Advertisement

Scientometrics

, Volume 44, Issue 2, pp 169–182 | Cite as

Between texts and contexts: Advances in theories of citation? (A rejoinder)

  • L. Leydesdorff
  • P. Wouters
Article

Abstract

Scientific literature is expected to contain a body of knowledge that can be indexed and retrieved using references and citations. References are subtexts which refer to a supertext, that is, the body of scientific literature. TheScience Citation Index has provided an electronic representation of science at the supertextual level by aggregating the subtextual citations. As the supertext, however, becomes independently available in virtual reality (as a “hypertext”), subtext and supertext become increasingly different contexts. The dynamics of hyperlinks are expected to feedback on the system of indexing, referencing, and retrieval at the level of research practices. References can be considered as part of the retention mechanism of this evolving system of scientific communication, and citations are a codified form of referencing.

Keywords

Science Citation Index Citation Analysis Citation Window Citation Context Scientometric Indicator 
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. Arunachalam, S. (1988). Citation Analysis: Do we need a theory?Scientometrics, 43, 141–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Arthur, W. B. (1988), Competing technologies, In:G. Dosi, C. Freeman, R. Nelson, G. Silverberg, andL. Soete (Eds.),Technical Change and Economic Theory, Pinter, London, pp. 590–607.Google Scholar
  3. Arthur, W. B. (1989), Competing technologies, increasing returns, and lock-in by historical events,Economic Journal, 99, 116–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bazerman, C. (1988),Shaping Written Knowledge: The Genre and Activity of the Experimental Article in Science. University of Wisconsin Press, Madison, WI.Google Scholar
  5. Blauwhof, G. (1995),The non-linear dynamics of technological developments: an exploration of telecommunications technology. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  6. Bloor, D. (1976),Knowledge and Social Imagery. Routledge & Kegan Paul, London.Google Scholar
  7. Bruckner, E., W. Ebeling, M. A. Jiménez Montaño, A. Scharnhorst (1994), Hyperselection and innovation described by a stochastic model of technological evolution. In:L. Leydesdorff, P. Van Den Besselaar (Eds.),Evolutionary Economies and Chaos Theory: New directions in technology studies. Pinter, London, pp. 79–90.Google Scholar
  8. Callon, M., J. Law, A. Rip (Eds.) (1986),Mapping the Dynamics of Science and Technology. Macmillan, London.Google Scholar
  9. Callon, M. (1988), Is there any future for scientometrics? And if yes, which one?,International Conference on STS: Book of Abstracts. Tokyo, p. 26.Google Scholar
  10. Cronin, B. (1998), Metatheorizing Citation,Scientometrics, 43, 45–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Egghe, L. (1998), Comments on the paper of Leydesdorff “Theories of Citation”,Scientometrics, 43, 57–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Els, W.P. Van, C.N.M. Jansz, C. Le Pair (1989), The citation gap between printed and instrumental output of technological research: the case of the electron microscope,Scientometrics, 17, 415–425.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Etzkowitz, H., L. Leydesdorff (Eds.) (1997),Universities in the Global Economy: A Triple Helix of University-Industry-Government Relations. Cassell Academic, London.Google Scholar
  14. Fujigaki, Y. (1998), The Citation System: Citation networks as repeatedly focusing on difference, continuous reevaluation, an a persistent knowledge accumulation,Scientometrics, 43, 77–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Fujigaki, Y. (1998), A Future perspective on STS and scientometrics,EASST Review, 17, No. 2, 16–19.Google Scholar
  16. Garfield, E. (1975), The obliteration phenomenon,Current Contents, Nr. 51/52, 5–7.Google Scholar
  17. Garfield, E. (1996), When to cite,Library Quarterly, 66, Nr. 4, 449–458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Garfield, E. (1998), Random thoughts on citationology— Its theory and practice,Scientometrics, 43, 69–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gibbons, M., C. Limoges, H. Nowotny, S. Schwartzman, P. Scott, M. Trow (1994),The New Production of Knowledge: The Dynamics of Science and Research in Contemporary Societies. Sage, London.Google Scholar
  20. Giddens, A. (1984),The Constitution of Society. Polity Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  21. Granovetter, M. S. (1973), The strength of weak ties,American Journal of Sociology, 78, No. 6, 1360–1380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kaufer, D. S., K. M. Carley (1993),Communication at a Distance: The Influence of Print on Sociocultural Organization and Change. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.Google Scholar
  23. Kostoff, R. N., H. J. Eberhart, D. R. Toothman, R. Pellenberg (1997), Database tomography for technical intelligence: comparative roadmaps of the research impact assessment literature and the Journal of the American Chemical Society,Scientometrics, 40, 103–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kostoff, R. N. (1998), The use and misuse of citation analysis in research evaluation,Scientometrics, 43, 27–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Le Pair, C. (1988), The citation gap of applicable science, In:A. F. J. Van Raan (Ed.),Handbook of Quantitative Studies of Science and Technology, Elsevier Science/North-Holland, Amsterdam, pp. 537–553.Google Scholar
