Abstract
This paper discusses the intellectual justification of scientometrics through the claim that it is part of the quest for a quantitative science of science. Initially, I will make a brief description of scientometrics' historical background. Next, I will explain that those disciplines that have been satisfactorily mathematized always contain two distinct basic components: an axiomatic, defining the operations that can be realized with the available data, and an interpretation of their meaning. Counting papers and citations is a way to collect statistical data about scientific activities, and therefore the axiomatic basis of scientometrics comes from statistics. Regarding the interpretation of scientometrics, I will argue that the meanings attributed to their key concepts are usually borrowed from economics. Then I discuss how the promise of a science of science becomes a too well adjusted historical narrative that apparently justifies the economic concerns of governments and private corporations.
Highlights
The significance of science and technology for economic development is currently taken for granted as an indisputable premise of any science policy
From the British Department of Scientific and Industrial Research (DSIR), suggested to the OECD that Freeman be invited as consultant to work on what would become the Frascati Manual (...) In the following decades, the manual served as the basis for surveying research and development (R&D) in member countries, for collecting international data at OECD, and for analyzing trends in science
The rising of scientometrics happened during the post- and cold war, so we cannot disregard all the constellation of extra-scientific interests of that milieu
Summary
The polymath Francis Galton made the very first surveys on the number of men of science in England (cf. Godin, 2007a). In particular, was politically engaged and used to make severe critics to Columbia University governance – where he worked from 1891 until being fired in 1917 – which, according to him, had limited academic freedom He used the data from the second edition of the American men of science as evidence to argue that universities that adopted democratic methods of appointments and promotions employed a larger number of eminent scientists (cf Sokal, 2009). There was no unified methodology able to provide reliable comparisons between countries This problem motivated the formulation of a standard methodology for collecting statistics on R&D, and resulted in the Frascati manual published in 1963 by the Organization of Economic Co-operation and Development. Wouters and Leydersdorff (1994) applied this criterion to examine whether scientometric studies exhibits high immediacy effect, but the results showed a citation temporal-pattern not significantly different from traditional social studies on science. One may wonder whether it does not sound a too well adjusted narrative
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
