Advertisement

Scientometrics

, Volume 60, Issue 2, pp 159–180 | Cite as

Top-down decomposition of the Journal Citation Reportof the Social Science Citation Index: Graph- and factor-analytical approaches

  • Loet Leydesdorff
Article

Abstract

The aggregated journal-journal citation matrix of the Journal Citation Report 2001of the Social Science Citation Indexis analyzed as a single domain in terms of both its eigenvectors and the bi-connected components contained in it. The traditional disciplines (e.g., economics, psychology, or political science) can be retrieved using both methods. These main disciplines do interact marginally. The space between them is occupied by a large number of small clusters of journals indicating specialties that gravitate among the major disciplines. These specialties operate in a mode different from that of the disciplines. For example, the impact factors are low on average and the developments remain volatile. Factor analysis enables us to study how the smaller bi-connected components are related to the larger ones. Factor analysis also highlights methodological differences among groups which may be theoretically connected in a single bi-component.

Keywords

Social Network Analysis Science Citation Index Journal Citation Report Social Science Citation Index Articulation Point 
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. Ahlgren, P., B. Jarneving, R. Rousseau (2003), Requirement for a cocitation similarity measure, with special reference to Pearson.s correlation coefficient. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 54(6): 550-560.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Borgatti, S. P., M. G. Everett, L. C. Freeman (2002), Ucinet for Windows: Software for Social Network Analysis. Harvard: Analytic Technologies.Google Scholar
  3. Burt, R. S. (1982), Toward a Structural Theory of Action. New York, etc.: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  4. Carpenter, M. P., F. Narin (1973), Clustering of scientific journals, Journal of the American Society of Information Science, 24: 425-436.Google Scholar
  5. Doreian, P., T. J. Fararo (1985), Structural equivalence in a journal network. Journal of the American Society of Information Science, 36: 28-37.Google Scholar
  6. Fruchterman, T., E. Reingold (1991), Graph drawing by force-directed replacement. Software—Practice and Experience, 21: 1129-1166.Google Scholar
  7. 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. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  8. Kamada, T., S. Kawai (1989), An algorithm for drawing general undirected graphs. Information Processing Letters, 31(1): 7-15.zbMATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Knaster, B., C. Kuratwoski (1921), Sur les ensembles connexes. Fund. Math., 2: 206-255.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. Kuhn, T. S. (1962), The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  11. Kuhn, T. S. (1977), The Essential Tension: Selected Studies in Scientific Tradition and Change. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Leydesdorff, L. (1987), Various methods for the mapping of science. Scientometrics, 11: 291-320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Leydesdorff, L. (1995), The Challenge of Scientometrics: The Development, Measurement, and Self-Organization of Scientific Communications. Leiden: DSWO / Leiden University; at <http://www.upublish.com/books/leydesdorff-sci.htm>Google Scholar
  14. Leydesdorff, L. (2001), A Sociological Theory of Communication: The Self-Organization of the Knowledge-Based Society. Parkland, FL: Universal Publishers; at <http://www.upublish.com/books/leydesdorff.htm>Google Scholar
  15. Leydesdorff, L. (2002), Dynamic and evolutionary updates of classificatory schemes in scientific journal structures. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 53(12): 987-994.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Leydesdorff, L. (2003a), Can networks of journal-journal citations be used as indicators of change in the social sciences? Journal of Documentation, 59(1): 84-104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Leydesdorff, L. (2003b), The construction and globalization of the knowledge base in inter-human communication systems. Canadian Journal of Communication, 28(3): 1-23.Google Scholar
  18. Leydesdorff, L. (2004), Clusters and maps of science journals based on bi-connected graphs in the Journal Citation Reports (Journal of Documentation, 60(4), forthcoming).Google Scholar
  19. Leydesdorff, L., R. Zaal (1988), Co-words and citations. Relations between document sets and environments. In: L. Egghe, R. Rousseau (Eds), Informetrics 87/88. Amsterdam: Elsevier, pp. 105-119.Google Scholar
  20. Leydesdorff, L., S. E. Cozzens (1993), The delineation of specialties in terms of journals using the dynamic journal set of the Science Citation Index, Scientometrics, 26: 133-154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Leydesdorff, L., P. V. D. Besselaar (1997), Scientometrics and communication theory: Towards theoretically informed indicators. Scientometrics, 38: 155-174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Moody, J., D. R. White (2003), Structural cohesion and embeddedness: A hierarchical concept of social groups. American Sociological Review, 68(1): 103-127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Mrvar, A., V. Bagatelj (s.d.). Network Analysis Using Pajek; at http://vlado.fmf.uni-lj.si/pub/networks/pajek/doc/pajekman.htm. Retrieved April 5, 2003.Google Scholar
  24. Narin, F., M. Carpenter, N. C. Berlt (1972), Interrelationships of scientific journals. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 23: 323-331.Google Scholar
  25. Otte, E., R. Rousseau (2002), Social network analysis: A powerful strategy, also for the information sciences. Journal of Information Science, 28(6): 443-455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Pearl, J. (1988), Probabilistic Reasoning and Artificial Intelligence: Networks of Plausible Inference. San Mateo, CA: Morgan Kaufman.Google Scholar
  27. Price, D. J. De Solla (1965), Networks of scientific papers. Science, 149: 510-515.Google Scholar
  28. Small, H., E. Sweeney (1985), Clustering the Science Citation Index using co-citations I. A comparison of methods. Scientometrics, 7: 391-409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Tijssen, R., J. De Leeuw, A. F. J. van Raan (1987), Quasi-correspondence analysis on square scientometric transaction matrices. Scientometrics, 11: 347-361.Google Scholar
  30. Van Den Besselaar, P. (2001), The cognitive and the social structure of science & technology studies. Scientometrics, 51: 441-460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Van Den Besselaar, P., L. Leydesdorff (1996), Mapping change in scientific specialties: A scientometric reconstruction of the development of artificial intelligence. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 47: 415-436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. White, H. D. (2003), Author cocitation analysis and Pearson's r. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 54(13): 1250-1259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publisher/Akadémiai Kiadó 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Loet Leydesdorff
    • 1
  1. 1.Science & Technology Dynamics, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam School of Communications Research (ASCoR)AmsterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations