The Matthew effect and a relation with concept symbols and defaults

Annals of Library and Information Studies

Volumn 58, Issue 4, 2011, Pages 335-345

  Mahbuba, Dilruba ^a,b   Rousseau, Ronald ^b,c,d  

^a Library and Information Department   (Bangladesh)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ANTWERP   (Belgium)

^c Katholieke Hogeschool Brugge Oostende   (Belgium)

^d UNIVERSITY OF LEUVEN   (Belgium)

Author keywords

Concept symbols; Defaults; Diffusion; Matthew effect; Women in science

Indexed keywords

EID: 84860004280     PISSN: 09725423     EISSN: 09752404     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Review

References (40)

1. Scharnhorst A, Garfield E, Tracing scientific influence, Dynamics of Socio-Economic Systems, 2 (1) (2010) 1-33.
2. Egghe L, Power laws in the information production process: Lotkaian informetrics, (Elsevier, Amsterdam), 2005.
3. Gaston J, The reward system in British and American science, (John Wiley & Sons, New York), 1978.
4. Mahbuba D and Rousseau R, Matthew, Matilda and the others. In: COLLNET 2011 Proceedings, pp 348-361, Bilgi University, Istanbul. 2011.
5. Merton R K, The Matthew effect in science, Science, 159 (1968) 56-63.
6. Duesenberry J S, Income, Savings, and the Theory of Consumer Behavior: Cambridge (MA), (Harvard University Press, Harvard), 1949.
7. Egghe L, Guns R, Rousseau R, Thoughts on uncitedness: Nobel laureates and Fields medallists as case studies, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62(8) (2011) 1637-1644.
8. Bonitz M, The scientific talents of nations, Libri, 47 (4) (1997) 206-213.
9. Bonitz M, Ranking of nations and heightened competition in Matthew core journals: two faces of the Matthew Effect for Countries, Library Trends, 50(3) (2002) 440-460.
10. Bonitz M, Bruckner E and Scharnhorst A, Characteristics and impact of the Matthew effect for countries, Scientometrics, 40(3) (1997) 407- 422.
11. Jin B H and Rousseau R, China's quantitative expansion phase: exponential growth but low impact. In: Proceedings of ISSI 2005 (Ingwersen P & Larsen B, eds.), (Karolinska University Press, Stockholm), 2005. p 362-370.
12. Zhou P and Leydesdorff L, The emergence of China as a leading nation in science, Research Policy, 35 (2006) 83-104.
13. Zhou P and Leydesdorff L, China ranks second in scientific publications since 2006, ISSI Newsletter, 4(1) (2008) 7-9.
14. Merton R K, The Matthew effect in science II. Cumulative advantage and the symbolism of intellectual property, Isis, 79 (4) (1988) 606-623.
15. Small H, Cited documents as concept symbols, Social Studies of Science, 8 (1978) 327-340.
16. Kessler M M, Bibliographic coupling between scientific papers, American Documentation, 14 (1963) 10-25.
17. Lohr S, The default choice, so hard to resist, The New York Times, 15 October 2011.
18. Abt H, Do astronomical journal still have extensive self-referencing? Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 121 (875) (2009) 73-75.
19. Hirsch J E, An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 102 (2005) 16569-16572.
20. Jin BH, Liang LM, Rousseau R and Egghe L, The R- and AR-indices: complementing the h-index Chinese Science Bulletin, 52 (2007) 855-863
21. Franses P H, The diffusion of scientific publications: the case of Econometrica 1987, Scientometrics 56(1) (2003) 29-42.
22. Frandsen T F, Journal diffusion factors: a measure of diffusion? Aslib Proceedings, 56(1) (2004) 5-11.
23. Lewison G, Rippon I and Wooding S, Tracking knowledge diffusion through citations, Research Evaluation, 14(1) (2005) 5-14.
24. Liu YX and Rousseau R, Knowledge diffusion through publications and citations: a case study using ESI-fields as unit of diffusion, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 61(2) (2010) 340-351.
25. Rowlands I, Journal diffusion factor: a new approach to measuring research influence, Aslib Proceedings, 54(2) (2002) 77-84.
26. Frandsen T F, Rousseau R and Rowlands I, Diffusion factors, Journal of Documentation, 62(1) (2006) 58-72.
27. Rousseau R, Robert Fairthorne and the empirical power laws, Journal of Documentation, 61(2) (2005) 194-202.
28. The Knudop Search Group, Podunk Effect, ISSI Newsletter, 4(2) (2008) p. 23.
29. Meyer R R, How do you do it at Podunk? Library Journal, 88(3) (1963) p. 368.
30. Liang LM, Liu W, A case of Knudop effect arises from the citation analysis of the journal Acta Physica Sinica, Studies in Science of Science, 27(5) (2009) 704-710 (in Chinese).
31. Wu Q, Wolfram D, The influence of effects and phenomena on citations: a comparative analysis of four citation perspectives, Scientometrics, 89, (2011) 245-258.
32. Rossiter M W, The Matthew Matilda effect in science, Social Studies in Science, 23(2) (1993) 325-341.
33. Greenfield S, Move over, magus, New Statesmen (August 16, 2010), p.34.
34. Barinaga M, Is there a female style in science? Science, 290(5106) (1993) 384-389.
35. Sonnert G and Holton G, Gender differences in science careers: the project access study, (Rutgers University Press, New Brunswick, New Jersey), 1995.
36. Haier R J, Jung R E, Yeo R A, Head K and Alkire M T, The neuroanatomy of general intelligence: sex matters, NeuroImage, 25(1) (2005) 320-327.
37. Hales D, Just like a woman: How gender science is redefining what makes us female, (Random House, New York), 1999.
38. Moir A and Jessel D, Brain sex: The real difference between men and women, (Delta, New York), 1995.
39. Wyer M, Barbercheck M, Giesman D, Ozturk O O and Wayne M, Women, science and technology, (Routledge, New York), 2001.
40. Ridgeway C L, Framed by gender. How gender inequality persists in the modern world, (Oxford University Press, Oxford), 2011.