Multi-modal social networks for modeling scientific fields

Groh, Georg; Fuchs, Christoph

doi:10.1007/s11192-011-0475-x

Cited by 14 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 53 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, to the best of our knowledge, longitudinal inter-organizational citation networks have not been examined thus far. Therefore, when we delineated our networks, we consulted studies with a somewhat different focus, including the use of multi-modal networks to model scientific fields [ 97 ] and the study of inter-institutional collaboration patterns in the life sciences and biotechnology [ 98 ].…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Does bibliometric research confer legitimacy to research assessment practice? A sociological study of reputational control, 1972-2016

Jappe¹,

Pithan²,

Heinze³

2018

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The use of bibliometric measures in the evaluation of research has increased considerably based on expertise from the growing research field of evaluative citation analysis (ECA). However, mounting criticism of such metrics suggests that the professionalization of bibliometric expertise remains contested. This paper investigates why impact metrics, such as the journal impact factor and the h-index, proliferate even though their legitimacy as a means of professional research assessment is questioned. Our analysis is informed by two relevant sociological theories: Andrew Abbott’s theory of professions and Richard Whitley’s theory of scientific work. These complementary concepts are connected in order to demonstrate that ECA has failed so far to provide scientific authority for professional research assessment. This argument is based on an empirical investigation of the extent of reputational control in the relevant research area. Using three measures of reputational control that are computed from longitudinal inter-organizational networks in ECA (1972–2016), we show that peripheral and isolated actors contribute the same number of novel bibliometric indicators as central actors. In addition, the share of newcomers to the academic sector has remained high. These findings demonstrate that recent methodological debates in ECA have not been accompanied by the formation of an intellectual field in the sociological sense of a reputational organization. Therefore, we conclude that a growing gap exists between an academic sector with little capacity for collective action and increasing demand for routine performance assessment by research organizations and funding agencies. This gap has been filled by database providers. By selecting and distributing research metrics, these commercial providers have gained a powerful role in defining de-facto standards of research excellence without being challenged by expert authority.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Does bibliometric research confer legitimacy to research assessment practice? A sociological study of reputational control, 1972-2016

Jappe¹,

Pithan²,

Heinze³

2018

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Generally, the social network usually consists of a great many components, and giant component is a universal phenomenon in an academic network. Due to the characteristics of the small network are not obvious and the giant component may signify the core of mainstream research activity [7,54], the common procedure is to narrow the analysis to the biggest one [55]. Thus in this paper, we only pay attention to the largest components in these two fields, with the scales of 107 and 69, respectively, which are large enough for our further analysis.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploratory Key Nodes in the Inventor-author Knowledge Diffusion Network

Zhang

Wei

Shao

2018

Proceedings of the 51st Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper aims to mine the key nodes in the process of knowledge flow from literatures of science and technology journals to technology patents on the community level. Based on the citation of technological patents to literatures of scientific journals and the cooperation among the researchers, this paper builds the knowledge flow network from the angle of spatial dimension. Then employing the extensity centrality-Newman and the commonly used degree indexes, this paper excavates and analyses the nodes which occupy important positions among communities in the knowledge flow network. After that, this paper puts forward suggestions on how to make full use of the key nodes' role of bridge to promote knowledge flow from literatures of science and technology journals to technology patents.

show abstract

“…Freeman (1979) identified three different prestige indices: (1) degree-based centralism, (2) proximity-based centralism and 3betweeness-based centralism. Such measures were successfully used to characterize relationships in scientific fields (Groh and Fuchs 2011).…”

Section: Network Analysis Measures Of Single Journalsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Social network analytics for advanced bibliometrics: referring to actor roles of management journals instead of journal rankings

Rost

Teichert

Pilkington³

2017

Scientometrics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Impact factors are commonly used to assess journals relevance. This implies a simplified view on science as a single-stage linear process. Therefore, few top-tier journals are one-sidedly favored as outlets, such that submissions to top-tier journals explode whereas others are short of submissions. Consequently, the often claimed gap between research and practical application in application-oriented disciplines as business administration is not narrowing but becoming entrenched. A more complete view of the scientific system is needed to fully capture journals ´ contributions in the development of a discipline. Simple citation measures, as e.g. citation counts, are commonly used to evaluate scientific work. There are many known dangers of miss-or over-interpretation of such simple data and this paper adds to this discussion by developing an alternative way of interpreting a discipline based on the positions and roles of journals in their wider network. Specifically, we employ ideas from the network analytic approach. Relative positions allow the direct comparison between different fields. Similarly, the approach provides a better understanding of the diffusion process of knowledge as it differentiates positions in the knowledge creation process. We demonstrate how different modes of social capital create different patterns of action that require a multidimensional evaluation of scientific research. We explore different types of social capital and intertwined relational structures of actors to compare journals with different bibliometric profiles. Ultimately, we develop a multi-dimensional evaluation of actor roles based upon multiple indicators and we test this approach by classifying management journals based on their bibliometric environment.

show abstract

Multi-modal social networks for modeling scientific fields

Cited by 14 publications

References 53 publications

Does bibliometric research confer legitimacy to research assessment practice? A sociological study of reputational control, 1972-2016

Does bibliometric research confer legitimacy to research assessment practice? A sociological study of reputational control, 1972-2016

Exploratory Key Nodes in the Inventor-author Knowledge Diffusion Network

Social network analytics for advanced bibliometrics: referring to actor roles of management journals instead of journal rankings

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About