  26. Leydesdorff, L. (1989), Words and co-words as indicators of intellectual organization,Research Policy, 18, 209–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Leydesdorff, L. (1995),The Challenge of Scientometrics: the Development, Measurement, and Self-Organization of Scientific Communications. DSWO, Leiden University Press, Leiden.Google Scholar
  28. Leydesdorff, L. (1996), The possibility of a mathematical sociology of scientific communication,Journal for General Philosophy of Science, 27, 243–265.Google Scholar
  29. Leydesdorff, L. (1997a), Why words and co-words cannot map the development of the sciences,Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 48, No. 5, 418–427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Leydesdorff, L. (1997b), The new communications regime of university-industry-government relations. In:Etzkowitz andLeydesdorff (1997), pp. 106–117.Google Scholar
  31. Leydesdorff, L. (1997c), The non-linear dynamics of sociological reflections,International Sociology, 12, 25–45.Google Scholar
  32. Leydesdorff, L. (1998), Theories of Citation?Scientometrics, 43, 5–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Leydesdorff, L. (forthcoming).Saientometorikus no chôsen: kagaku-gijyutsu-joho no jiko-soshiki-ka [The Challenge of Scientometrics: The development, measurement, and self-organization of scientific communications], translated into Japanese byY. Fujigaki, T. Hayashi, H. Hirakawa, J. Makino, M. Shirabe, and H. Tomizawa.Google Scholar
  34. Leydesdorff, L., S. Cozzens (1993), The delineation of specialties in terms of journals using the dynamic journal set of theSCI, Scientometrics, 26, 133–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Leydesdorff, L., P. Van Den Besselaar (1997), Scientometrics and communication theory: Towards theoretically informed indicators,Scientometrics, 38, 155–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Leydesdorff, L., H. Etzkowitz (1998), The Triple Helix as a model for innovation studies,Science and Public Policy, 25, 195–203.Google Scholar
  37. Makino, J. (1998), Productivity of research groups: relation between citation analysis and reputation within research communities,Scientometrics, 43, 87–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Maturana, H. R., F. J. Varela (1980),Autopoiesis and Cognition: The Realization of the Living. Reidel, Boston.Google Scholar
  39. Narin, F., D. Olivastro (1992), Status report: Linkages between technology and science,Research Policy, 21, 237–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Price, D. De Solla (1970), Citation measures of hard science, soft science, technology, and nonscience. In:C. E. Nelson andD. K. Pollack (Eds.),Communication among Scientists and Engineers. Heath, Lexington, MA, pp. 3–22.Google Scholar
  41. Rip, A. (1997), Qualitative conditions of scientometrics: The new challenges,Scientometrics, 38, 7–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Rousseau, R. (1997), Sitation: an exploratory study,Cybermetrics 1, Issue I, Paper 1 at http://www.cindoc.csic.es/cybermetrics/articles/vlilpl.htmlGoogle Scholar
  43. Rousseau, R. (1998), Citation analysis as a theory of friction or polluted air,Scientometrics, 43, 63–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Sahal, D. (1985), Technological guideposts and innovation avenues,Research Policy, 14, 61–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Scharnhorst, A. (1998), Citation—networks, science landscapes, and evolutionary strategies,Scientometrics, 43, 95–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Small, H. (1998), Citations and consilience in science.Scientometrics, 43, 143–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Stichweh, R. (1984),Zur Entstehung des modernen Systems wissenschaftlicher Disziplinen. Physik in Deutschland, 1740–1890, Suhrkamp, Prankfurt a.M.Google Scholar
  48. Swanson, D. R. (1990), Medical literature as a potential source of new knowledge,Bull. Med. Libr. Assoc., 78, 29–37.Google Scholar
  49. Van Alstyne, M., E. Brynjlofsson (1996), Could the Internet balkanize science?Science, 247 (29th November), 1479–1480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Van Raan, A. F. J. (1998), In matters of quantitative studies of science the fault of theorists is offering too little and asking too much,Scientometrics, 43, 129–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Vinkler, P. (1998), Comparative investigation of frequency and strength of motives toward referencing: The reference threshold model,Scientometrics, 43, 107–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Watts, D. J., S. H. Strogatz (1998), Collective dynamics of ‘small-world’ networks,Nature 393 (4 June), 440–442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Wouters, P. (1997), Citation cycles and peer review cycles.Scientometrics, 38, 39–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Wouters, P. (1998), The signs of science,Scientometrics, 41, 225–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Zuckerman, H., R. K. Merton (1971), Patterns of evaluation in science: institutionalization, structure and functions of the referree system,Minerva, 9, 66–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  • L. Leydesdorff
    • 1
  • P. Wouters
    • 1
  1. 1.Science and Technology DynamicsAmsterdam(The Netherlands)

Personalised recommendations