Abstract
AbstractWe use a technique recently developed by V. Blondel, J.‐L. Guillaume, R. Lambiotte, and E. Lefebvre (2008) to detect scientific specialties from author cocitation networks. This algorithm has distinct advantages over most previous methods used to obtain cocitation “clusters” since it avoids the use of similarity measures, relies entirely on the topology of the weighted network, and can be applied to relatively large networks. Most importantly, it requires no subjective interpretation of the cocitation data or of the communities found. Using two examples, we show that the resulting specialties are the smallest coherent “groups” of researchers (within a hierarchy of cluster sizes) and can thus be identified unambiguously. Furthermore, we confirm that these communities are indeed representative of what we know about the structure of a given scientific discipline and that as specialties, they can be accurately characterized by a few keywords (from the publication titles). We argue that this robust and efficient algorithm is particularly well‐suited to cocitation networks and that the results generated can be of great use to researchers studying various facets of the structure and evolution of science.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
More From: Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.