A Machine-Learning Approach to Coding Book Reviews as Quality Indicators: Toward a Theory of Megacitation

Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology

Volumn 65, Issue 11, 2014, Pages 2248-2260

  Zuccala, Alesia ^a   Van Someren, Maarten ^a   Van Bellen, Maurits ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF AMSTERDAM   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

bibliometrics; book reviews; machine learning

Indexed keywords

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE; CLASSIFICATION (OF INFORMATION); CODES (SYMBOLS); LEARNING SYSTEMS;

BIBLIOMETRIC INDICATORS; BIBLIOMETRICS; BOOK REVIEWS; COMPREHENSIVE ASSESSMENT; HISTORICAL REVIEW; MACHINE LEARNING APPROACHES; POSITIVE CORRELATIONS; QUALITY INDICATORS;

REVIEWS;

EID: 84929681380     PISSN: 23301635     EISSN: 23301643     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/asi.23104     Document Type: Review

References (80)

1. Bilhartz, T.D., (1984). In 500 words or less: Academic book reviewing in American history. History Teacher, 17 (4), 525-536.
2. Blake, V., (1989). The role of reviews and reviewing media in the selection process: An examination of the research record. Collection Management, 11 (1/2), 1-40.
3. Bornmann, L., &, Daniel, H.-D., (2008). What do citations measure? A review of studies on citing behaviour. Journal of Documentation, 64 (1), 45-80.
4. Burges, C.J.C., (1998). A tutorial on support vector machines for pattern recognition. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery, 2, 121-168.
5. Carlo, P.W., &, Natowitz, A., (1996). The appearance of praise in Choice reviews of outstanding and favorably assessed books in American history, geography, and area studies. Collection Management, 20 (3/4), 97-116.
6. Case, D.O., &, Higgens, G.M., (2000). How can we investigate citation behaviour? A study of reasons for citing literature in communication. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 51 (7), 635-645.
7. Champion, D.T., &, Morris, M.F., (1973). A content analysis of book reviews in the AJS, ASR, and Social Forces. American Journal of Sociology, 78 (5), 1256-1265.
8. Chubin, D.E., &, Moitra. S.D., (1975). Content analysis of references; adjunct or alternative to citation counting? Social Studies of Science, 5, 423-441.
9. Cole, S., &, Cole, J.R., (1967). Scientific output and recognition: a study in the operation of the reward system in science. American Sociological Review, 32, 377-390.
10. Cozzens, S.E., (1981). Taking the measure of science: a review of citation theories. Newsletter of the International Society for the Sociology of Knowledge, 7 (1-2), 16-21.
11. Cozzens, S.E., (1989). What do citations count? The rhetoric first model. Scientometrics, 15 (5-6), 437-447.
12. Cronin, B., (1984). The citation process. The role and significance of citations in scientific communication. London, United Kingdom: Taylor Graham.
13. Cronin, B., (1994). Tiered citation and measures of document similarity. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 45 (7), 537-538.
14. Cronin, B., (1998). Metatheorizing citation. Scientometrics, 43 (1), 45-55.
15. Cronin, B., &, Snyder, H., (1997). Comparative citation rankings of authors in monographic and journal literature: A study of sociology. Journal of Documentation, 53 (3), 263-273.
16. Cullars, J.M., (1992). Citation characteristics of monographs in the fine arts. Library Quarterly, 62 (3), 325-342.
17. Cullars, J.M., (1998). Citation characteristics of English-language monographs in philosophy. Library & Information Science Research, 20 (1), 41-68.
18. Dilevko, J., McMillan, B., Allison-Cassin, S., Aspinall, J., &, Mauro, C., (2006). Investigating the value of scholarly book reviews for the work of academic reference librarians. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 32 (5), 452-456.
19. Diodato, V., (1984). Impact and scholarliness in arts and humanities book reviews: A citation analysis. Proceedings of the 47th Annual Meeting of the American Society for Information Science, 21, 217-220.
20. Feldman, R., &, Sanger, J., (2006). The text mining handbook. Advanced approaches in analyzing unstructured data. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.
21. Frost, C.O., (1979). The use of citations in literary research: A preliminary classification of citation functions. Library Quarterly, 49 (4), 399-414.
22. Garfield, E., (1964). The citation index-A new dimension in indexing. Science, 144, 649-654.
23. Garfield, E., (1983). Citation indexing, its theory and application in science, technology, and humanities. Philadelphia: ISI Press.
24. Gilbert, G.N., (1977). Referencing as persuasion. Social Studies of Science, 7 (1), 113-122.
25. Glenn, N., (1978). On the misuse of book reviews. Contemporary Sociology, 7 (3), 254-255.
26. Guillory, J., (2005). Evaluating scholarship in the humanities: principles and procedures. ADE Bulletin, 137 (1), 18-33.
