Quantitative Studies Of Science Research Articles

Science and technology studies: Exploring the knowledge base

Science and Technology Studies (STS) is one of a number of new research fields to emerge over the last four or five decades. This paper attempts to identify its core academic contributions from the perspective of the authors of chapters in authoritative ‘handbooks’ and the references they cite. Besides identifying the most prominent publications, institutions and authors, we examine whether the core contributions can be broken down into identifiable clusters. The study also analyses the impact of these contributions by exploring the research fields, journals, and geographical location of the researchers that have cited the STS core contributions in their own work. Together, these analyses reveal a number of phases in the development of STS with periods of convergence and divergence of the field, including the gradual separation of quantitative studies of science and technology from the main body of STS. The paper ends with some conclusions about the evolution of STS, such as the role of ‘institution builders’ in developing new research fields and the structures required to hold them together.

Eurekometrics: Analyzing the Nature of Discovery

Eurekometrics: Analyzing the Nature of Discovery

Katy Börner: Atlas of science: visualizing what we know

Katy Borner (2010) has written a wonderful book about visualization that makes our field of scientometrics accessible to much larger audiences. The book is to be read in relation to the ongoing series of exhibitions entitled “Places and Spaces: Mapping Science” currently touring the world. The book also provides the scholarly background to the exhibitions. It celebrates scientometrics as the discipline in the background that enables us to visualize the evolution of knowledge as the acumen of human civilization. Katy Borner is deeply anchored in the tradition of the Enlightenment. In addition to Garfield and many of our other colleagues, Diderot and d’Alembert are prominently mentioned and indeed the book can be read as another Encyclopedia: one adapted for the internet age with its emphasis on access and visualization. As most of us know, the long-term project covers also the Networkbench (NWB) and the many other tools and platforms generated at the Cyberinfrastructure for Network Science (http://cns.iu.edu) of the School of Library and Information Sciences (Indiana University, Bloomington, IN). Open-source software is thus made available systematically in an integrated environment. This major effort and strong development has now been ongoing for more than 7 years and the results pervade quantitative science studies, network analysis, and the various neighbouring fields. The book’s focus is wider than these scholarly disciplines and begins with Ptolemy and the other classics of building maps—of the earth, the heavens, and the sciences that study them. However, the focus shifts quickly to modern time and the wealth of illustrations—which are also made available online at http://scimaps.org/atlas/maps—makes the book attractive for the general audience. This is the only book in my library that I can read successfully with my granddaughter. The introductory chapter is followed by two chapters entitled “The History of Science Maps” and “Toward a Science of Science.” The aim is to be encompassing, ecumenical, and encyclopedic. The history of science mapping, in my opinion, rewrites this history from the perspective of the major efforts which the author, in collaboration with Kevin Boyack and Dick Klavans made for comprehensive science mapping during the last 10 years (e.g., Boyack et al. 2005). Perhaps, this overshadows a bit the “prehistory” of science mapping such as, for example, the various mapping efforts of the 1980s when personal computing became available. The book is in this respect really a product of the 2000s: it mirrors the turn in our field from tables to visuals. The availability of a graphics environment since the mid-1990s changed this enterprise from a largely algorithmically driven one producing tables (e.g., Schubert et al. 1989) to one that strives for visualization. There is a certain tension between these two—for example, because a two-dimensional map reduces a multi-dimensional space—but Katy Borner demonstrates the extent to which surplus value is to be found in meeting the demands of larger audiences.

Anthony van Raan and bibliometrics

This issue, inspired by the extensive scientific oeuvre of Anthony van Raan, provides a concise tour de horizon of current research evaluation topics and quantitative studies of science. A historiograph analysis positions key documents, written by Van Raan and other authors, that helped define the present-day field of bibliometrics. A life-cycle output analysis traces phases in the development of CWTS, Anthony's institute at Leiden University. Other contributions in this issue focus on the longterm importance of a paper's references as exemplified by landmark scholarly texts and the phenomenon of ‘Sleeping Beauties’. Several papers focus on how the autonomy of institutes and researchers is related to bibliometric research evaluation. High-quality S&T indicators can act as structuring devises in policy debate and collective learning processes. We also learn about the need for statistical tests to distinguish among researchers with a similar h-index.

