Referencing in the humanities and its implications for citation analysis

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology

Volumn 61, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 310-318

  Hellqvist, Björn ^a  

^a UPPSALA UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CITATION ANALYSIS; SOCIOLOGY OF SCIENCE;

TECHNICAL WRITING;

EID: 76649084624     PISSN: 15322882     EISSN: 15322890     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/asi.21256     Document Type: Article

References (54)

1. Åstrom, F. (2004). Library and information science in context: The development of scientific fields and their relations to professional contexts. In WB. Rayward (Ed.), Aware and responsible: Papers of the Nordicinternational colloquium on social and cultural awareness and responsibility in library, information and documentation studies (SCARLID) (pp. 1-27). Lanham & Oxford, UK: Scarecrow.
2. Barthes, R. (1984). Image, music, text. Essays selected and translated by S. Heath. Oxford, UK: Fontana Paperbacks.
3. Bates, M.J. (1996). The Getty end-user online searching project in the humanities: Report no. 6: Overview and conclusions. College & Research Librarians, 57, 514-523.
4. Bates, M.J. (2002). Speculations on browsing, directed searching, and linking in relation to the Bradford distribution. In H. Bruce, R. Fidel, P. Ingwersen, & P. Vakkari (Eds.), Emerging frameworks and methods: Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Conceptions of Library and Information Science (CoLIS 4) (pp. 137-149). Santa Barbara, CA: Libraries Unlimited.
5. Bazermann, C. (1988). Shaping written knowledge: The genre and activity of the experimental article in science. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press.
6. Becher, T., & Trowler P.R. (2001). Academic tribes and territories: Intellectual enquiry and the culture of disciplines. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.
7. Borgman, C. (2007). Scholarship in the digital age: Information, infrastructure, and the Internet. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
8. Brockman, W.S., Neumann, L., Palmer, C.L., & Tidline, T.J. (2001). Scholarly work in the humanities and the evolving information environment. Digital Library Federation. Council on Library and Information Resources. Retrieved February 26,2009, from www.clir.org/pubs/reports/pub104.pdf
9. Brooks, TA. (1985). Private acts and public objects: An investigation of citer motivations. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 36(4), 223-229.
10. Cano, V. (1989). Citation behavior: Classification, utility, and locating. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 40(4), 284-290.
11. Cozzens, S.E. (1982). Split citation identity: A case study from economics. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 33(4), 233-236.
12. Cronin, B. (1984). The citation process: The role and significance of citations in scientific communication. London: Taylor Graham.
13. Cronin, B. (2001). Hyperauthorship: A postmodern perversion or evidence of a structural shift in scholarly communication practices? Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 52(7), 558-569.
14. Cronin, B., Shaw, D., &La Barre, K. (2003). A cast of thousands: Coauthorship and subauthorship in the 20th century as manifested in the scholarly journal literature of psychology and philosophy. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 54(9), 855-871.
15. Cullars, J.M. (1989). Citation characteristics of French and German literary monographs. Library Quarterly, 59(4), 305-325.
16. Cullars, J.M. (1990). Citation characteristics of Italian and Spanish literary monographs. Library Quarterly, 60(4), 337-356.
17. Cullars, J.M. (1998). Citation characteristics of English-language monographs in philosophy. Library & Information Science Research, 20(1), 41-68.
18. Derrida, J. (1991). This is not an oral footnote. In S.A. Barney (Ed.), Annotation and its texts. New York: Oxford University Press.
19. Ellis, D., & Oldman, H. (2005The English literature researcher in the age of the Internet. Journal of Information Science, 31(1), 29-36. (Pubitemid 40122462)
20. Frost, CO. (1979). The use of citations in literary research: A preliminary classification of citation functions. Library Quarterly, 49(4), 399-414.
21. Fry, J., & Talja, S. (2004). The cultural shaping of scholarly communication: Explaining e-journal use within and across academic fields. In Proceedings of the 67th ASIST Annual Meeting (ASIST 2004) (pp. 20-30). Medford, NJ: Information Today.
22. 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. London: Sage Publications.
23. Gilbert, N.G. (1976). The transformation of research findings into scientific knowledge. Social Studies of Science, 6(3-4), 281-306.