27. Hartley, J., (2006). Reading and writing book reviews across disciplines. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 57 (9), 1194-1207.
28. Hartley, J., (2010). The anatomy of a book review. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 40 (4), 473-487.
29. Haustein, S., (2012). Multidimensional journal evaluation. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter Saur.
30. Hirsch, W., Kulley, A.M., &, Potter-Efron, R.T., (1974). The gatekeeping process in scientific communication: norms, practices and content of book reviews in professional journals (Working Paper No. 81). Institute for the Study of Social Change, Department of Sociology and Anthropology, Purdue University.
31. Holton, G., (1978). Can science be measured? In, Y. Elkana, J. Lederberg, R.K. Merton, A. Thackray, &, H. Zuckerman, (Eds.), Toward a metric of science: The advent of science indicators (pp. 39-68). New York: John Wiley & Sons.
32. Jordy, M.L., McGrath, E.L., &, Rutledge, J.B., (1999). Book reviews as a tool for assessing publisher reputation. College & Research Libraries, 60 (2), 132-142.
33. Kaplan, N., (1965). The norms of citation behaviour: Prolegomena to the footnote. American Documentation, 16 (3), 179-184.
34. Knievel, J.E., &, Kellsey, C., (2005). Citation analysis for collection development: A comparative study of eight humanities fields. Library Quarterly, 75 (2), 142-168.
35. Kousha, K., Thelwall, M., &, Resaie, S., (2011). Assessing the citation impact of books: The role of Google Books, Google Scholar, and Scopus. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62 (11), 2147-2164.
36. Lewison, G., (2001). Evaluation of books as research outputs in history of medicine. Research Evaluation, 10 (2), 89-95.
37. Leydesdorff, L., (1998). Theories of citation? Scientometrics, 43 (1), 5-25.
38. Leydesdorff, L., &, Amsterdamska, O., (1990). Dimensions of citation analysis. Science, Technology and Human Values, 15 (3), 305-335.
39. Lindholm-Romantschuk, Y., (1998). Scholarly book reviewing in the social sciences and humanities. The flow of ideas within and among disciplines. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.
40. Maricic, S., Spaventi, J., Pavicic, L., &, Pifat-Mrzljak, G., (1998). Citation context vs. frequency counts of citation histories. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 49 (6), 530-540.
41. Merton, R.K., (1996). The Matthew effect in science, II. Cumulative advantage and the symbolism of intellectual property. Isis, 79 (4), 606-623.
42. Miranda, E.O., (1996). On book reviewing. Journal of Educational Thought, 30 (2), 101-201.
43. Moed, H.F., (2005). Citation analysis in research evaluation. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
44. Moravcsik, M.I., &, Murugesan, P., (1975). Some results on the function and quality of citations. Social Studies of Science, 5 (1), 86-92.
45. Motta-Roth, D., (1998). Discourse analysis and academic book reviews: A study of text and disciplinary cultures. In, I. Fortanet, (Ed.), Genre studies in English for academic purposes (pp. 29-58). Castellõ de la Plana: Universitat Jaume.
46. Mullen, T., &, Collier, N., (2004). Sentiment analysis using support vector machines with diverse information sources. In D. Lin & D. Wu (Eds.), Proceedings of the Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (pp. 412-418). Retrieved from http://acl.ldc.upenn.edu/acl2004/emnlp/pdf/Mullen.pdf
47. Nederhof, A.J., (2006). Bibliometric monitoring of research performance in the social sciences and the humanities: a review. Scientometrics, 66 (1), 81-100.
48. Natowitz, A., &, Wheeler Carlo, P., (1997). Evaluating review content for book selection: An analysis of American history reviews in Choice, American Historical Review, and Journal of American History. College & Research Libraries, 58 (4), 322-335.
49. Nicolaisen, J., (2002a). The J-shaped distribution of citedness. Journal of Documentation, 58 (4), 383-395.
50. Nicolaisen, J., (2002b). The scholarliness of published peer reviews: A bibliometric study of book reviews in selected social science fields. Research Evaluation, 11 (3), 129-140.
51. Nicolaisen, J., (2002c). Structure-based interpretation of scholarly book reviews: A new research technique. In, H. Bruce, R. Fidel, P. Ingwersen, &, P. Vakkari, (Eds.), Emerging frameworks and methods: Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Conceptions of Library and Information Science (pp. 123-135). Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited.
52. Pang, B., Lee, L., &, Vaithyanathan, S., (2002). Thumbs up? Sentiment classification using machine learning techniques. In EMNLP '02 Proceedings of the ACL-02 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, Vol. 10. (pp. 79-86). Stroudsburg, PA: Association for Computational Linguistics.
