Book editors in the social sciences and humanities: An analysis of publication and collaboration patterns of established researchers in Flanders

Learned Publishing

Volumn 28, Issue 4, 2015, Pages 261-273

  Ossenblok, Truyken L B ^a   Guns, Raf ^a,b   Thelwall, Mike ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ANTWERP   (Belgium)

^b Institute of Education and Information Sciences   (Belgium)

^c UNIVERSITY OF WOLVERHAMPTON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84944079910     PISSN: 09531513     EISSN: 17414857     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1087/20150405     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Leydesdorff, L. and Felt, U. 2012. Edited volumes, monographs and book chapters in the Book Citation Index (BKCI) and Science Citation Index (SCI, SoSCI, A&HCI). Journal of Scientometric Research, 1: 28–34. http://dx.doi.org/10.5530/jscires.2012.1.7
2. Torres-Salinas, D., Robinson-Garcia, N., Cabezas-Clavijo, Á., and Jiménez-Contreras, E. 2013. Analyzing the citation characteristics of books: edited books, book series and publisher types in the Book Citation Index. Scientometrics, 98(3): 2113–2127. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11192-013-1168-4
3. Ossenblok, T.L.B. and Engels, T.C.E. 2015. Edited books in the social sciences and humanities: characteristics and collaboration analysis. Scientometrics, 104(1): 219–237. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1544-3
4. Lewis, R. 1996. Books with multiple contributors present multiple editing challenges. The Scientist, 10(9): 15.
5. 5 Heumann, L. 2001. Growth of edited volumes. Journal of the American Planning Association, 67(4): 467–468.
6. Nederman, C.J. 2005. Herding cats: the view from the volume and series editor. Journal of Scholarly Publishing, 36(4): 221–228. http://dx.doi.org/10.3138/jsp.36.4.221
7. Thomas, C.S. and Hrebenar, R.J. 1993. Editing multiauthor books in political science: plotting your way through an academic minefield. Political Science and Politics, 26(4): 778–783. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S1049096500039135
8. Engels, T.C.E., Ossenblok, T.L.B., and Spruyt, E.H.J. 2012. Changing publication patterns in the social sciences and humanities, 2000–2009. Scientometrics, 93(2): 373–390. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11192-012-0680-2
9. Ossenblok, T.L.B., Verleysen, F.T., Spruyt, E.H.J., and Engels, T.C.E. Bibliometrische analyse van het Vlaamse universitaire onderzoek in de sociale en humane wetenschappen aan de hand van het VABB-SHW. In: K. Debackere and R. Veugelers (eds), Vlaams indicatorenboek 2013. Brussels, Expertisecentrum Onderzoek & Ontwikkelingsmonitoring (ECOOM), Ministerie van de Vlaamse Gemeenschap, 2013. http://anet.uantwerpen.be/docman/irua/6fb6d3/6b724b54.pdf
10. Gorraiz, J., Purnell, P.J., and Glänzel, W. 2013. Opportunities and limitations of the Book Citation Index. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 64(7): 1388–1398. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/asi.22875
11. Butler, L. and Visser, M.S. 2006. Extending citation analysis to non-source items. Scientometrics, 66(2): 327–343. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11192-006-0024-1
12. Edwards, L. 2012. Editing academic books in the humanities and social sciences: maximizing impact for effort. Journal of Scholarly Publishing, 44(1): 61–74. http://dx.doi.org/10.3138/jsp.44.1.61
13. 13 Leal, D.L. 2013. Chapters, volumes, editors! Oh my! Reassessing the role of edited volumes in the social sciences. Political Science and Politics, 46: 380–382. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S1049096513000097
14. Gold, D. 1999. A tapestry of kings: edited volumes and the growth of knowledge in religious studies. Religion, 29: 243–259. http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/reli.1998.0172
15. Gläser, J. and Laudel, G. Evaluation without evaluators. In: R. Whitley and J. Gläser (eds), The Changing Governance of the Sciences: The Advent of Research Evaluation Systems. Sociology of the Sciences Yearbook. Springer, Dordrecht, 2007.
16. Aagaard, K. 2015. How incentives trickle down: local use of a national bibliometric indicator system. Science and Public Policy, 13. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scu087
17. Butler, L. Impact of performance-based research funding systems: a review of the concerns and the evidence. In: OECD (eds), Performance-based Funding for Public Research in Tertiary Education Institutions: Workshop Proceedings. OECD Publishing, Paris, 2010.
18. Gläser, J. The social orders of research evaluation systems. In: R. Whitley and J. Gläser (eds), The Changing Governance of the Sciences: The Advent of Research Evaluation Systems. Sociology of the Sciences Yearbook. Springer, Dordrecht, 2007.
19. Larivière, V., Gingras, Y., and Archambault, E. 2006. Canadian collaboration networks: a comparative analysis of the natural sciences, social sciences and the humanities. Scientometrics, 68(3): 519–533. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11192-006-0127-8
20. Ossenblok, T.L.B., Verleysen, F.T., and Engels, T.C.E. 2014. Co-authorship of journal articles and book chapters in the social sciences and humanities (2000–2010). Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 65(5): 882–897. http://dx.doi.org/ doi:10.1002/asi.23015