European Summer School for Scientometrics (ESSS) to be launched

Scientometric methods are increasingly used to analyse developments and trends in science and technology. Decisions to be taken in science policy and research management often have severe implications. Consequently data handling, indicator construction and interpretation require competent expert knowledge, which is currently only available to a limited extent for all stakeholders in Central Europe not the least due to lacking training opportunities. Responding to the lack of a pertinent scientometrics education (especially in German speaking countries) and to the increasing demand, the University of Vienna (Austria), the Humboldt University of Berlin (Germany), the Institute for Research Information and Quality Assurance (iFQ, Germany) and the Katholieke Universiteit Leuven (Belgium) have joined forces. They agreed upon jointly launching the European Summer School for Scientometrics (ESSS) this year. ESSS will take place alternately in Berlin, Vienna and Leuven. ESSS will offer training covering major aspects of quantitative science and technology studies. The main emphasis will be on scientometrics methods however, relevant aspects of patent analysis will be covered as well. The sound theoretical education will be combined with practical exercises in order to give participants the opportunity to familiarise themselves with the most commonly used databases, to learn how to construct relevant indicators and how to interpret the outcomes. ESSS courses provided are especially designed to cater for the needs of science policy makers, research quality managers, scientists, information specialists and librarians. ESSS is open to interested parties from all over Europe and beyond.

New developments in the use of citation analysis in research evaluation

This paper presents an overview of research assessment methodologies developed in the field of evaluative bibliometrics, a subfield of quantitative science and technology studies, aimed to construct indicators of research performance from a quantitative statistical analysis of scientific-scholarly documents. Citation analysis is one of its key methodologies. The paper illustrates the potentialities and limitations of the use of bibliometric indicators in research assessment. It discusses the relationship between metrics and peer review; databases used as sources of bibliometric analysis; the pros and cons of indicators often applied, including journal impact factors, Hirsch indices, and normalized indicators of citation impact; and approaches to the bibliometric measurement of institutional research performance.

Seven Myths in Bibliometrics About facts and fiction in quantitative science studies

Seven myths with cognitive and methodological background are analysed for validity. Although, there is always a grain of truth in bibliometrics myths too, the generality of their statements is disproved on the bases of methodological studies and by referring to typical counterexamples. It is shown how and where the logical fallacy lies in the inference from the reality behind the myths leading to the erroneous generalisation of the actual statements.

Diseño de un sistema de información y evaluación científica (Doctoral Thesis by Daniel Torres-Salinas)

QUANTITATIVE STUDY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY is a rapidly developing field, and its development is closely linked to a number of general tendencies in scholarship throughout the world. National governments and research organisations and institutions need systematic evaluations to optimise their research allocations, re-orient their research support, justify research organisations, restructure research in particular fields, or augment research productivity.

Fatal attraction: Conceptual and methodological problems in the ranking of universities by bibliometric methods

Ranking of research institutions by bibliometric methods is an improper tool for research performance evaluation, even at the level of large institutions. The problem, however, is not the ranking as such. The indicators used for ranking are often not advanced enough, and this situation is part of the broader problem of the application of insufficiently developed bibliometric indicators used by persons who do not have clear competence and experience in the field of quantitative studies of science. After a brief overview of the basic elements of bibliometric analysis, I discuss the major technical and methodological problems in the application of publication and citation data in the context of evaluation. Then I contend that the core of the problem lies not necessarily at the side of the data producer. Quite often persons responsible for research performance evaluation, for instance scientists themselves in their role as head of institutions and departments, science administrators at the government level and other policy makers show an attitude that encourages ‘quick and dirty’ bibliometric analyses whereas better quality is available. Finally, the necessary conditions for a successful application of advanced bibliometric indicators as support tool for peer review are discussed.

Impact of bibliometrics upon the science system: Inadvertent consequences?

