Interdisciplinarity Metric Based on the Co-Citation Network

Hernández, Juan M.; Dorta-González, Pablo

doi:10.3390/math8040544

Cited by 6 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Regarding possible applications, the uncited rate of a serial title (journals, conference proceedings and book series) can be used as a better measure of the frequency of lowimpact documents within that title than an impact ranking that measures the average impact of all published documents in that title. This is especially relevant in the case of interdisciplinary journals (Hernández and Dorta-González, 2020).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Open access effect on uncitedness: a large-scale study controlling by discipline, source type and visibility

2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There are many factors that affect the probability of being uncited during the first years after publication. In this study, we analyze three of these factors for journals, conference proceedings and book series: the field (in 316 subject categories of the Scopus database), the access modality (open access vs. paywalled), and the visibility of the source (through the percentile of the average impact in the subject category). We quantify the effect of these factors on the probability of being uncited. This probability is measured through the percentage of uncited documents in the serial sources of the Scopus database at about two years after publication. As a main result, we do not find any strong correlation between open access and uncitedness. Within the group of most cited journals (Q1 and top 10%), open access journals generally have somewhat lower uncited rates. However, in the intermediate quartiles (Q2 and Q3) almost no differences are observed, while for Q4 the uncited rate is again somewhat lower in the case of the OA group. This is important because it provides new evidence in the debate about open access citation advantage.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Open access effect on uncitedness: a large-scale study controlling by discipline, source type and visibility

2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Measures of IDR have leveraged various classifications of disciplines, such as the Web of Science Subject Classification (Wagner et al, 2011), the All Science Journal Classification (Leydesdorff et al, 2015), the Leuven-Budapest classification (Thijs et al, 2015), or proxies of disciplines, such as journal title, or citation-based fields (Hernández & Dorta-González, 2020). All of these have different granularities.…”

Section: Knowledge Being Allocated To a Set Of Disciplinesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…18. Interdisciplinary Research Index This measure is based on a citation network, where a given paper's references are evaluated in terms of their co-occurrence in reference lists in other papers, using motives (Hernández & Dorta-González, 2020). The index indicates the inverse of the degree a paper's reference set is commonly cited together, and thus a difficulty of attributing it to a specific research area.…”

Section: Identifying the Measuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…An entirely different approach to overcome this limitation is to not rely on pre-specified disciplinary classifications, but to define the disciplines based on the dataset itself. For example, when a paper is citing two works the relative frequency of these two works being co-cited in the literature can constitute an indicator of their similarity or their likelihood of belonging to the same discipline (Hernández et. al., 2020).…”

Section: Evaluating Criterion 3a: Valid Discipline Allocationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Toward greater consistency and validity in measuring interdisciplinarity: a systematic and conceptual evaluation

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While interdisciplinary research (IDR) has attracted much attention, this has not yet resulted in a coherent body of knowledge of interdisciplinarity. One of the impediments is a lack of consensus on its conceptualization and measurement. Some of the proposed measures have shown to misalign empirically, meaning that conclusions about IDR can differ across measures. To clarify this disagreement conceptually, and to stimulate better coherence in measurement, this paper starts with a review of the IDR definitions. From a synthesis of these definitions, we provide a conceptual definition and a logical structure of the construct, and derive evaluation criteria for its measures. We use these to evaluate 21 measures of IDR. The results show that measures vary widely in meeting the criteria, which can explain some of the observed inconsistencies in earlier studies. We discuss the most common limitations and present empirical analyses to gauge their severity. We present several suggestions for future measurement of the interdisciplinarity of research. We hope that with these suggestions, researchers can draw more consistent conclusions, aiding in the development of a coherent body of knowledge of this ever-important phenomenon.

show abstract

“…It is an effective method to evaluate the importance of nodes and reveal the network structure. In the bibliometric networks, different types of networks, such as co-authorship networks (Barabási et al , 2002; González-Alcaide et al , 2020), bibliographic coupling networks (Yan and Ding, 2012) and co-citation networks (Hernández and Dorta-González, 2020), are constructed by bibliometricians (Perianes-Rodriguez et al , 2016).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Knowledge discovery in research on domestic violence: an overview of the last fifty years

Basílio

Pereira

Oliveira

et al. 2021

DTA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThe database of the Web of Science (WoS) was searched for publications from January 1945–May 7, 2020 on the topic of domestic violence in titles, abstracts and keywords. The references were analyzed using the R bibliometrix package, and abstracts were analyzed using latent Dirichlet allocation (LDA) with collapsed Gibbs sampling to obtain topics related to domestic violence.Design/methodology/approachThe aim of the study is to explore and provide an overview of research carried out on domestic violence, in its various aspects, over the past fifty years.FindingsAs a result of the research, the authors can assert that in the last fifty years, 32,298 authors have produced 19,495 documents on the theme of policing strategy and related subjects in 111 countries. Scientific production in this area grows at a rate of 12.81 per year. The United States of America is the leading country in publications with 48.14%, followed by the United Kingdom with 7.57% and Australia with 6.05%. Regarding universities, the highlight is the University of California with 664 publications, followed by the University of London with 515 and the University of North Carolina with 484. As for journals, the highlight is the Journal of Interpersonal Violence, Journal of Family Violence and Violence Against Women, which account for more than 14.32% of all indexed literature. Regarding the authors, the highlight is Campbell J.C and Feder G. Probabilistic topic modeling revealed that 18% of the topics concentrate 90% of all tokens. Topic 1 accounts for 27.9% of the sample and conducts research related to intimate partner violence.Practical implicationsAs a practical implication of using the LDA in the bibliographic review, we infer that its capacity to explore large masses of data allows the researcher to explore an infinitely greater amount than the traditional methods of systematic literature review.Originality/valueThe value of these studies is summarized in the presentation of an overview on the theme in the last fifty years, offering the opportunity for other researchers to use this research as a starting point for other analyses.

show abstract

Interdisciplinarity Metric Based on the Co-Citation Network

Cited by 6 publications

References 19 publications

Open access effect on uncitedness: a large-scale study controlling by discipline, source type and visibility

Open access effect on uncitedness: a large-scale study controlling by discipline, source type and visibility

Toward greater consistency and validity in measuring interdisciplinarity: a systematic and conceptual evaluation

Knowledge discovery in research on domestic violence: an overview of the last fifty years

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About