53. Parker, J.M., (1989). Scholarly book reviews in literature journals as collection development sources for librarians. Collection Management, 11 (1&2), 41-57.
54. Pichappen, P., (1996). Levels of citation relation between papers. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 47 (8), 650-652.
55. Prabowo, R., &, Thelwall, M., (2009). Sentiment analysis: A combined approach. Journal of Informetrics, 3 (2), 143-157.
56. Price, D.J.D., (1980, July). Towards a comprehensive system of science indicators. Paper presented to the Conference on "Evaluation in Science and Technology: Theory and Practice," Dubrovnik.
57. Riley, L.E., &, Spreitzer, E.A., (1970). Book reviewing in the social sciences. American Sociologist, 5 (4), 358-363.
58. Salvetti, F., Lewis, S., &, Reichenbach, C., (2004). Automatic opinion polarity classification of movie reviews. Colorado Research in Linguistics, 17 (1).
59. Schubert, A., Zsindely, S., Telcs, A., &, Braun, T., (1984). Quantitative analysis of a visible tip of the iceberg: Book reviews in chemistry. Scientometrics, 6 (6), 433-443.
60. Sebastiani, F., (2002). Machine learning in automated text categorization. ACM Computing Surveys, 34 (1), 1-47.
61. Serebnick, J., (1992). Selection and holdings of small publishers' books in OCLC libraries: A study of the influence of reviews, publishers and vendors. Library Quarterly, 62 (3), 259-294.
62. Small, H.G., (1978). Cited documents as concept symbols. Social Studies of Science, 8 (3), 327-340.
63. Small, H., (2011). Interpreting maps of science using citation context sentiments: a preliminary investigation. Scientometrics, 87 (2), 373-388.
64. Snizek, W.E., &, Fuhrman, E.R., (1979). The evaluative content of book reviews in the American Journal of Sociology, Contemporary Sociology, and Social Forces. Contemporary Sociology, 8 (3), 339-340.
65. Spink, A., Robbins, D., &, Schamber, L., (1998). Use of scholarly book reviews: implications for electronic publishing and scholarly communication. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 49 (4), 364-374.
66. Stowe, S., (1991). Thinking about reviews. The Journal of the American History, 78 (2), 591-595.
67. Tang, H., Tan, S., &, Cheng, X., (2009). A survey on sentiment detection of reviews. Expert Systems with Applications, 36, 10760-10773.
68. Taylor, W.R., (1967). The influence of professional status differences upon book reviewing in sociology. Doctoral dissertation, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN.
69. Thelwall, M., Buckley, K., Paltoglou, G., Cai, D., &, Kappas, A., (2010). Sentiment strength detection in short informal text. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 61 (12), 2544-2558.
70. Thomson Reuters. (2012). Putting books back into the library. Completing the research picture: the Book Citation IndexSM. Retrieved from http://wokinfo.com/products-tools/multidisciplinary/bookcitationindex/
71. Torres-Salinas, D., &, Moed, H.F., (2009). Library catalog analysis as a tool in studies of social sciences and humanities: an exploratory study of published book titles in economics. Journal of Informetrics, 3 (1), 9-26.
72. Torres-Salinas, D., Robinson-Garcìa, N., Jimènez-Contreras, E., &, Delgado Loìpez-Coìzar, E., (2012). Towards a "book publishers citation reports." First approach using the Book Citation Index. Revista Espanpola de Documentaciòn Cientifica, 35 (4), 615-620.
73. Turney, P.D., (2002). Thumbs up or thumbs down? Semantic orientation applied to unsupervised classification of reviews. In Proceedings of the 40th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (pp. 417-424). Stroudsburg, PA: Association for Computational Linguistics.
74. Van Raan, A.F.J., (1998). In matters of quantitative studies of science the fault of theorists is offering too little and asking too much. Scientometrics, 43 (1), 129-139.
75. Weiss, S.M., Indurkhya, N., Zhang, T., &, Damerau, F., (2010). Text mining: Predictive methods for analyzing unstructured information. Heidelberg: Springer Publishing Company.
76. White, H.D., &, Griffith, B.C., (1981). Author cocitation: A literature measure of intellectual structure. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 32 (3), 163-172.
77. White, H.D., Boell, S.K., Yu, H., Davis, M., Wilson, C.S., &, Cole, F.T.H., (2009). Libcitations: A measure for comparative assessment of book publications in the humanities and social sciences. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60 (6), 1083-1096.
78. Williams, P., Stevenson, I., Nicholas, D., Watkinson, A., &, Rowlands, I., (2009). The role and future of the monograph in arts and humanities research. Aslib Proceedings: New Information Perspectives, 61 (1), 67-82.
79. Wouters, P., (1999). Beyond the holy grail: From citation theory to indicators theories. Scientometrics, 44 (3), 561-589.
80. Zuccala, A., &, van Leeuwen, T., (2011). Book reviews in humanities research evaluations. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62 (10), 1979-1991.