Patent citation data in social science research: Overview and best practices

Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology

Volumn 68, Issue 6, 2017, Pages 1360-1374

  Jaffe, Adam B ^a,b,c   de Rassenfosse, Gaétan ^d  

^a MOTU ECONOMIC AND PUBLIC POLICY RESEARCH   (New Zealand)

^b QUEENSLAND UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Australia)

^c Te Pūnaha Matatini Centre of Research Excellence ^*  (New Zealand)

^d EPFL   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH; SOCIAL SCIENCES;

BEST PRACTICES; COMMUNITY OF PRACTICE; COMPUTING POWER; INNOVATION NETWORK; PATENT CITATION; PATENT DATUM; SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH; STRATEGIC EFFECT;

PATENTS AND INVENTIONS;

HUMAN; PATENT; SOCIOLOGY;

EID: 85010682910     PISSN: 23301635     EISSN: 23301643     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/asi.23731     Document Type: Article

References (103)

1. Abrams, D., Akcigit, U., & Popadak, J. (2013). Patent value and citations: Creative destruction or strategic disruption? National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper No. 19647.
2. Ahuja, G., & Lampert, C.M. (2001). Entrepreneurship in the large corporation: A longitudinal study of how established firms create breakthrough inventions. Strategic Management Journal, 22(6–7), 521–543.
3. Albert, M.B., Avery, D., Narin, F., & McAllister, P. (1991). Direct validation of citation counts as indicators of industrially important patents. Research Policy, 20(3), 251–259.
4. Alcácer, J., & Gittelman, M. (2006). Patent citations as a measure of knowledge flows: The influence of examiner citations. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 88(4), 774–779.
5. Alcacer, J., Gittelman, M., & Sampat, B. (2009). Applicant and examiner citations in US patents: An overview and analysis. Research Policy, 38(2), 415–427.
6. Allison, J.R., Lemley, M.A., Moore, K.A., & Trunkey, R.D. (2003). Valuable patents. Georgetown Law Journal, 92, 435.
7. Almeida, P., & Kogut, B. (1997). The exploration of technological diversity and the geographic localization of innovation. Small Business Economics, 9, 21–31.
8. Almeida, P., & Kogut, B. (1999). Localization of knowledge and the mobility of engineers in regional networks. Management Science, 45(7), 905–917.
9. Atal, V., & Bar, T. (2010). Prior art: To search or not to search. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 28(5), 507–521.
10. Azagra-Caro, J.M., Mattsson, P., & Perruchas, F. (2011). Smoothing the lies: The distinctive effects of patent characteristics on examiner and applicant citations. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62(9), 1727–1740.
11. Bacchiocchi, E., & Montobbio, F. (2009). Knowledge diffusion from university and public research. A comparison between US, Japan and Europe using patent citations. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 34(2), 169–181.
12. Bacchiocchi, E., & Montobbio, F. (2010). International knowledge diffusion and home-bias effect: Do USPTO and EPO patent citations tell the same story?. The Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 112(3), 441–470.
13. Benson, C.L., & Magee, C.L. (2015). Quantitative determination of technological improvement from patent data. PLoS One, 10(4), e0121635.
14. Bessen, J. (2008). The value of US patents by owner and patent characteristics. Research Policy, 37(5), 932–945.
15. Brin, S., & Page, L. (1998). The anatomy of a large-scale hypertextual Web search engine. Computer Networks and ISDN Systems, 30, 107–117.
16. Caballero, R.J., & Jaffe, A.B. (1993). How high are the giants' shoulders: An empirical assessment of knowledge spillovers and creative destruction in a model of economic growth. In O.Blanchard and S. Fischer (Eds), NBER Macroeconomics Annual 1993 (Vol. 8, pp. 15–86). Cambridge: MIT press.
17. Callaert, J., Van Looy, B., Verbeek, A., Debackere, K., & Thijs, B. (2006). Traces of prior art: An analysis of non-patent references found in patent documents. Scientometrics, 69(1), 3–20.
18. Carpenter, M.P., & Narin, F. (1983). Validation study: Patent citations as indicators of science and foreign dependence. World Patent Information, 5(3), 180–185.
19. Carpenter, M.P., Narin, F., & Woolf, P. (1981). Citation rates to technologically important patents. World Patent Information, 3(4), 160–163.
20. Chen, C., & Hicks, D. (2004). Tracing knowledge diffusion. Scientometrics, 59(2), 199–211.
21. Clark, C.V. (1976). Obsolescence of the patent literature. Journal of Documentation, 32(1), 32–52.
22. Cockburn, I.M., Kortum, S., & Stern, S. (2002). Are all patent examiners equal?: The impact of characteristics on patent statistics and litigation outcomes. National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper 8980.
