Skip to main content

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

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.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

References

  1. Arunachalam, S. (1988). Citation Analysis: Do we need a theory?Scientometrics, 43, 141–142.

    Article  Google 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.

    Article  Google 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.

  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.

  10. Cronin, B. (1998), Metatheorizing Citation,Scientometrics, 43, 45–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Egghe, L. (1998), Comments on the paper of Leydesdorff “Theories of Citation”,Scientometrics, 43, 57–62.

    Article  Google 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.

    Article  Google 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.

    Article  Google 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Garfield, E. (1998), Random thoughts on citationology— Its theory and practice,Scientometrics, 43, 69–76.

    Article  Google 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.

    Article  Google 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Kostoff, R. N. (1998), The use and misuse of citation analysis in research evaluation,Scientometrics, 43, 27–43.

    Article  Google 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.

    Article  Google 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Leydesdorff, L. (1997b), The new communications regime of university-industry-government relations. In:Etzkowitz andLeydesdorff (1997), pp. 106–117.

  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.

    Article  Google 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.

  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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Leydesdorff, L., P. Van Den Besselaar (1997), Scientometrics and communication theory: Towards theoretically informed indicators,Scientometrics, 38, 155–174.

    Article  Google 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.

    Article  Google 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.

    Article  Google 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Rousseau, R. (1997), Sitation: an exploratory study,Cybermetrics 1, Issue I, Paper 1 at http://www.cindoc.csic.es/cybermetrics/articles/vlilpl.html

  43. Rousseau, R. (1998), Citation analysis as a theory of friction or polluted air,Scientometrics, 43, 63–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Sahal, D. (1985), Technological guideposts and innovation avenues,Research Policy, 14, 61–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Scharnhorst, A. (1998), Citation—networks, science landscapes, and evolutionary strategies,Scientometrics, 43, 95–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Small, H. (1998), Citations and consilience in science.Scientometrics, 43, 143–148.

    Article  Google 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.

    Article  Google 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Vinkler, P. (1998), Comparative investigation of frequency and strength of motives toward referencing: The reference threshold model,Scientometrics, 43, 107–127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Watts, D. J., S. H. Strogatz (1998), Collective dynamics of ‘small-world’ networks,Nature 393 (4 June), 440–442.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Wouters, P. (1997), Citation cycles and peer review cycles.Scientometrics, 38, 39–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Wouters, P. (1998), The signs of science,Scientometrics, 41, 225–241.

    Article  Google 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Leydesdorff, L., Wouters, P. Between texts and contexts: Advances in theories of citation? (A rejoinder). Scientometrics 44, 169–182 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02457378

Download citation

Keywords

  • Science Citation Index
  • Citation Analysis
  • Citation Window
  • Citation Context
  • Scientometric Indicator