Qualitative conditions of scientometrics: The new challenges

Scientometrics

Volumn 38, Issue 1, 1997, Pages 7-26

  Rip, A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TWENTE   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0040562982     PISSN: 01389130     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/BF02461120     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. W. GLÄNZEL, U. SCHOEPFLIN, Little scientometrics, big scientometrics - and beyond, Scientometrics, 30 (1994) 375-384.
2. B. R. MARTIN, J. IRVINE, Evaluating the evaluators: A reply to our critics, Social Studies of Science, 15 (1985) 558-575.
3. A. RIP, Wetenschap als Mensenwerk, Ambo, Baarn, 1978.
4. P. HEALEY, H. ROTHMAN, P.K. HOCH, An experiment in science mapping for research planning, Research Policy, 15 (1986) 233-251.
5. S. WOOLGAR, Beyond the citation debate: towards a sociology of measurement technologies and their use in science policy, Science and Public Policy, 18 (1991) No. 5, 319-326.
6. M. CALLON, J. LAW, A. RIP, Mapping the Dynamics of Science and Technology, Macmillan, London, 1986.
7. B. R. MARTIN, J. IRVINE, Assessing basic research: Some partial indicators, of scientific progress in radio astronomy, Research Policy, 12 (1983) 61-90.
8. O. AMSTERDAMSKA, L. LEYDESDORFF, Citations: Indicators of significance?, Scientometrics, 15 (1989) 449-471.
9. J. L. PENICK JR., C. W. PURSELL JR., M. B. SHERWOOD, D. C. SWAIN, The Politics of American Science, 1939 to the Present (Revised Edition), MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass., 1972.
10. L. LEYDESDORFF, Problems with the 'measurement' of national scientific performance, Science and Public Policy, 15 (1988) 149-152.
11. J. ANDERSON, P. M. D. COLLINS, J. IRVINE, P. A. ISARD, B. R. MARTIN, F. NARIN, K. STEVENS, On-line approaches to measuring national scientific output - A cautionary tale, Science and Public Policy, 15 (1988) 153-161.
12. J. IRVINE, B. MARTIN, T. PEACOCK, R. TURNER, Charting the decline of British science, Nature, 316 (1985) 587-590.
13. B. R. MARTIN, British science in the 1980s - Has the relative decline continued?, Scientometrics, 29 (1994) 27-57.
14. G. N. GILBERT, Referencing as persuasion, Social Studies of Science, 7 (1977) 113-122.
15. A. RIP, Mapping of science: Possibilities and limitations, in: A. F. J. VAN RAAN (Ed.), Handbook of Quantitative Studies of Science and Technology, Elsevier Science Publishers, Amsterdam, 1988, p. 253-273.
16. R. WHITLEY, The Intellectual and Social Organisation of the Sciences, Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1984.
17. D. H. WHITE, D. SULLIVAN, E. J. BARBONI, The interdependence theory and experiment in revolutionary science: The case of parity violation, Social Studies of Science, 9 (1979) 303-327.
18. A. J. NEDERHOF, R. F. MEIJER, Development of bibliometric indicators for utility of research to users in society: measurement of external knowledge transfer via publications in trade journals, Scientometrics, 32 (1995) 37-48.
19. C. LE PAIR, The citation gap of applicable science, in: A. F. J. VAN RAAN, (Ed.), Handbook of Quantitative Studies of Science and Technology, Elsvier Science Publishers, Amsterdam, 1988, p. 537-553.
20. B. LATOUR, S. WOOLGAR, Laboratory Life, Sage, Beverly Hills, Cal., 1979.
21. A. RIP, The Republic of Science in the 1990s, Higher Education, 28 (1994) 3-23.
22. W. E. SNIZEK, Comment on Nicolini et al., Scientometrics, 32 (1995). 117-120.
23. W. B. ARTHUR, Competing technologies, increasing returns and lock-in by historical events, Economic Journal, 99 (1989) 116-131.
24. M. DAHL, S. LAHLOU, Measurement of network effects from the EC Science/Stimulation Programmes, Scientometrics, 21 (1991) 325-342.