23. Cohen, W.M., Nelson, R.R., & Walsh, J.P. (2000). Protecting their intellectual assets: Appropriability conditions and why U.S. manufacturing firms patent or not. National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper 7552.
24. Collins, P., & Wyatt, S. (1988). Citations in patents to the basic research literature. Research Policy, 17(2), 65–74.
25. Cotropia, C.A., Lemley, M.A., & Sampat, B. (2013). Do applicant patent citations matter? Research Policy, 42(4), 844–854.
26. Criscuolo, P., & Verspagen, B. (2008). Does it matter where patent citations come from? Inventor vs. examiner citations in European patents. Research Policy, 37(10), 1892–1908.
27. Czarnitzki, D., Hussinger, K., & Schneider, C. (2011). “Wacky” patents meet economic indicators. Economics Letters, 113(2), 131–134.
28. Dahlin, K.B., & Behrens, D.M. (2005). When is an invention really radical?: Defining and measuring technological radicalness. Research Policy, 34(5), 717–737.
29. Danguy, J., de Rassenfosse, G., & van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, B. (2014). On the origins of the worldwide surge in patenting: An industry perspective on the R&D-patent relationship. Industrial and Corporate Change, 23(2), 535–572.
30. Dorogovtsev, S.N., & Mendes, J.F. (2002). Evolution of networks. Advances in Physics, 51(4), 1079–1187.
31. Duguet, E., & MacGarvie, M. (2005). How well do patent citations measure flows of technology? Evidence from French innovation surveys. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 14(5), 375–393.
32. Fontana, R., Nuvolari, A., & Verspagen, B. (2009). Mapping technological trajectories as patent citation networks. An application to data communication standards. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 18(4), 311–336.
33. Gambardella, A., Harhoff, D., & Verspagen, B. (2008). The value of European patents. European Management Review, 5(2), 69–84.
34. Garfield, E. (1955). Citation indexes for science: A new dimension in documentation through association of ideas. Science, 122(3159), 108–111.
35. Garfield, E. (1966). Patent citation indexing and the notions of novelty, similarity, and relevance. Journal of Chemical Documentation, 6(2), 63–65.
36. Gay, C., & Le Bas, C. (2005). Uses without too many abuses of patent citations or the simple economics of patent citations as a measure of value and flows of knowledge. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 14(5), 333–338.
37. Goto, A., & Motohashi, K. (2007). Construction of a Japanese Patent Database and a first look at Japanese patenting activities. Research Policy, 36(9), 1431–1442.
38. Griliches, Z. (1979). Issues in assessing the contribution of research and development to productivity growth. The Bell Journal of Economics, 92–116.
39. Griliches, Z. (1990). Patent statistics as economic indicators: A survey. Journal of Economic Literature, 28(4), 1661–1707.
40. Guellec, D., Martinez, C., & Zuniga, P. (2012). Pre-emptive patenting: Securing market exclusion and freedom of operation. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 21(1), 1–29.
41. Hall, B.H., Jaffe, A.B., & Trajtenberg, M. (2001). The NBER patent citation data file: Lessons, insights and methodological tools. National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper 8498.
42. Hall, B.H., Jaffe, A., & Trajtenberg, M. (2005). Market value and patent citations. RAND Journal of Economics, 36(1), 16–38.
43. Hall, B.H. & Trajtenberg, M. (2006). Uncovering GPTs using patent data. In C. Antonelli, D. Foray, B.H. Hall, & W.E. Steinmuller (Eds.), New frontiers in the economics of innovation and new technology—Essays in honor of Paul A. David. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.
44. Harhoff, D., Narin, F., Scherer, F.M., & Vopel, K. (1999). Citation frequency and the value of patented inventions. Review of Economics and Statistics, 81(3), 511–515.
45. Harhoff, D., Scherer, F.M., & Vopel, K. (2003). Citations, family size, opposition and the value of patent rights. Research Policy, 32(8), 1343–1363.
46. Hegde, D., & Sampat, B. (2009). Examiner citations, applicant citations, and the private value of patents. Economics Letters, 105(3), 287–289.
47. Henderson, R., Jaffe, A., & Trajtenberg, M. (2005). Patent citations and the geography of knowledge spillovers: A reassessment: Comment. American Economic Review, 95(1) 461–464.
48. Hicks, D., Breitzman, T., Olivastro, D., & Hamilton, K. (2001). The changing composition of innovative activity in the US—A portrait based on patent analysis. Research Policy, 30(4), 681–703.
