Advertisement

Scientometrics

, Volume 31, Issue 2, pp 193–222 | Cite as

Has Price's dream come true: Is scientometrics a hard science?

  • P. Wouters
  • L. Leydesdorff
Article

Abstract

At the occasion of the completion of the 25th volume ofScientometrics, we present a combined bibliometric and social network analysis of this journal. In more than one respect,Scientometrics displays the characteristics of a social science journal. Its Price Index amounts to 43.0 percent, and is remarkably stable over time. The majority of the published items inScientometrics has been written by a single author. Moreover, the network of co-authorships is highly fragmented: most authors cooperate with no more than one or two colleagues. Both the citation networks of the authors and the network of title words indicate that the field is nonetheless highly cohesive. In this sense, a specific identity seems to have developed, indeed. Some indications concerning the character of this identity are discussed.

Keywords

Social Network Social Science Network Analysis Price Index Science Journal 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. H. A. Abt, Publication practices in various sciences,Scientometrics, 24 (1992) 441–447.Google Scholar
  2. H. A. Abt, Long-term citation histories of astronomical papers,Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 93 (1981) 207–210.Google Scholar
  3. M. T. Beck, Editorial statements,Scientometrics, 1 (1978) 3–4.Google Scholar
  4. R. S. Burt,Toward a Structural Theory of Action. Network Models of Social Structure, Perception and Action. Academic Press, New York, 1982.Google Scholar
  5. M. Callon, J.-P. Courtial, W. A. Turner, S. Bauin, From translation to problematic networks: An introduction to co-word analysis,Social Science Information, 22 (1983) 199–235.Google Scholar
  6. S. Cozzens, Using the archive: Derek Price's theory of differences among the sciences,Scientometrics, 7 (1985) 431–441.Google Scholar
  7. S. Cozzens, What do citation count? The rhetoric-first model,Scientometrics, 15 (1989) 437–447.Google Scholar
  8. D. Crane,Invisible Colleges, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1972.Google Scholar
  9. M. Douglas,Essays in the Sociology of Perception, Routledge and Kegan Paul, London, 1982.Google Scholar
  10. L. Leydesdorff, Words and co-words as indicators of intellectual organization,Research Policy, 19 (1989a) 209–223.Google Scholar
  11. L. Leydesdorff, The relations between qualitative theory and scientometric methods in science and technology studies. Introduction to the topical issue,Scientometrics, 15 (1989b) 333–347, at pp. 343 f.Google Scholar
  12. L. Leydesdorff, O. Amsterdamska, Dimensions of citation analysis,Science, Technology & Human Values, 15 (1990) 305–335.Google Scholar
  13. L. Lubrano, The hidden structure of Soviet science,Science, Technology & Human Values, 18 (1993) 147–175.Google Scholar
  14. T. Luukkonen,Citations in the Rhetorical, Reward, and Communication Systems of Science, Ph. D. Thesis, University of Tampere, 1990.Google Scholar
  15. T. Luukkonen, O. Persson, G. Sivertsen, Understanding patterns of international scientific collaboration,Science, Technology & Human Values, 17 (1992) 101–126.Google Scholar
  16. M. MacRoberts, B. MacRoberts, Problems of citation analysis: a critical review,Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 40 (1989) 342–349.Google Scholar
  17. J. Marton, Obsolence or immediacy? Evidence supporting Price's hypothesis,Scientometrics, 7 (1985) 145–153.Google Scholar
  18. A. J. Meadows,Communication in Science, Butterworths, London, 1974.Google Scholar
  19. H. Moed, Bibliometric measurement of research performance and Price's theory of differences among the sciences,Scientometrics, 15 (1989) 473–483.Google Scholar
  20. H. Moed, W. J. M. Burger, J. G. Frankfort, A. F. J. van Raan, The application of bibliometric indicators: Important field- and time-dependent factors to be considered,Scientometrics, 8 (1985) 177–203.Google Scholar
  21. D. de Solla Price, Networks of scientific papers,Science, 149 (1965) 510–515.Google Scholar
  22. D. de Solla Price, Editorial statements,Scientometrics, 1 (1978) 7.Google Scholar
  23. D. de Solla Price, Citation measures of hard science, soft science, technology, and nonscience, In:C. E. Nelson, D. K. Pollack (Eds),Communication among Scientists and Engineers, Heath, Lexington, MA, 1970, pp. 3–22.Google Scholar
  24. D. de Solla Price, S. Gürsey, Studies in scientometrics, Part 1: Transience and continuance in scientific authorship,International Forum on Information and Documentation (1976), International Federation for Documentation, Moscow, 1(2), pp. 17–24.Google Scholar
  25. D. de Solla Price, S. Gürsey, Studies in scientometrics, Part 2: The relation between source author and cited author populations,International Forum on Information and Documentation (1976), International Federation for Documentation, Moscow, 1 (3), pp. 19–22.Google Scholar
  26. A. Rip, J.-P. Courtial, Co-word maps of biotechnology: an example of cognitive scientometrics,Scientometrics, 6 (1984) 381–400.Google Scholar
  27. W. van Rossum, K. Y. v.d. Berg, P. Groenewegan, “Actor and Social Network Analyses of a Problem Fields: The Case of DES Research”, revised version of a paper presented at the WorkshopScience Indicators: Their Use in Science Policy and Their Role in Science Studies, Leiden, November 14–15th 1988.Google Scholar
  28. A. Schubert, H. Maczelka, Cognitive changes in scientometrics during the 1980s, as reflected by the reference patterns of its core journal,Social Studies of Science, 23 (1993) 571–581.Google Scholar
  29. W. Shrum, N. Mullins, Network analysis in the study of science and technology, In:A. F. J. van Raan (Ed.),Handbook of Quantitative Studies of Science and Technology, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1988, pp. 107–133.Google Scholar
  30. I. Spiegel-Rösing, Science studies: Bibliometric and content analysis,Social Studies of Science, 7 (1977) 97–113.Google Scholar
  31. T. D. Stokes, J. A. Hartley, Coauthorship & influence in specialties,Social Studies of Science, 19 (1989) 101–125.Google Scholar
  32. M. Thompson, A. Wildavsky, R. Ellis,Cultural Theory, Westview Press, Boulder, CO, 1990.Google Scholar
  33. M. Yitzhaki, D. Ben-Tamar, Number of references in biochemistry and other fields: a case study of the Journal of Biological Chemistry throughout 1910–1985,Scientometrics, 21 (1991) 3–22.Google Scholar
  34. S. Woolgar, Beyond the citation debate: towards a sociology of measurement technologies and their use in science policy,Science and Public Policy, 18 (1991) 319–326.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • P. Wouters
    • 1
  • L. Leydesdorff
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Science DynamicsUniversity of AmsterdamAmsterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations