Similarity measures, author cocitation analysis, and information theory

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology

Volumn 56, Issue 7, 2005, Pages 769-772

  Leydesdorff, Loet ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF AMSTERDAM   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ALGORITHMS; COMPUTER SOFTWARE; CORRELATION METHODS; NORMAL DISTRIBUTION; PROBLEM SOLVING; SET THEORY; VECTORS;

AUTHOR COCITATION ANALYSIS (ACA); CLUSTERING; JACCARD INDEX; LOGARITHMIC TRANSFORMATION;

INFORMATION THEORY;

EID: 19944407179     PISSN: 15322882     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/asi.20130     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Ahlgren, P., Jarneving, B., & Rousseau, R. (2003). Requirement for a cocitation similarity measure, with special reference to Pearson's correlation coefficient. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 54(6), 550-560.
2. Bensman, S. J. (2004). Pearson's r and author cocitation analysis: A commentary on the controversy. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 55(10), 935-936.
3. Callon, M., Law, J., & Rip, A. (Eds.) (1986). Mapping the dynamics of science and technology. London: Macmillan.
4. Courtial, J.-P. (1989). Qualitative models, quantitative tools and network analysis. Scientometrics, 15, 527-534.
5. Everitt, B. (1974). Cluster analysis. London: Heinemann.
6. Jones, W.P., & Furnas, G.W. (1987). Pictures of relevance: A geometric analysis of similarity measures. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 36(6), 420-442.
7. Krippendorff, K. (1986). Information theory: Structural models for qualitative data. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
8. Leydesdorff, L. (1987), Various methods for the mapping of science. Scientometrics, 11, 291-320.
9. Leydesdorff, L. (1991). The static and dynamic analysis of network data using information theory. Social Networks, 13, 301-345.
10. Leydesdorff, L. (1992). A validation study of "Leximappe." Scientometrics, 25, 295-312.
11. Leydesdorff, L. (1995). The challenge of Scientometrics: The development, measurement, and self-organization of scientific communications. Leiden: DSWO Press, Leiden University. Retrieved November 18, 2004, from http://www.upublish. com/books/leydesdorff-sci.htm
12. Leydesdorff, L., & Zaal, R. (1988). Co-words and citations. Relations between document sets and environments. In L. Egghe & R. Rousseau (Eds.), Informetrics 87/88 (pp. 105-119). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
13. Noms, E. (1982). An improved method for analyzing square scientometric transaction matrices. Scientometrics, 4, 297-316.
14. Oberski, J. (1988). Some statistical aspects of co-citation cluster analysis and a judgement by physicist. In A.F.J. van Raan (Ed.), Handbook of quantitative studies of science & technology (pp. 431-462). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
15. Price, D.J. de Solla. (1981). The analysis of square matrices of scientometric transactions. Scientometrics, 3, 55-63.
16. Salton, G., & McGill, M.J. (1983). Introduction to modern information retrieval. Auckland: McGraw-Hill.
17. Shannon, C.E. (1948). A mathematical theory of communication. Bell System Technical Journal, 27, 379-423 and 623-656.
18. Small, H., & Sweeney, E. (1985). Clustering the Science Citation Index using co-citations I. A comparison of methods. Scientometrics, 7, 391-409.
19. Small, H., Sweeney, E., & Greenlee, E. (1985). Clustering the Science Citation Index using co-citations II. Mapping science. Scientometrics, 8, 321-340.
20. Theil, H. (1972). Statistical decomposition analysis. Amsterdam and London: North-Holland.
21. White, H.D. (2003). Author cocitation analysis and Pearson's r. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 54(13), 1250-1259.