49. Hu, X., Rousseau, R., & Chen, J. (2012). A new approach for measuring the value of patents based on structural indicators for ego patent citation networks. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 63(9), 1834–1842.
50. Huang, M.H., Chiang, L.Y., & Chen, D.Z. (2003). Constructing a patent citation map using bibliographic coupling: A study of Taiwan's high-tech companies. Scientometrics, 58(3), 489–506.
51. Huang, M.H., Huang, W.T., Chang, C.C., Chen, D.Z., & Lin, C.P. (2014). The greater scattering phenomenon beyond Bradford's law in patent citation. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 65(9), 1917–1928.
52. Hummon, N.P., & Doreian, P. (1989). Connectivity in a citation network: The development of DNA theory. Social Networks, 11(1), 39–63.
53. Hung, S.W., & Wang, A.P. (2010). Examining the small world phenomenon in the patent citation network: A case study of the radio frequency identification (RFID) network. Scientometrics, 82(1), 121–134.
54. Jaffe, A.B., & Trajtenberg, M. (1999). International knowledge flows: Evidence from patent citations. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 8(1–2), 105–136.
55. Jaffe, A.B., & Trajtenberg, M. (2002). Patents, citations, and innovations: A window on the knowledge economy. Cambridge: MIT press.
56. Jaffe, A.B., Trajtenberg, M., & Fogarty, M.S. (2000). Knowledge spillovers and patent citations: Evidence from a survey of inventors. American Economic Review, 90(2), 215–218; also published with additional detail as “The Meaning of Patent Citations: Report on the NBER/Case-Western Reserve Survey of Patentees,” in Jaffe and Trajtenberg (2002), op cit.
57. Jaffe, A.B., Trajtenberg, M., & Henderson, R. (1993). Geographic localization of knowledge spillovers as evidenced by patent citations. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 108(3), 577–598.
58. Kessler, M.M. (1963). Bibliographic coupling between scientific papers. American Documentation, 14(1), 10–25.
59. Krugman, P.R. (1991). Geography and trade. Cambridge: MIT press.
60. Kuznets, S. (1962). Inventive activity: Problems of definition and measurement. In The rate and direction of inventive activity: Economic and social factors (pp. 19–52). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
61. Lampe, R. (2012). Strategic citation. Review of Economics and Statistics, 94(1), 320–333.
62. Lanjouw, J., & Schankerman, M. (2001). Characteristics of patent litigation: A window on competition. RAND Journal of Economics, 32(1), 129–151.
63. Lemley, M., & Sampat, B. (2012). Examiner characteristics and patent office outcomes. Review of Economics and Statistics, 94(3), 817–827.
64. Lerner, J., & Seru, A. (2015). The use and misuse of patent data: Issues for corporate finance and beyond. Harvard Business School Mimeo. Cambridge: MA.
65. Li, R., Chambers, T., Ding, Y., Zhang, G., & Meng, L. (2014). Patent citation analysis: Calculating science linkage based on citing motivation. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 65(5), 1007–1017.
66. Li, X., Chen, H., Huang, Z., & Roco, M.C. (2007). Patent citation network in nanotechnology (1976–2004). Journal of Nanoparticle Research, 9(3), 337–352.
67. Liu, Y., Hseuh, P.Y., Lawrence, R., Meliksetian, S., Perlich, C., & Veen, A. (2011). Latent graphical models for quantifying and predicting patent quality. In Proceedings of the 17th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining (pp. 1145–1153). August 21–24, 2011, San Diego, California, USA.
68. Liu, D.R., & Shih, M.J. (2011). Hybrid-patent classification based on patent-network analysis. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62(2), 246–256.
69. Lukach, R., & Lukach, M. (2007). Ranking USPTO patent documents by importance using random surfer method (pagerank). Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=996595.
70. Marco, A.C. (2007). The dynamics of patent citations. Economics Letters, 94(2), 290–296.
71. Maurseth, P.B., & Verspagen, B. (2002). Knowledge spillovers in Europe: A patent citations analysis. The Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 104(4), 531–545.
72. Mehta, A., Rysman, M., & Simcoe, T. (2010). Identifying the age profile of patent citations: New estimates of knowledge diffusion. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 25(7), 1179–1204.
73. Meyer, M. (2000). What is special about patent citations? Differences between scientific and patent citations. Scientometrics, 49(1), 93–123.
74. Michel, J., & Bettels, B. (2001). Patent citation analysis. A closer look at the basic input data from patent search reports. Scientometrics, 51(1), 185–201.
