The 'Economy of Memory': Publications, Citations, and the Paradox of Effective Research Governance

Minerva

Volumn 51, Issue 3, 2013, Pages 341-362

  Woelert, Peter ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE   (Australia)

Author keywords

Citation behavior; Digital memory; Electronic publishing; Information overload; Knowledge practice; Redundant publication; Research communication; Research governance; Research policy; Scientific culture

Indexed keywords

EID: 84883779895     PISSN: 00264695     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11024-013-9232-z     Document Type: Article

References (75)

1. Abbott, Andrew. 1988. The system of professions: An essay on the division of expert labor. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
2. Abbott, Andrew. 2010. Varieties of ignorance. American Sociologist 41: 174-189.
3. Adams, Jonathan. 2009. The use of bibliometrics to measure research quality in UK higher education institutions. Archivum Immunologiae et Therapiae Experimentalis 57: 19-32.
4. Andras, Peter. 2011. Research: Metrics, quality, and management implications. Research Evaluation 20: 90-106.
5. Barker, Katherine. 2007. The UK Research Assessment Exercise: The evolution of a national research evaluation system. Research Evaluation 16: 3-12.
6. Barnes, Barry, and Steven Shapin (eds.). 1979. The natural order: Historical studies of scientific culture. London: Sage.
7. Bazerman, Charles. 1981. What written knowledge does: Three examples of academic discourse. Philosophy of the Social Sciences 11: 361-387.
8. Bazerman, Charles. 1988. Shaping written knowledge: The genre and activity of the experimental article in science. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press.
9. Bornmann, Lutz. 2011. Mimicry in science? Scientometrics 86: 173-177.
10. Bornmann, Lutz, and Hans-Dieter Daniel. 2006. What do citations measure? A review of studies on citing behavior. Journal of Documentation 64: 45-80.
11. Brenner, Sydney. 1995. Loose ends. Current Biology 5: 568.
12. Butler, Linda. 2003. Explaining Australia's increased share of ISI publications-The effects of a funding formula based on publication counts. Research Policy 32: 143-155.
13. Butler, Linda. 2004. What happens when funding is linked to publication counts? In Handbook of quantitative science and technology research: The use of publication and patent statistics in studies of S&T systems, eds. Henk F. Moed, Wolfgang Glänzel, and Ulrich Schmoch, 389-405. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
14. Cozzens, Susan E. 1989. What do citations count? The rhetoric-first model. Scientometrics 15: 437-447.
15. de Solla-Price, Derek J. 1986. Little science, big science... and beyond. New York: Columbia University Press.
16. Donald, Merlin. 1991. Origins of the modern mind: Three stages in the evolution of culture and cognition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
17. Eichorn, Philip, and Alfred Yankauer. 1987. Do authors check their references? A Survey of accuracy of references in three public health journals. American Journal of Public Health 77: 1011-1012.
18. Eisenstein, Elizabeth L. 1979. The printing press as an agent of change: Communications and cultural transformations in early modern Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
19. Eisenstein, Elizabeth L. 1983. The printing revolution in early modern Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
20. Enders, Walter, and Gary A. Hoover. 2004. Whose line is it? Plagiarism in economics. Journal of Economic Literature 42: 487-493.
21. Errami, Mounir, Zhaohui Sun, Angela C. George, Tara C. Long, Michael A. Skinner, Jonathan D. Wren, and Harold R. Garner. 2010. Identifying duplicate content using statistically improbable phrases. Bioinformatics 26: 1453-1457.
22. Evans, James A. 2008. Electronic publication and the narrowing of science and scholarship. Science 321: 395-399.
23. Evans, James A., and Jacob Reimer. 2009. Open access and global participation in science. Science 323: 1025.
