Nanotechnology as a field of science: Its delineation in terms of journals and patents

Scientometrics

Volumn 70, Issue 3, 2007, Pages 693-713

  Leydesdorff, Loet ^a   Zhou, Ping ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF AMSTERDAM   (Netherlands)

^b INSTITUTE OF SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL INFORMATION OF CHINA   (China)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33847366772     PISSN: 01389130     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11192-007-0308-0     Document Type: Article

References (42)

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. (forthcoming). Garfield and the Impact Factor: The creation, utilization, and validation of a citation measure. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology (ARIST), 42 : In print.
3. BRAUN, T., SCHUBERT, A., ZSINDELY, S. (1997). Nanoscience and nanotechnology on the balance. Scientometrics, 38 : 321-325.
4. CHAN, L. M. (1999). A Guide to the Library of Congress Classification. 5th ed., Englewood, CO: Libraries Unlimited.
5. CHEN, C. (2006). CiteSpace II: Detecting and Visualizing Emerging Trends and Transient Patterns in Scientific Literature. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 57 (3) : 359-377.
6. COURTIAL, J.-P., CALLON, M., SIGOGNEAU, A. (1984). Is indexing trustworthy? Classification of articles through co-word analysis. Journal of Information Science, 9 : 47-56.
7. COURTIAL, J.-P., CALLON, M., SIGOGNEAU, A. (1993). The use of patent titles for identifying the topics of invention and forecasting trends. Scientometrics, 26 : 231-242.
8. FARRALL, K. (2005). Web Graph Analysis in Perspective: Description and Evaluation in terms of Krippendorff's Conceptual Framework for Content Analysis (version 1.0); athttp://farrall.org/papers/ webgraph_as_content.html#between. Retrieved 7 May 2006
9. FREEMAN, L. C. (1977). A set of measures of centrality based on betweenness. Sociometry, 40 (1) : 35-41.
10. FREEMAN, L. C. (1978/1979). Centrality in social networks. conceptual clarification,. Social Networks, 1 : 215-239.
11. GILBERT, G. N. (1977). Referencing as persuasion. Social Studies of Science, 7 : 113-122.
12. GOLDSTONE, R., LEYDESDORFF, L. (2006). The import and export of cognitive science. Cognitive Science, 30 (6) : 983-993.
13. GRANSTRAND, O. (1999). The Economics and Management of Intellectual Property: Towards Intellectual Capitalism. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK.
14. HE, C., PAO, M. L. (1986). A Discipline-specific journal selection algorithm. Information Processing Management, 22 (5) : 405-416.
15. HEALEY, P., ROTHMAN, H., KOCH, P. K. (1986). An experiment in science mapping for research planning. Research Policy, 15 : 179-184.
16. HEDGE, D., SAMPAT, B. N. (2005). Examiner Citations, Applicant Citations, and the Private Value of Patents; available at http://mgt.gatech.edu/news_room/news/2005/reer/files/friday_examiner.pdf
17. JAFFE, A. B., TRAJTENBERG, M. (2002). Patents, Citations, and Innovations: A Window on the Knowledge Economy. MIT, Pess, Cambridge, MA/London.
18. 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.
19. KAMADA, T., KAWAI, S. (1989). An algorithm for drawing general undirected graphs. Information Processing Letters, 31 (1) : 7-15.
20. KING, J. (1987). A review of bibliometric and other science indicators and their role in research evaluation. Journal of Information Science, 13 : 261-276.
21. KOSTOFF, R. (2004). The (scientific) wealth of nations. The Scientist, 18 (18) : 10.
22. 60: Buckminsterfullerene. Nature, 318 (14 November) : 162-163.
23. LEYDESDORFF, L. (1989). Words and co-words as indicators of intellectual organization. Research Policy, 18 : 209-223.
24. LEYDESDORFF, L. (2002). Dynamic and evolutionary updates of classificatory schemes in scientific journal structures. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 53 (12) : 987-994.
25. LEYDESDORFF, L. (2004). The university-industry knowlege relationship: Analyzing patents and the science base of technologies. Journal of the American Society for Information Science Technology, 55 (11) : 991-1001.
26. LEYDESDORFF, L. (2006). Can scientific journals be classified in terms of aggregated journal-journal citation relations using the Journal Citation Reports? Journal of the American Society for Information Science Technology, 57 (5) : 601-613.
27. LEYDESDORFF, L. (2007). "Betweenness" centrality as an indicator of the interdisciplinarity of scientific journals. Journal of the American Society for Information Science Technology, in print.
28. LEYDESDORFF, L., COZZENS, S. E. (1993). The delineation of specialties in terms of journals using the dynamic journal set of the Science Citation Index. Scientometrics, 26 : 133-154.
29. LEYDESDORFF, L., COZZENS, S. E., VAN DEN BESSELAAR, P. (1994). Tracking areas of strategic importance using scientometric journal mappings. Research Policy, 23 : 217-229.
30. LEYDESDORFF, L., VAN DER SCHAAR, P. (1987). The use of scientometric indicators for evaluating national research programmes. Science Technology Studies, 5 : 22-31.
31. MEYER, M. (2000). Patent citations in a novel field of technology: What can they tell about interactions of emerging communities of science and technology? Scientometrics, 48 : 151-178.
32. MEYER, M. (2006). Are patenting scientists the better scholars? An exploratory comparison of inventorauthors with their non-inventing peers in nano-science and technology. Research Policy, 35 (10) : 1646-1662
33. MEYER, M., PERSSON, O. (1998). Nanotechnology - interdisciplinarity, patterns of collaboration and differences in application. Scientometrics, 42 : 195-205.
34. NARIN, F., HAMILTON, K. S., OLIVASTRO, D. (1997). The increasing link between U. S. technology and public science. Research Policy, 26 (3) : 317-330.
35. PORTER, A., YOUTIE, J., SHAPIRA, P. (2006). Refining Search Terms for Nanotechnology (in preparation).
36. SALTON, G., MCGILL, M. J. (1983). Introduction to Modern Information Retrieval. McGraw-Hill, Auckland, etc.
37. SAMPAT, B. N. (2006). Patenting and U. S. academic research in the 20th century: The world before and after Bayh-Dole. Research Policy, 35 : 772-789.
38. SHEU, M., VEEFKIND, V., VERBANDT, Y., GALAN, E. M., ABSALOM, R., FÖRSTER, W. (2006). Mapping nanotechnology patents: The EPO approach. World Patent Information, 28 : 204-211.
39. SMALL, H. (1978). Cited documents as concept symbols. Social Studies of Science, 7 : 113-122.
40. VAN DEN BESSELAAR, P., HEIMERIKS, G. (2001). Disciplinary, Multidisciplinary, Interdisciplinary: Concepts and Indicators. Paper presented at the 8th International Conference on Scientometrics and Informetrics - ISSI2001, Sydney.
41. ZHOU, P., LEYDESDORFF, L. (2006). The emergence of China as a leading nation in science. Research Policy, 35 (1) : 83-104.
42. ZITT, M., BASSECOULARD, E. (2006). Delineating complex scientific fields by an hybrid lexical-citation method: A application to nanosciences. Information Processing and Management, 42 : 1513-1531.