Ranking of research institutions by bibliometric methods is an improper tool for research performance evaluation, even at the level of large institutions. The problem, however, is not the ranking as such. The indicators used for ranking are often not advanced enough, and this situation is part of the broader problem of the application of insufficiently developed bibliometric indicators used by persons who do not have clear competence and experience in the field of quantitative studies of science. After a brief overview of the basic elements of bibliometric analysis, I discuss the major technical and methodological problems in the application of publication and citation data in the context of evaluation. Then I contend that the core of the problem lies not necessarily at the side of the data producer. Quite often persons responsible for research performance evaluation, for instance scientists themselves in their role as head of institutions and departments, science administrators at the government level and other policy makers show an attitude that encourages 'quick and dirty' bibliometric analyses whereas better quality is available. Finally, the necessary conditions for a successful application of advanced bibliometric indicators as support tool for peer review are discussed.

Can compute, won’t compute: women's participation in the culture of computing

This paper is designed to enlarge our understanding of how computing is perceived. It uses findings from a quantitative and qualitative study of Computer Science and Psychology students. The paper shows how students believe they have an equal chance in Computing Science and are failing to acknowledge inequality.

Getting Off to a Good Start: The Effects of Upper Echelon Affiliations on Underwriter Prestige

The initial public offering (IPO) is one of the most critical events in the lifetime of a young firm. Prior research has shown that firms tend to have successful IPOs if they go public with the endorsement of a prestigious lead underwriter. This paper examines the antecedents to receiving endorsement by a prestigious underwriter and links this to the experience base of a firm's upper echelon. We theorize that the amount and type of upper echelon experience serve as important symbols of a young firm's legitimacy to critical outsiders. We introduce a typology of upper echelon experience that distinguishes between upper echelon upstream, horizontal, and downstream employment-based affiliations and suggest that these different types of upper echelon affiliations allay different types of endorser concerns regarding firm legitimacy, affecting the endorsement process. Further, we theorize that the relationships between upper echelon experience and investment bank prestige will be moderated by technological uncertainty. We test our assertions on a comprehensive sample of public and private biotechnology firms that were founded between 1961 and 1994 and that went public between 1979 and 1996. Analyses of the five-year career histories of the over 3,200 executives and directors that make up the upper echelons of these firms show that firms with upper echelons with affiliations with prominent downstream organizations (i.e., pharmaceutical and/or healthcare companies) and with prominent horizontal organizations (i.e., biotechnology companies) are more likely to attract the endorsement of a prestigious investment bank. We also find that the greater the range of upper echelon affiliations across the categories of upstream, horizontal, and downstream affiliations, the more prestigious the firm's lead underwriter. We also find that these latter results are moderated by technological uncertainty. The present research has implications for the study of organizational legitimacy, interorganizational endorsements, and entrepreneurship.

Visualizing latent domain knowledge

Knowledge discovery and data mining commonly rely on finding salient patterns of association from a vast amount of data. Traditional citation analysis of scientific literature draws insights from strong citation patterns. Latent domain knowledge, in contrast to the mainstream domain knowledge, often consists of highly relevant but relatively infrequently cited scientific works. Visualizing latent domain knowledge presents a significant challenge to knowledge discovery and quantitative studies of science. We build upon a citation-based knowledge visualization procedure and develop an approach that not only captures knowledge structures from prominent and highly cited works, but also traces latent domain knowledge through low-frequency citation chains. We apply this approach to two cases: (1) identifying cross-domain applications of Pathfinder networks (PFNETs) and (2) clarifying the current status of scientific inquiry of a possible link between Bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), also known as mad cow disease, and a new variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (vCJD), a type of brain disease in humans.

Foundation of a Global Interdisciplinary Research Network (COLLNET) with Berlin as the Virtual Centre

The growing importance of collaboration in research and the still underdeveloped state-of-the-art of research on collaboration have encouraged scientists from16 countries to establish a global interdisciplinary research network under the title “Collaboration in Science and in Technology” (COLLNET)with Berlin as its virtual centre which has been set up on January 1st, 2000.The network is to comprise the prominent scientists, who work at present mostly in the field of quantitative science studies. The intention is to work together in co-operation both on theoretical and applied aspects.

