Betweenness centrality as an indicator of the interdisciplinary of scientific journals

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology

Volumn 58, Issue 9, 2007, Pages 1303-1319

  Leydesdorff, Loet ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF AMSTERDAM   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BIOTECHNOLOGY; INDEXING (OF INFORMATION); INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY; NANOTECHNOLOGY; SELF ORGANIZING MAPS; TECHNICAL WRITING;

BETWEENNESS CENTRALITY; CLOSENESS CENTRALITY; SCIENTIFIC JOURNALS;

INFORMATION SCIENCE;

EID: 33847416037     PISSN: 15322882     EISSN: 15322890     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/asi.20614     Document Type: Article

References (60)

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. Bavelas, A. (1948). A mathematical model for group structure. Applied Anthropology, 7, 16-30.
3. Bensman, S.J. (2001). Bradford's law and fuzzy sets: Statistical implications for library analyses. IFLA Journal, 27, 238-246.
4. Bensman, S.J. (2007). Garfield and the impact factor. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 41,93-155.
5. Bonacich, P. (1987). Power and centrality: A family of measures. American Journal of Sociology, 92(5), 1170-1182.
6. Borgatti, S.P., Everett, M.G., & Freeman, L.C. (2002). UCINet for Windows: Software for social network analysis. Needham, MA: Analytic Technologies.
7. Burt, R.S. (1982). Toward a structural theory of action. New York: Academic Press.
8. Carpenter, M.P., & Narin, F. (1973). Clustering of scientific journals. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 24, 425-436.
9. Caswill, C (2006, July). Research funding organisations in context: Institutional learning and stubborn variety. Paper presented at the XVIth World Congress of Sociology, Durban, South Africa.
10. 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.
11. De Nooy, W., Mrvar, A., & Batagelj, V. (2005). Exploratory social network analysis with Pajek. New York: Cambridge University Press.
12. Doreian, P., & Fararo, T.J. (1985). Structural equivalence in a journal network, Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 36, 28-37.
13. Farrall, K. (2005). Web graph analysis in perspective: Description and evaluation in terms of Krippendorff's conceptual framework for content analysis (Version 1.0). Retrieved May 7, 2006, from http://farrall.org/papers/ webgraph_as_content.html#between
14. Freeman, L.C. (1977). A set of measures of centrality based on betweenness. Sociometry, 40(1), 35-41.
15. Freeman, L.C. (1978/1979). Centrality in social networks. Conceptual clarification. Social Networks, 1, 215-239.
16. Garfield, E. (1972). Citation analysis as a tool in journal evaluation. Science, 178(4060), 471-479.
17. Garfield, E. (1998). The multiple meanings of impact factors. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 49(8), 768.
18. Garfield, E., & Sher, I.H. (1963). New factors in the evaluation of scientific literature through citation indexing. American Documentation, 14, 195-201.
19. Gilbert, G.N. (1977). Referencing as persuasion. Social Studies of Science, 7, 113-122.
20. Hanneman, R.A., & Riddle, M. (2005). Introduction to social network methods. Riverside, CA: University of California, Riverside. Retrieved August 24, 2006, from http://faculty.ucr.edu/-hanneman/nettext/
21. He, C., & Pao, M.L. (1986). A discipline-specific journal selection algorithm. Information Processing & Management, 22(5), 405-416.
22. Hirst, G. (1978). Discipline impact factors: A method for determining core journal lists. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 29,171-172.
23. 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.
24. Klein, J.T. (1990). Interdisciplinarity: History, theory, & practice. Detroit, MI: Wayne State University Press.
25. Lewison, G., & Cunningham, P. (1988). The use of bibliometrics in the evaluation of community biotechnology programmes. In A.F.J. Van Raan (Ed.), Handbook of quantitative studies of science and technology (pp. 99-114). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
26. Leydesdorff, L. (1986). The development of frames of references. Scientometrics 9,103-125.
27. Leydesdorff, L. (1994). Een Scientometrische Verkenning van de Biotechnologie [A scientometric orientation of biotechnology] Amsterdam: Overlegcommissie Verkenningen (OCV).
28. Leydesdorff, L. (1995). The challenge of scientometrics: The development, measurement, and self-organization of scientific communications. Leiden: DSWO Press, Leiden University. Retrieved August 24, 2006, from http://www.universal- publishers.com/book.php?method=ISBN&book= 1581126816
29. 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.