24. Evans, James A., and Andrey Rzhetsky. 2010. Machine science. Science 329: 399-400.
25. Evans, James T., Howard I. Nadjari, and Sherry A. Burchell. 1990. Quotational and reference accuracy in surgical journals. A continuing peer review problem. JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association 263: 1353-1354.
26. Gaukroger, Stephen. 2006. The emergence of a scientific culture: Science and the shaping of modernity 1210-1685. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
27. Geuna, Aldo, and Ben R. Martin. 2003. University research evaluation and funding: An international comparison. Minerva 41: 277-304.
28. Gilbert, G. Nigel. 1977. Referencing as persuasion. Social Studies of Science 7: 113-122.
29. Gläser, Jochen, and Grit Laudel. 2007. Evaluation without evaluators: The impact of funding formulae on Australian University research. In The Changing governance of the sciences: The advent of research evaluation systems, eds. Richard Whitley, and Jochen Gläser, 127-151. Dordrecht: Springer.
30. Goody, Jack. 1977. The domestication of the savage mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
31. Gusfield, Joseph. 1976. The literary rhetoric of science: Comedy and pathos in drinking driver research. American Sociological Review 41: 16-34.
32. Harris, Roy. 1989. How does writing restructure thought? Language & Communication 9: 99-106.
33. Havelock, Eric A. 1982. The literate revolution in Greece and its cultural consequences. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
34. Hutchins, Edwin. 1995. Cognition in the wild. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
35. Hutchins, Edwin. 2001. Cognitive artifact. In The MIT encyclopedia of the cognitive sciences, eds. Robert A. Wilson, and Frank C. Keil, 126-128. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
36. Hutchins, Edwin. 2010a. Cognitive ecology. Topics in Cognitive Science 2: 705-715.
37. Hutchins, Edwin. 2010b. Distributed cognition. In The international encyclopedia of the social and behavioral sciences, eds. Neil J. Smelser, and Paul B. Baltes, 2068-2072. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
38. Kaplan, Norman. 1965. The norms of citation behavior: Prolegomena to the footnote. American Documentation 16: 179-184.
39. Kirsh, David. 1995. The intelligent use of space. Artificial Intelligence 73: 31-68.
40. Kirsh, David. 2000. A few thoughts on cognitive overload. Intellectia 30: 19-51.
41. Kirsh, David. 2006. Distributed cognition: A methodological note. Pragmatics & Cognition 14: 249-262.
42. Knorr, Karin D., and Dietrich W. Knorr. 1978. From scenes to scripts: On the relationship between laboratory research and published paper in science. Vienna: Institute for Advanced Studies; Ithaca, NY: Cornell University.
43. Kostoff, Ronald N., J. Dustin Johnson, Antonio Del Rio, Louis A. Bloomfield, Michael F. Shlesinger, Guido Malpohl, and Hector D. Cortes. 2006. Duplicate publication and 'paper inflation' in the fractals literature. Science and Engineering Ethics 12: 543-554.
44. Lariviere, Vincent, and Yves Gingras. 2010. On the prevalence and scientific impact of duplicate publications in different scientific fields (1980-2007). Journal of Documentation 66: 179-190.
45. Latour, Bruno, and Steve Woolgar. 1979. Laboratory life: The social construction of a scientific fact. Beverly Hills: Sage.
46. Lewis, Jenny, and Sandy Ross. 2011. Research funding systems in Australia, New Zealand and the UK: Policy settings and perceived effects. Policy & Politics 39: 379-398.
47. Long, Tara C., Mounir Errami, Angela C. George, Zhaohui Sun, and Harold R. Garner. 2009. Responding to possible plagiarism. Science 323: 1293-1294.
48. Marris, Emma. 2006. Should journals police scientific fraud? Nature 439: 520-521.
49. Merton, Robert K. 1973. The sociology of science: Theoretical and empirical investigations. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
50. Miller, Boaz. 2009. What does it mean that PRIMES is in P? Popularization and distortion revisited. Social Studies of Science 39: 257-288.