21. Bukvova, H. 2010. Studying research collaboration: a literature review. Sprouts Working Papers on Information Systems, 10(3), http://sprouts.aisnet.org/10-3.
22. Subramanyam, K. 1983. Bibliometric studies of research collaboration: a review. Journal of Information Science, 6: 33–38. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/016555158300600105
23. Katz, J.S. and Martin, B. 1997. What is research collaboration? Research Policy, 26: 1–18. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(96)00917-1
24. Laudel, G. 2002. What do we measure by co-authorship? Research Evaluation, 11(1): 3–15. http://dx.doi.org/10.3152/147154402781776961
25. Leimu, R. and Koricheva, J. 2005. Does scientific collaboration increase the impact of ecological articles? Bio Science, 55(5): 438. http://dx.doi.org/10.1641/0006-3568(2005)055[0438:dsciti]2.0.co;2
26. Hampton, S.E. and Parker, J.N. 2011. Collaboration and productivity in scientific synthesis. BioScience, 61(11), 900–910. http://dx.doi.org/10.1525/bio.2011.61.11.9
27. Katz, J.S. 1994. Geographical proximity and scientific collaboration. Scientometrics, 31(1). http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02018100
28. Beaver, D. 2013. The many faces of collaboration and teamwork in scientific research: updated reflections on scientific collaboration. Collnet Journal of Scientometrics and Information Management, 7(1): 45–54. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09737766.2013.802629
29. Didegah, F. and Thelwall, M. 2013. Which factors help authors produce the highest impact research? Collaboration, journal and document properties. Journal of Informetrics, 7: 861–873. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2013.08.006
30. Thelwall, M. and Sud, P. 2014. No citation advantage for monograph-based collaborations? Journal of Informetrics, 8(1): 9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2013.12.008
31. Katz, J.S. and Hicks, D. 1997. How much is a collaboration worth? A calibrated bibliometric model. Scientometrics, 40(3): 541–554. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02459299
32. Sonnenwald, D.H. 2007. Scientific collaboration. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 41(1): 643–681. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/aris.2007.1440410121
33. Glänzel, W. and Schubert, A. Analysing scientific networks through co-authorship. In: H.F. Moed, W. Glänzel, and U. Schmoch (eds), Handbook of Quantitative Science and Technology Research: The Use of Publication and Patent Statistics in Studies on S&T Systems. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, 2004.
34. Melin, G. and Persson, O. 1996. Studying research collaboration using co-authorships. Scientometrics, 36(3): 363–377. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02129600
35. Cronin, B. 2004. Bowling alone together: academic writing as distributed cognition. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 55(6): 557–560. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/asi.10406
36. Sula, CA. 2012. Visualizing social connections in the humanities: beyond bibliometrics. Bulletin of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 38(4): 31–35. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/bult.2012.1720380409
37. Galanter, M. 2008. A guide for preparation of an academic edited book. Substance Abuse, 29(1): 1–4. http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J465v29n01_01
38. Hicks, D. The four literatures of social science. In: H.F. Moed, W. Glänzel, and U. Schmoch (eds), Handbook of Quantitative Science and Technology Research: The Use of Publication and Patent Statistics in Studies on S&T Systems. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, 2004. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-2755-9_22
39. Verleysen, F.T. and Engels, T.C.E. 2014. Internationalization of peer reviewed and non-peer reviewed book publications in the social sciences and humanities. Scientometrics, 101(2): 1431–1444. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11192-014-1267-x
40. Ossenblok, T.L.B., Guns, R. and Thelwall, M. 2015. Supplementary material to ‘Book editors in the social sciences and humanities: an analysis of publication and collaboration patterns of established researchers in Flanders’. http://dx.doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.1485611
41. Liao, C.H. and Yan, H.R. 2012. Quantifying the degree of research collaboration: a comparative study of collaborative measures. Journal of Informetrics, 6: 27–33. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2011.09.003
42. Ossenblok, T.L.B. and Thelwall, M. What’s special about book editors? A bibliometric comparison of book editors and other Flemish researchers in the social sciences and humanities. In: A. Ali Salah, Y. Tonta, A. A. Akdağ Salah, and C. Sugimoto, and U. Al (eds), Proceedings of the 15th International Society of Scientometrics and Informetrics Conference. Istanbul, 2015
43. Ossenblok, T.L.B., Verleysen, F.T., and Engels, T.C.E. Patterns of co-authorship in journal articles in the social sciences and humanities (2000–2010). In: E. Archambault, Y. Gingras, and V. Larivière (eds), Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Science and Technology Indicators. Science-Metrix and OST, Montreal, 2012
44. Rafols, I. and Meyer, M. 2010. Diversity and network coherence as indicators of interdisciplinarity: case studies in bionanoscience. Scientometrics, 82: 263–287. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0041-y