Gaining scientific recognition by position: Does editorship increase citation rates?
- 184 Downloads
We investigated three rival hypotheses concerning scientific communication and recognition: the performance hypothesis and two alternative assumptions, the reputation hypothesis and the resource hypothesis. The performance hypothesis reflects the norm of universalism in the sense given byMerton, the reputation hypothesis predicts a Matthew Effect (scientists receive communications and recognition on the basis of their reputation), and the resource hypothesis assumes that communication with other scientitis is used as a form of asset to defend one's own research results.
Using bibliometric methods, we assessed whether assuming an important scientific position enhances scientific impact and prestige. Specifically, we explored whether a person's assumption of editorship responsibilities of a psychology journal increases the frequency with which that person is cited in theSocial Sciences Citation Index. The data base consisted of ten psychology journals, seven premier American and three German journals, covering the years 1981 to 1995. Citation rates for the years prior to, during, and following periods of editorship were compared for three groups: editors cited in the journal they edited, editors cited in a journal they did not edit, and non-editors. The results showed that during their editorship, editors showed an increased citation rate in the journal edited; this result was found for American journals, but not for German journals. These findings indicate that, for American journals, assuming editorship responsibilities for a major psychology journal increases one's scientific impact, at least as reflected by a measure of citation rate. A careful examination of ages of the non-editors' citations reveals that the post-editorship citation rates of editors and comparable non-editors do not differ significantly. The reputation hypothesis (Matthew Effect) is therefore preferred for interpreting the results, because it shows the cumulative nature of prestige-oriented citations. The results contradict the convention of using citation rates as pure performance measures.
KeywordsCitation Rate Social Science Citation Index Scientific Performance Matthew Effect Scientific Impact
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.R. K. Merton, ‘Die normative Struktur der Wissenschaft’, inR. K. Merton (Ed.)Entwicklung und Wandel von Forschungsinteressen, Suhrkamp-Verlag, Frankfurt a.M., 1985.Google Scholar
- 2.N. Kaplan, The Norms of Citation Behavior: Prolegomena to the Footnote,American Documentation, 16 (1965) 179–184, p. 183.Google Scholar
- 3.S. Cole,Making Science, Between Nature and Society, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass., 1992.Google Scholar
- 4.E. Garfield, How to use citation analysis for faculty evaluations and when is it relevant?,Current Contents, Part 1, 44 (1983) 5–13; Part 2, 45 (1983) 5–13.Google Scholar
- 5.G. Pinski, F. Narin, Structure of the psychological literature,Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 30 (1979) 161–168.Google Scholar
- 10.E. Garfield, The 100 most-cited SSCI-author, 1967–1977,Current Contents, 10 (1978) 5–11.Google Scholar
- 14.E. Garfield, The most cited primary authors, 1961–1975, Part 2. The correlation between citedness, Nobel prizes and academic memberships,Current Contents, 9 (1977) 5–15.Google Scholar
- 15.R. A. Gordon, P. J. Vicari, Eminence in social psychology: A comparison of textbook citation, Social Sciences Citation Index, and research productivity ratings,Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 18 (1992) 26–38.Google Scholar
- 16.R. L. Helmreich, J. T. Spence, W. L. Thorbecke, On the stability of productivity and recognition,Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 7 (1981) 516–522.Google Scholar
- 17.K. R. Popper,Conjectures and Refutations: The Growth of Scientific Knowledge. Routledge & Paul, London. 1963.Google Scholar
- 18.R. K. Merton, The Matthew effect in science,Science, 159 (1968) 56–63.Google Scholar
- 19.R. K. Merton, ‘Foreword’, inE. Garfield (Ed.)Citation Indexing—Its Theory and Application in Science, Technology, and Humanities, ISI Press, Philadelphia, 1979, p. VII.Google Scholar
- 21.R. Over, The durability of scientific reputation,Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences, 18 (1982) 53–61.Google Scholar
- 24.B. Latour,Science in Action. How to Follow Scientists and Engineers through Society. Harvard University Press, Cambridge/Mass., 1987.Google Scholar
- 25.—Ref., p. 39.Google Scholar
- 26.G. N. Gilbert, Referencing as persuasion,Social Studies of Science, V (1977) 113–122.Google Scholar
- 28.—Ref., 18 p. 57.Google Scholar
- 29.D. Crane, The gatekeepers of science: Some factors affecting the selection of articles for scientific journals,American Sociologist, 32 (1967) 195–201.Google Scholar
- 33.S. Smart, J. Waldfogel,A Citation-Based Test for Discrimination at Economics and Finance Journals, National Bureau of Economic Research, NBER Working Paper Series, Working Paper 5460, 1996.Google Scholar
- 34.—Ref. 18 p. 62.Google Scholar
- 38.S. Zsindely, A. Schubert, Editors-in-Chief of medical journals,Communication Research, 16 (1989) 695–700.Google Scholar
- 41.J. R. Cole, S. Cole,Social Stratification in Science, University of Chigaco Press, Chicago, London, 1973.Google Scholar