51. Moed, Henk F. 2005. Citation analysis in research evaluation. Dordrecht: Springer.
52. Mojon-Azzi, Stefania M., Xiaoyi Jiang, Ulrich Wagner, and Daniel S. Mojon. 2004. Redundant publications in scientific ophthalmologic journals-The tip of the iceberg? Ophthalmology 111: 863-866.
53. Norman, Donald A. 1991. Cognitive artifacts. In Designing interaction: Psychology at the human-computer interface, ed. John M. Carroll, 17-38. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
54. Norman, Donald A. 1993. Things that make us smart: Defending human attributes in the age of the machine. New York: Basic Books.
55. Persson, Olle, Wolfgang Glänzel, and Rickard Danell. 2004. Inflationary bibliometric values: The role of scientific collaboration and the need for relative indicators in evaluative studies. Scientometrics 60: 421-432.
56. Power, Michael. 1997. The audit society: Rituals of verification. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
57. Power, Michael. 2004. Counting, control and calculation: Reflections on measuring and management. Human Relations 57: 765-783.
58. Power, Michael. 2005. The theory of the audit explosion. In The Oxford handbook of public management, eds. Ewan Ferlie, Laurence E. Lynn, and Christopher Pollitt, 326-344. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
59. Roig, Miguel. 2005. Re-using text from one's own previously published papers: An exploratory study of potential self-plagiarism. Psychological Reports 97: 43-49.
60. Schein, Moshe, and Rameh Paladugu. 2001. Redundant surgical publications: Tip of the iceberg? Surgery 129: 655-661.
61. Schimank, Uwe. 2005. "New Public Management" and the academic profession: Reflections on the German situation. Minerva 43: 361-376.
62. Shaffer, David W., and Katherine A. Clinton. 2006. Toolforthoughts: Reexamining thinking in the digital age. Mind, Culture, and Activity 13: 283-300.
63. Shaffer, David W., and James J. Kaput. 1999. Mathematics and virtual culture: An evolutionary perspective on technology and mathematics education. Educational Studies in Mathematics 37: 97-119.
64. Shannon, Claude E., and Warren Weaver. 1949. The mathematical theory of communication. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.
65. Sieber, Robert W., and Shaun Holt. 2000. Accuracy of references in five leading medical journals. Lancet 356: 1445.
66. Simkin, Mikhail, and Vwani P. Roychowdhury. 2005. Stochastic modeling of citation slips. Scientometrics 62: 367-384.
67. Sismondo, Sergio. 2009. Ghosts in the machine: Publication planning in the medical sciences. Social Studies of Science 39: 171-198.
68. Stichweh, Rudolf. 1992. The sociology of scientific disciplines: On the genesis and stability of the disciplinary structure of modern science. Science in Context 5: 3-15.
69. Sun, Zhaohui, Mounir Errami, Tara Long, Chris Renard, Nishant Choradia, and Harold Garner. 2010. Systematic characterizations of text similarity in full text biomedical publications. PloS ONE 5: e12704. doi: 10. 1371/journal. pone. 0012704.
70. Sutton, John. 2006. Distributed cognition: Domains and dimensions. Pragmatics & Cognition 14: 235-247.
71. Tenopir, Carol, Donald W. King, Sheri Edwards, and Wu Lei. 2009. Electronic journals and changes in scholarly article seeking and reading patterns. Aslib Proceedings 61: 5-32.
72. von Elm, Erik, Greta Poglia, Bernhard Walder, and Martin R. Tramer. 2004. Different patterns of duplicate publication: An analysis of articles used in systematic reviews. JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association 291: 974-980.
73. Weingart, Peter. 2005. Impact of bibliometrics upon the science system: Inadvertent consequences? Scientometrics 62: 117-131.
74. Whitley, Richard. 2011. Changing governance and authority relations in the public sciences. Minerva 49(4): 359-385.
75. Yearly, Steven. 1981. Textual persuasion: The role of social accounting in the construction of scientific arguments. Philosophy of the Social Sciences 11: 409-435.