Advertisement

Scientometrics

, Volume 5, Issue 5, pp 303–312 | Cite as

A classification of citation roles for the social sciences and related fields

  • Bluma C. Peritz
Article

Abstract

The paper proposes a classification scheme for the roles of citations in empirical studies from the social sciences and related fields. The use of the classification, which has eight categories, is illustrated in sociology, education, demography, epidemiology and librarianship; its association with the citations' location within the paper is presented. The question of repeated citations of the same document is discussed. Several research questions to which this classification is relevant are proposed. The need for further critique, validation and experimentation is pointed out.

Keywords

Research Question Social Science Empirical Study Classification Scheme Related Field 
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. 1.
    B. CRONIN, The Need for a Theory of Citing,Journal of Documentation, 37 (1981) 16–24.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    B. A. LIPETZ, Improvement of the Selectivity of Citation Indexes to Science Literature Through the Inclusion of Citation Relationship Indicators,American Documentation, 16 (1965) 81–90.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    M. J. MORAVCSIK, P. MURUGESAN, Some Results on the Function and Ouality of Citations,Social Studies of Science, 5 (1975) 86–92.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    M. WEINSTOCK, ‘Citation Indexes’, inEncyclopedia of Library and Information Science Marcel Dekker, Inc., New York 1971 16–40.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    C. FROST, The Use of Citations in Literary Research: Preliminary Classification of Citation Functions,Library Ouarterly, 49 (1979) 399–414.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    I. SPIEGEL-RÖSING,Science Studies: Bibliometric and Content Analysis,Social Studies of Science, 7 (1977) 97–113.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    H. VOOS, K. S. DAGAEV, Are all Citation Equal? Or, Did We Op. Cit. Your Idem?,Journal of Academic Librarianship, 1 (1976) 19–21.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    FROST, op. cit. reference 5,.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    VOOS, DAGAEV, op. cit. reference 7,.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    T. L. HODGES,Citation Indexing: Its Potential for Bibliographical Control (Doctoral diss., Berkeley, Calif.: University of California, 1972).Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ibid., 243–248.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    MORAVCSIK, MURUGESAN, op. cit. reference 3,, 88.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    D. E. CHUBIN, S. D. MOITRA, Content Analysis of References: Adjunct or Alternative to Citation Counting,Social Studies of Science, 5 (1975) 423–441.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    FROST, op. Cit. reference 5,, 407–408.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    P. MURUGESAN, M. J. MORAVCSIK, Variations of the Nature of Citation Measures with Journals of Scientific Specialities,Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 29 (1978) 141–147.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    VOOS, DAGAEV, op. cit. reference 7,.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    G. HERLACH, Can Retrieval of Information from Citation Indexes be Simplified? Multiple Mention of a Reference as a Characteristic of the Link Between Cited and Citing Article,Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 29 (1978) 308–310.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    HODGES, op. cit. reference 10,.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    VOOS, DAGAEV, op. cit. reference 7,.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    HERLACH, op. cit. reference 17,.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó 1983

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bluma C. Peritz
    • 1
  1. 1.Graduate School of Library and Archive StudiesThe Hebrew UniversityJerusalemIsrael

Personalised recommendations