abstract
In this paper we take position in the ‘citation theory’ debate. First we revisit relevant earlier work of our group and try to assemble the findings. We criticise the constructivist fashion in sociology of science concerning citation practices. With statistical arguments we show the strong limitations of any ‘citation theory’ at the ‘citer side’. We emphasize that citations should be conceived of as ‘binding properties’ of an individual publication, from which many types of structuring follow. As keywords also have such binding properties at the same time, and as there are empirically established relations between the citation domain and the word domain, it is useless to develop a model concerning citations only. We envisage an interesting development, both theoretically and empirically, of what we would like to call ‘bibliometric chemistry’.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Braam, R. R., H. F. Moed, andA. F. J. van Raan (1991), Mapping of science by combined co-citation and word analysis. Part I: Structural aspects.Journal of the American Society for Information Science (JASIS) 42, 233–251.
Braam, R. R., H. F. Moed, andA. F. J. van Raan (1991), Mapping of science by combined co-citation and word analysis. Part II: Dynamical aspects.Journal of the American Society for Information Science (JASIS) 42, 252–266.
Cozzens, S. E. (1989)., What do citations count?. The Rhetoric First model.Scientometrics 15, 437–447.
Elkana, Y., J. Lederberg, R. K. Merton, A. Thrackray, andH. Zuckerman (Eds) (1977),Toward a Metric of Science: The Advent of Science Indicators, New York: John Wiley.
Garfield, E. (1979),Citation Indexing—Its Theory and Applications in Science, Technology and Humanities, Wiley: New York.
Holton, G. (1977), Can science be measured? In:Y. Elkana et al (Eds) op. cit., 39–68.
Kostoff, R. N. (1995), Feferal research impact assessment: Axioms, approaches, applications,Scientometrics, 34, 163–206.
Luukkonen, T. (1997), Why has Latour's theory of citation been ignored by the bibliometric community? Discussion of sociological interpretations of citation analysis,Scientometrics, 38, 27–37.
Latour, B. (1987),Science in action. How to follow scientists and engineers through society, Milton Keynes: Open University Press.
Latour, B., andS. Woolgar (1979),Laboratory life. The construction of scientific facts, Beverly Hills: Sage.
Leydesdorff, L. (1987), Towards a theory of citations?Scientometrics, 12, 305–309.
Leydesdorff, L. (1998), Theories of citation?Scientometrics, 43, (this issue).
van Leeuwen, Th. N., E. J. Rinia, andA. F. J. van Raan (1996),Bibliometric Profiles of Academic Physics Research in the Netherlands. Research report to the Foundation for Fundamental Research on Matter (FOM), Leiden: CWTS. Report 96-09.
MacRoberts, M. H., andB. R. MacRoberts (1987), Quantitative measures of communication in science: a study of the formal level,Social Studies of Science, 36, 223–229.
MacRoberts, M. H., andB. R. MacRoberts (1987), Testing the Ortega Hypothesis: facts and artifacts,Scientometrics, 12, 293–295.
MacRoberts, M. H., andB. R. MacRoberts (1989), Another test of the normative theory of citing,Journal of the American Society for Information Science (JASIS), 16, 151–172.
Merton, R. K. (1968), The Matthew effect in science,Science, 159, 56–63.
Merton, R. K. (1973),The Sociology of Science, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Moed, H. F., W. J. M. Burger, J. G. Frankfort, andA. J. F. van Raan (1985), The use of bibliometric data for the measurement of university research performance,Research Policy, 14, 131–149.
Moed, H. F., andTh. N. van Leeuwen (1995), Improving the Accuracy of the Institute for Scientific Information's Journal Impact Factors,Journal of the American Society for Information Science (JASIS), 46, 461–467.
Moed, H. F., andTh. N. van Leeuwen (1996), Impact factors can mislead,Nature, 381, 186.
Narin, F. (1976),Evaluative Bibliometrics: The Use of Publication and Citation Analysis in the Evaluation of Scientific Activity. Washington DC: National Science Foundation.
Nederhof, A. J. (1988), The validity and reliability of evaluation of scholarly performance. In:A. F. J. van Raan (Ed.),Handbook of Quantitative Studies of Science and Technology, p. 193–228. Amsterdam, North-Holland/Elsevier Science.
Nederhof, A. J. andA. F. J. van Raan (1989), A validation study of biobliometric indicators: the comparative performance of cum laude doctorates in chemistry,Scientometrics, 17, 427–435.
Nederhof, A. J. andA. F. J. van Raan (1987), Peer review and bibliometric indicators of scientific performance: a comparison of cum laude doctorates with ordinary doctorates in physics,Scientometrics, 11, 333–350.
Nederhof, A. J. andA. F. J. van Raan (1987), Citation theory and the Ortega Hypothesis,Scientometrics, 12, 325–328.
Ortega Y Gasset, J. The Revolution of the Masses, New York: Norton, 1932.
Peters, H. P. F. andA. F. J. van Raan (1994), A bibliometric profile of top-scientists. A case study in chemical engineering,Scientometrics, 29, 115–136.
Peters, H. P. F. andA. F. J. van Raan (1994), On determinants of citation scores: a case study in chemical engineering,Journal of the American Soceity for Information Science (JASIS), 45, 39–49.
Peters, H. P. F. andA. F. J. van Raan (1995), Cognitive resemblance and citation relations in chemical engineering publications.Journal of the American Society for Information science (JASIS), 46, 9–21.
Price, D. J. De Solla (1963),Little Science, Big Science. New York: Columbia University Press.
Price, D. J. De Solla (1975),Science since Babylon (enlarged ed.), New Haven: Yale University Press.
van Raan, A. F. J. (1988), Impact of research performance as measured by citations: a new model. In:L. Egghe andR. Rousseau (Eds),Informetrics 87/88, Amsterdam: Elsevier Science Publishers.
van Raan, A. F. J. (1996), Advanced bibliometric methods as quantitative core of peer review based evaluation and foresight exercises,Scientometrics, 36, 397–420.
Woolgar, S. (1991), Beyond the citation debate. Towards a sociology of measurement technologies and their use in science policy,Science and Public Policy, 18, 319–326.
Wouters, P. (1997), Citation cycles and peer review cycles,Scientometrics, 38, 39–55.
Zuckerman, H. (1987), Citation analysis and the complex problem of intellectual influence,Scientometrics, 12, 329–338.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
Comments on Theories of Citation?L. Leydesdorff,Scientometrics, 43 (1998) No. 1.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
van Raan, A.F.J. In matters of quantitative studies of science the fault of theorists is offering too little and asking too much. Scientometrics 43, 129–139 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02458401
Received:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02458401