Characterizing intellectual spaces between science and technology

Scientometrics

Volumn 58, Issue 2, 2003, Pages 369-390

  Bhattacharya, Sujit ^a   Kretschmer, Hildrun ^b   Meyer, Martin ^c,d  

^a National Institute of Science Technology and Development Studies India   (India)

^b ROYAL NETHERLANDS ACADEMY OF ARTS AND SCIENCES   (Netherlands)

^c UNIVERSITY OF LEUVEN   (Belgium)

^d SYO Finnish Inst for Entpr Mgmt   (Finland)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 1142307687     PISSN: 01389130     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1023/A:1026244828759     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. BEVER, M. B. (1986), Encyclopedia of Material Science and Technology. Pergamon Press Ltd, USA, pp. 4989-4991.
2. BHATTACHARYA, S., BASU, P. (1998), Mapping a research area at the micro level using co-word analysis. Scientometrics, 43 (3): 359-372.
3. BHATTACHARYA, S, SUKEEJA, G., BASU, P. (1999), Mapping the knowledge domain of a research field through scientometric indicators. In: MACIAS-CHAPULA, C. A. (Ed.), Proceedings of the Seventh Conference of the International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics. Universidad de Colima, Colima, pp. 37-50.
4. BHATTACHARYA, S., KHAN, M. T. R. (2001), Monitoring technology trends through patent analysis. Research Evaluation, 10 (1): 33-45.
5. CALLON, M., COURTIAL, J. P., TURNER, W. A., BAUIN, S. (1983), From translations to problematic networks: An introduction to co-word analysis. Social Science Information, 22: 191-235.
6. CAMPBELL, R. S., NEIVES N. L. (1979), Technology Indicators Based on Patent Data: The Case of Catalytic Convertors. Phase I Report, Design and Demonstration. Batelle Pacific Northwest Laboratories, n.p.
7. CASIMIR, H. B. J. (1971), Industries and academic freedom. Research Policy, 1: 3-8.
8. COLLINS, P., WYATT, S. (1988), Citations in patents to the basic research literature. Research Policy, 17: 65-74.
9. DAVID, C. M., ROSENBERG, N. (1982), The influence of market demand upon innovation: a critical review of some empirical studies. In: ROSENBERG, N. (Ed.), Inside the Black Box: Technology and Economics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 193-241.
10. FAGERBERG, J. (1987), A technology gap approach to why growth rates differ. Research Policy, 16: 87-99.
11. GRUPP, H., SCHMOCH, U. (1992) Perceptions of scientification of innovation as measured by referencing between patents and papers: dynamics in science-based fields of technology. In: GRUPP, H. (Ed.), Dynamics of Science based Innovation. Springer-Verlag, Germany, pp. 73-122.
12. GIBBONS, M., LIMOGES, C., NOWOTNY, H., SCHWARTZMAN, S., SCOTT, P., TROW, M. (1994), The New Production of Knowledge: The Dynamics of Science and Research in Contemporary Societies. Sage publications, London.
13. GLUCER, D. A., SHAH, S. I. (Eds) (1995), Handbook of Thin Film Process Technology: User Guide. Institute of Physics, London.
14. GRUPP, H., SCHMOCH, U. (1992), Perceptions of scientification of innovation as measured by referencing between patents and papers: dynamics in science-based fields of technology. In: GRUPP, H. (Ed.), Dynamics of Science based Innovation. Springer-Verlag, Germany, pp. 73-122.
15. GUPTA, V. K., PANGANNAYA, N. B. (2000), Carbon nanotubes: bibliometric analysis of patents. World Patent Information, 22: 185-189.
16. IRVINE, J. et al. (Ed.) (1997), Equipping Science for the 21st century. Edwer Elger Publishing Ltd., Lyme: US.
17. MARTIN, B., SALTE R, A. (1996), The Relationship between Publicly Funded Basic Research and Economic Performance. Brigton: SPRU, University of Sussex.
18. MEYER, M. (2000a), Does science push technology? Patents citing scientific literature. Research Policy, 29: 409-434.
19. MEYER, M. (2000b), What is special about patent citations? Differences between scientific and patent citations. Scientometrics, 47 (2): 93-124.
20. MEYER, M. (2001), Patent citation analysis in a novel field of technology: an exploration of nano-science and nano-technology. Scientometrics, 51 (1): 163-183.
21. MOWERY, C. D., ROSENBERG, N. (1982), The influence of market demand upon innovation: a critical review of some empirical studies. In: ROSENBERG, N. (Ed.), Inside the Black Box: Technology and Economics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 193-241.
22. NARIN, F. (1994), Patent bibliometrics. Scientometrics, 30 (1): 147-155.
23. NARIN, F., NOMA, R. (1985), Is technology becoming science?. Scientometrics, 7: 369-381.
24. NARIN, F., OLIVASTRO, D. (1992), Status report- Linkage between technology and science. Research Policy, 21 (3): 237-249.
25. NARIN F., OLIVASTRO, D. (1988), Patent citation analysis: New validation studies and linkage statistics. In: A. F. J. VAN RAAN, A. J. NEDERHOFF, H. F. MOED (Eds), Science Indicators: Their Use in Science Policy and Their Role in Science Studies, DSWO Press, Leiden, pp. 14-16.
26. NIGHTINGALE, P. (1998), A cognitive model of innovation. Research Policy, 27 (7): 689-709.
27. RIP, A. (1992), Science and technology as dancing partners. In: KROE S, P., BAKKER, M. (Eds), Technology Development and Science in the Industrial Age. Kluwer, n.p. pp. 231-270.
28. ROSENBERG, N. (1982), Inside the Black Box: Technology and Economics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
29. TIJSSEN, R. J. W., BUTER, R. K., VAN LEEUWEN, TH. N. (2000), Technological relevance of science: An assessment of citation linkages between patents and research papers. Scientometrics, 47 (2): 389-412.
30. TOYNBEE, A. J. (1963), Introduction: The Genesis of Civilisations, A Study of History. 12 Vols, New York.
31. VERSPAGEN, B. (1999), Large firms and knowledge flows in Dutch R&D system: A case study of Philips electronics. Technology Analysis and Strategic Management, 11: 211-233.
32. White Paper on Science and Technology on New Developments in Science and Technology: Responding to National and Societal Needs (1999), Science and Technology Agency, Japanese Government (Ed.). Japan Science and Technology Corporation: Japan.