30. Leydesdorff, L. (2004). Top-down decomposition of the Journal Citation Report of the Social Science Citation Index: Graph- and factor-analytical approaches. Scientometrics, 60(2), 159-180.
31. 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.
32. Leydesdorff, L. (2007a). Mapping interdisciplinarity at the interfaces between the Science Citation Index and the Social Science Citation Index. Scientometrics, 71(3), 391-405.
33. Leydesdorff, L. (2007b). Visualization of the citation impact environments of scientific journals: An online mapping exercise. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(1), 207-222.
34. Leydesdorff, L., & Bensman, S.J. (2006). Classification and powerlaws: The logarithmic transformation. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 57(11), 1470-1486.
35. 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.
36. Leydesdorff, L., Cozzens, S.E., & Van den Besselaar, P. (1994). Tracking areas of strategic importance using scientometric journal mappings. Research Policy, 23, 217-229.
37. Linton, J. (2006). Ranking of technology and innovation management journals. Technovation, 26, 285-287.
38. Moed, H.F. (2005). Citation analysis in research evaluation. Dordrecht: Springer.
39. Moed, H.F., Burger, W.J.M., Frankfort, J.G., & Raan, A.F.J.V. (1985). The use of bibliometric data for the measurement of university research performance. Research Policy, 14, 131-149.
40. Monastersky, R. (2005). The number that's devouring science. Chronicle of Higher Education, 52(8), A12. Retrieved on August 24, 2006, from http://chronicle.com/free/v52/i08/08a01201.htm
41. Morillo, F., Bordons, M., & Gómez, I. (2003). Interdisciplinarity in science: A tentative typology of disciplines and research areas. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 54(13), 1237-1249.
42. Narin, F. (1976). Evaluative bibliometrics: The use of publication and citation analysis in the evaluation of scientific activity. Washington, DC: National Science Foundation.
43. Narin, F., Carpenter, M., & Berlt, N.C. (1972). Interrelationships of scientific journals. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 23, 323-331.
44. Otte, E., & Rousseau, R. (2002). Social network analysis: A powerful strategy, also for the information sciences. Journal of Information Science, 28(6), 441-453.
45. Pinski, G., & Narin, F. (1976). Citation influence for journal aggregates of scientific publications: Theory, with application to the literature of physics. Information Processing and Management, 12(5), 297-312.
46. Price, D.J. de Solla (1965). Networks of scientific papers. Science, 149, 510-515.
47. Price, D.J. de Solla (1970). Citation measures of hard science, soft science, technology, and nonscience. In CE. Nelson & D.K. Pollock (Eds.), Communication among Scientists and Engineers (pp. 3-22). Lexington, MA: Heath.
48. Price, D.J. de Solla (1981). The analysis of square matrices of scientometric transactions. Scientometrics, 3, 55-63.
49. Salton, G., & McGill, M.J. (1983). Introduction to modern information retrieval. Auckland: McGraw-Hill.
50. Schimbel, A. (1953). Structural parameters of communication networks. Bulletin of Mathematical Biophysics, 15, 501-507.
51. Simon, H.A. (1973). The organization of complex systems. In H.H. Pattee (Ed.), Hierarchy theory: The challenge of complex systems (pp. 1-27). New York: George Braziller Inc.
52. Theil, H. (1972). Statistical decomposition analysis. Amsterdam/London: North-Holland.
53. Tijssen, R., Leeuw, J. de, & Raan, A.F.J, van (1987). Quasi-correspondence analysis on square scientometric transaction matrices. Scientometrics, 11, 347-361.
54. Van den Besselaar, P., & Heimeriks, G. (2001). Disciplinary, multidisciplinary, interdisciplinary: Concepts and indicators. In M. Davis & C.S. Wilson (Eds.),
55. Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Scientometrics and Informetrics - ISSI2001 (pp. 705-716). Sydney: University of New South-Wales.
56. Van Leeuwen, T., & Tijssen, R. (2000). Interdisciplinary dynamics of modern science: Analysis of cross-disciplinary citation flows. Research Evaluation, 9(3), 183-187.
57. Wagner, CS., & Leydesdorff, L. (2005). Network structure, self-organization and the growth of international collaboration in science. Research Policy, 34(10), 1608-1618.
58. Yue, W., Wilson, C.S., & Rousseau, R. (2004). The immediacy index and the journal impact factor: Two highly correlated derived measures. The Canadian Journal of Information and Library Science, 28(1), 33-48.
59. Zhou, P., & Leydesdorff, L. (2006). The emergence of China as a leading nation in science. Research Policy, 35(1), 83-104.
60. Zitt, M. (2005). Facing diversity of science: A challenge for bibliometric indicators. Measurement: Interdisciplinary Research and Perspectives, 3(1), 38-49.