Manifestation of emerging specialties in journal literature: A growth model of papers, references, exemplars, bibliographic coupling, cocitation, and clustering coefficient distribution

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology

Volumn 56, Issue 12, 2005, Pages 1250-1273

  Morris, Steven A ^a  

^a Oklahoma State University   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADVANTAGE BY PAPER WITH EXAMPLARS (CAPE); COMPLEX NETWORKS; COUPLING DISTRIBUTION; PRICE'S CUMULATIVE ADVANTAGE MODEL;

BIBLIOGRAPHIES; ELECTRIC SWITCHES; FEATURE EXTRACTION; LARGE SCALE SYSTEMS; MICROELECTROMECHANICAL DEVICES;

MATHEMATICAL MODELS;

EID: 27744433574     PISSN: 15322882     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/asi.20208     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Abt, H.A. (2000). The reference-frequency relation in the physical sciences. Scientometrics, 49(3), 443-451.
2. Albert, R., & Barabasi, A. (2002). Statistical mechanics of complex networks. Reviews of Modern Physics, 74(1), 47-97.
3. Borner, K., Chen, C., & Boyack, K.W. (2003). Visualizing knowledge domains. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 37, 179-255.
4. Crane, D. (1980). An exploratory study of Kuhnian paradigms in theoretical high energy physics. Social Studies of Science, 10, 23-54.
5. Dorogovtsev, S.N., & Mendes, J.F.F. (2002). Evolution of networks. Advances in Physics, 51(4), 1079-1187.
6. Eldredge, N., & Gould, S.J. (1972). Punctuated equilibria: An alternative to phyletic gradualism. In T.J.M. Schopf (Ed.), Models in paleobiology (pp. 82-115). San Fransisco: Freeman, Cooper.
7. Garfield, E. (1979). Citation indexing - Its theory and application in science, technology, and humanities. New York: Wiley.
8. Garfield, E., Malin, M.V., & Small, H. (1978). Citation data as science indicators. In U. Elkana, J. Lederberg, R.K. Merten, A. Thackray, & H. Zuckerman (Eds.), Toward a metric of science: The advent of science indicators. New York: Wiley.
9. Goldstein, M.L., Morris, S.A., & Yen, G.G. (2005). A group-based Yule model for bipartite author-paper networks. Physical Review E, 71(026108).
10. Hargens, L.L. (2000). Using the literature: Reference networks, reference contexts, and the social structure of scholarship. American Sociological Review, 65(6), 846-865.
11. Johnson, N.L., Kotz, S., & Kemp, A.W. (1992). Univariate discrete distributions (2nd ed.). New York: Wiley.
12. Kessler, M.M. (1963). Bibliographic coupling between scientific papers. American Documentation, 14, 10-25.
13. Kuhn, T.S. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
14. Kuhn, T.S. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions (2nd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
15. Lotka, A.J. (1926). The frequency distribution of scientific productivity. Journal of the Washington Academy of Sciences, 16, 317-323.
16. Milgram, S. (1967). Small-world problem. Psychology Today, 1(1), 61-67.
17. Moravcsik, M.J., & Murugesan, P. (1975). Some results on the function and quality of citations. Social Studies of Science, 5(1), 86-92.
18. Morris, S.A., & Yen, G. (2004). Crossmaps: Visualization of overlapping relationships in collections of journal papers. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States, 101(suppl. 1), 5291-5296.
19. Morris, S.A., Yen, G., Wu, Z., & Asnake, B. (2003). Time line visualization of research fronts. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 54(5), 413-422.
20. Naranan, S. (1971). Power law relations in science bibliography - A self-consistent interpretation. Journal of Documentation, 27(2), 83-97.
21. Newman, M.E.J. (2003). The structure and function of complex networks. Siam Review, 45(2), 167-256.
22. Porter, A.L., Roper, A.T., Mason, T.W., Rossini, F.A., & Banks, J. (1991). Forecasting and management of technology. New York: Wiley.
23. Price, D. (1965). Networks of scientific papers. Science, 149(3683), 510-515.
24. Price, D. (1976). A general theory of bibliometric and other cumulative advantage processes. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 27(5-6), 292-306.
25. Price, D. (1986). Little science, big science - And beyond. New York: Columbia University Press.
26. Redner, S. (1998). How popular is your paper? An empirical study of the citation distribution. European Physical Journal B, 4(2), 131-134.
27. Seglen, P.O. (1992). The skewness of science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 43(9), 628-638.
28. Simon, H.A. (1955). On a class of skew distribution functions. Biometrika, 42, 425-440.
29. Small, H. (1973). Cocitation in scientific literature - New measure of relationship between 2 documents. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 24(4), 265-269.
30. Small, H. (1997). Update on science mapping: Creating large document spaces. Scientometrics, 38(2), 275-293.
31. Small, H.G. (1978). Cited documents as concept symbols. Social Studies of Science, 8, 327-340.
32. Tabah, A.N. (1999). Literature dynamics: Studies on growth, diffusion, and epidemics. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 34, 249-286.
33. van Raan, A.F.J. (2001). Competition amongst scientists for publication status: toward a model of scientific publication and citation distributions. Scientometrics, 51(1), 347-357.
34. van Raan, A.F.J. (2005). Reference-based publication networks with episodic memories. Scientometrics, 63(3), 549-566.
35. Yule, G.U. (1924). A mathematical theory of evolution, based on the conclusions of Dr. J.C. Willis, F.R.S. Philosophical Transactions B, 213, 21-87.