In matters of quantitative studies of science the fault of theorists is offering too little and asking too much

In this paper we take position in the ‘citation theory’ debate. First we revisit relevant earlier work of our group and try to assemble the findings. We criticise the constructivist fashion in sociology of science concerning citation practices. With statistical arguments we show the strong limitations of any ‘citation theory’ at the ‘citer side’. We emphasize that citations should be conceived of as ‘binding properties’ of an individual publication, from which many types of structuring follow. As keywords also have such binding properties at the same time, and as there are empirically established relations between the citation domain and the word domain, it is useless to develop a model concerning citations only. We envisage an interesting development, both theoretically and empirically, of what we would like to call ‘bibliometric chemistry’.

Derek J. de S. Price (1922–83) Historian of science and herald of scientometrics

AbstractThe 1960s, a golden age for academia in the USA, witnessed an unparallelled expansion of disciplines, among them the history of science and quantitative studies of science. A major pioneer in developing those fields was Derek Price, whose leadership of Yale University's newly created Department of History of Science and Medicine helped to bring national prominence to research about science and scientists. Price's legacy to the history of science, science policy, and scientometrics continues to be influential today. Three of Price's students recall the chemistry of the first years of the department, and reflect on their experiences with Price the scholar, teacher, and mentor.

Scientometrics: A citation based bibliography, 1990

For almost a decade, Bibliography Section of Scientometrics regularly published compilations under the title "Quantitative Studies of Science: A Current Bibliography". The series of 17 parts published between 1983 and 1991 was concluded in a set of comprehensive indexes [Scientometrics Vol. 32, No. 3 (1995) pp 263-367]. It seems that with the wide accessibility of bibliographic databases on CD-ROM, BBS, Internet and various other electronic media, such kind of somewhat arbitrary compilations are gradually losing their grounds unless some specific "extras" in organization, indexing, etc. are added. In the present bibliography, which is intended to be the first part of a new series, no kind of thematic completeness was even attempted. Instead, a complete collection of all SC1 and SSC1 source items citing at least one Scientometrics article has been compiled. We are well aware that the journal Scientometrics is not the only source of knowledge in the field and, therefore, several valuable contributions will be omitted f rom the bibliography. We are convinced, however, that each item citing the journal belongs to a region of attraction that, together with the paper~ published in the journal itself, form a coherent intellectual space, which is worth mapping without claiming any superiority over other more or less related such spaces. Not more and not less than this is attempted in this new series of bibliographies. Papers published in Scientometrics were, evidently, omitted from this compilation. The items are arranged in the alphabetic order of the source journal; the bibliographic data are followed by a = sign and a short identifier (first author + volume + first page) of the cited Scientometrics article(s).

Quantitative studies of science in the eighties indexes to “current bibliographies” 1–17

Quantitative studies of science in the eighties indexes to “current bibliographies” 1–17

Facts or imposed names on facts?

According to the title, there is no doubt that the objective of the authors is to attract attention on the state of health of quantitative studies of science (scientometrics) and encourage research vigor. Every effort in this direction is praised in any field. At the same time, it is strange that (instead of concentrating on the patient) they have extended the set of quantitative methods without considering the purpose of their application and nature of treated data. Thus, some of the statements (e.g. growing number of publications) “seem” to be more names imposed on facts than the facts themselves.

Favoritism versus Search for Good Papers: Empirical Evidence Regarding the Behavior of Journal Editors

Journal editors who publish papers authored by colleagues and former graduate students have been charged with practicing favoritism, with the implication that the papers in question are of lower quality than those written by scholars with no ties to the editor. Using citation analysis, the authors find strong evidence that although journal editors occasionally publish subpar papers authored by colleagues and former graduate students, on balance their use of professional connections enables them to identify and 'capture' high-impact papers for publication. This implies that a practice interpreted as favoritism by many scholars in fact serves to enhance efficiency in the market for scientific knowledge. Copyright 1994 by University of Chicago Press.