75. Mina, A., Ramlogan, R., Tampubolon, G., & Metcalfe, J.S. (2007). Mapping evolutionary trajectories: Applications to the growth and transformation of medical knowledge. Research Policy, 36(5), 789–806.
76. Moser, P., & Nicholas, T. (2004). Was electricity a general purpose technology? The American Economic Review, 94(2), 388–394.
77. Moser, P., Ohmstedt, J., & Rhode, P.W. (2014). Patent citations and the size of patented inventions - Evidence from Hybrid Corn (p. 48). Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1888191.
78. Narin, F. (1995). Patents as indicators for the evaluation of industrial research output. Scientometrics, 34(3), 489–496.
79. Narin, F., & Noma, E. (1985). Is technology becoming science? Scientometrics, 7(3–6), 369–381.
80. Narin, F., Noma, E., & Perry, R. (1987). Patents as indicators of corporate technological strength. Research Policy, 16(2), 143–155.
81. Nicholas, T. (2008). Does innovation cause stock market runups? Evidence from the great crash. The American Economic Review, 1370–1396.
82. Packalen, M., & Bhattacharya, J. (2015). New ideas in invention. National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper 20922.
83. Palangkaraya, A., Webster, E., & Jensen, P.H. (2011). Misclassification between patent offices: Evidence from a matched sample of patent applications. Review of Economics and Statistics, 93(3), 1063–1075.
84. Roach, M., & Cohen, W.M. (2013). Lens or prism? Patent citations as a measure of knowledge flows from public research. Management Science, 59(2), 504–525.
85. Sampat, B.N. (2010). When do applicants search for prior art? Journal of Law and Economics, 53(2), 399–416.
86. Schmoch, U. (1993). Tracing the knowledge transfer from science to technology as reflected in patent indicators. Scientometrics, 26(1), 193–211.
87. Schmookler, J. (1966). Invention and economic growth. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
88. Sonn, J.W., & Storper, M. (2008). The increasing importance of geographical proximity in knowledge production: An analysis of US patent citations, 1975–1997. Environment and Planning A, 40, 1020–1039.
89. Takahiro, M., Nagaoka, S., & Naito, Y. (2015). Effects of stronger disclosure rule on applicants' behavior and on examination efficiency: Evidence from Japan. Paper presented at EPIP 2015 conference, 2–3 September 2015, University of Glasgow, UK.
90. Thompson, P. (2006). Patent citations and the geography of knowledge spillovers: Evidence from inventor-and examiner-added citations. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 88(2), 383–388.
91. Thompson, P., & Fox-Kean, M. (2005). Patent citations and the geography of knowledge spillovers: A reassessment. American Economic Review, 95, 450–460.
92. Tijssen, R.J. (2002). Science dependence of technologies: Evidence from inventions and their inventors. Research Policy, 31(4), 509–526.
93. Trajtenberg, M. (1990a). Economic analysis of product innovation: The case of CT scanners (Vol. 160). Harvard University PressCambridge: MA.
94. Trajtenberg, M. (1990b). A penny for your quotes: Patent citations and the value of innovations. The Rand Journal of Economics, 21(1), 172–187.
95. Trajtenberg, M., Henderson, R., & Jaffe, A. (1997). University versus corporate patents: A window on the basicness of invention. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 5(1), 19–50.
96. Verspagen, B. (2007). Mapping technological trajectories as patent citation networks: A study on the history of fuel cell research. Advances in Complex Systems, 10(1), 93–115.
97. von Graevenitz, G., Wagner, S., & Harhoff, D. (2011). How to measure patent thickets—A novel approach. Economics Letters, 111(1), 6–9.
98. von Wartburg, I., Teichert, T., & Rost, K. (2005). Inventive progress measured by multi-stage patent citation analysis. Research Policy, 34(10), 1591–1607.
99. Wagner, S., Hoisl, K., & Thoma, G. (2014). Overcoming localization of knowledge—The role of professional service firms. Strategic Management Journal, 35(11), 1671–1688.
100. Webb, C., Dernis, H., Harhoff, D., & Hoisl, K. (2005). Analysing European and international patent citations: A set of EPO patent database building blocks. OECD STI Working Paper 2005/09.
101. Youtie, J., Iacopetta, M., & Graham, S. (2008). Assessing the nature of nanotechnology: Can we uncover an emerging general purpose technology? The Journal of Technology Transfer, 33(3), 315–329.
102. Younge, K, & Kuhn, J. (2015). Patent similarity: A vector space model. Mimeo, Ecole polytechnique fédérale de Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
103. Ziedonis, R.H. (2004). Don't fence me in: Fragmented markets for technology and the patent acquisition strategies of firms. Management Science, 50(6), 804–820.