24. Gilbert, N.G. (1977). Referencing as persuasion. Social Studies of Science, 7, 113-122.
25. Grafton, A. (1997). The footnote: A curious history. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
26. Gross, A.G., Harmon, J., & Reidy, M. (2002). Communicating science: The scientific article from the 17th century to the present. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
27. Guetzkow, J., Lamont, M., & Mallard, G. (2004). What is originality in the humanities and the social sciences? American Sociological Review, 69(2), 190-212.
28. Harwood, N. (2008). Citers' use of citees' names: Findings from a qualitative interview-based study. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(6), 1007-1011.
29. Hérubel, J.-R, & Buchanan A.L. (1994). Citation studies in the humanities and social sciences: A selective and annotated bibliography. Collection Management, 18(3-4), 89-136.
30. Hjörland, B., & Sejer Christiansen, F. (2002). Work tasks and socio-cognitive relevance. A specific example. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 53(11), 960-965.
31. Hyland, K. (1999). Academic attribution: Citation and the construction of disciplinary knowledge. Applied Linguistics, 20(3), 341-367.
32. Hyland, K. (2004). Disciplinary discourses: Social interactions in academic writing. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
33. Kautto, V., & Talja, S. (2007). Disciplinary socialization: Learning to evaluate the quality of scholarly literature. In E.D. Garten, D.E. Williams, J.M. Nyce, & S. Talja (Eds.), Advances in Library Administration and Organization: Vol.25 (pp. 33-59). Oxford, UK: Elsevier.
34. Koestler, A. (1964). The act of creation. London: Hutchinson & Co.
35. Latour, B. (1987). Science in action: How to follow scientists and engineers through society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
36. Leydesdorff, L. (1998). Theories of citation? Scientometrics, 43(1), 5-25.
37. Meadows, A.J. (1974). Communication in science. London: Butterworths.
38. McFarland, T. (1991). Who was Benjamin Whichcote? Or, the myth of annotation. In S.A. Barney (Ed.), Annotation and its texts. New York: Oxford University Press.
39. McInnis, R.G., & Symes, D. (1988). David Reisman and the concept of bibliographic citation. College & Research Libraries, 49(5), 391-399.
40. Merton, R.K. (1942/1974). The normative structure of science. In N. Storer (Ed.), The sociology of science: Theoretical and empirical investigations. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
41. Nicolaisen, J. (2003). The social act of citing: Towards new horizons in citation theory (pp. 12-20). In Proceedings of the 66th American Society for Information Science and Technology (ASIST 2003) (pp. 12-20). Medford, NJ: Information Today.
42. Shapin, S. (1994). A social history of truth-civility and science in seventeenth-century England. Chicago: University of Chicagob Press.
43. Small, H.G. (1978). Cited documents as concept symbols. Social Studies of Science, 8(3), 327-340.
44. Stevens, A.H., & Williams, J. (2006). The footnote in theory. Critical Inquiry, 32(2), 208-226.
45. Stone, S. (1982). Humanities scholars: Information needs and uses. Journal of Documentation, 38(4), 292-313.
46. Swales, J.M. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
47. Talja, S. (2002). Information sharing in academic communities: Types and levels of collaboration in information seeking and use. New Review of Information Behavior Research, 3, 145-149.
48. Talja, S., & Maula, H. (2003). Reasons for the use and non-use of electronic journals and databases: A domain analytic study in four scholarly disciplines. Journal of Documentation, 59(6), 673-691.
49. White, H.D. (2007). Combining bibliometrics, information retrieval, and relevance theory, Part 1: First examples of a synthesis. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(4), 536-559.
50. Whitley, R. (1984). The intellectual and social organization of the sciences. Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press.
51. Wiberley, S.E., & Jones, WG. (1989). Patterns of information seeking in the humanities. College & Research Libraries, 50(6), 638-645.
52. Wiberley, S.E., & Jones, WG. (2000). Time and technology: A decade-long look at humanists' use of electronic information technology. College & Research Libraries, 61(5), 421-431.
53. Wouters, P. (1999). The citation culture. Unpublished doctoral thesis. The University of Amsterdam. Retrieved February 26, 2008, from http://www.asis.org/Chapters/europe/announcements/citation.htm
54. Zerby, C. (2003). The devil's details: A history of the footnote. New York: Simon & Schuster.