Same data—different results? Towards a comparative approach to the identification of thematic structures in science

Scientometrics

Volumn 111, Issue 2, 2017, Pages 981-998

  Gläser, Jochen ^a   Glänzel, Wolfgang ^b,c   Scharnhorst, Andrea ^d  

^a TECHNISCHE UNIVERSITÄT BERLIN   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY OF LEUVEN   (Belgium)

^c INSTITUTE OF EXPERIMENTAL MEDICINE   (Hungary)

^d Data Archiving and Networked Services   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85014572826     PISSN: 01389130     EISSN: 15882861     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11192-017-2296-z     Document Type: Editorial

References (84)

1. Bauin, S., Michelet, B., Schweighoffer, M. G., & Vermeulin, P. (1991). Using bibliometrics in strategic analysis: “Understanding chemical reactions” at the CNRS. Scientometrics, 22(1), 113–137.
2. Blei, D. M. (2012). Probabilistic topic models. Communications of the ACM, 55(4), 77–84.
3. Boyack, K. W. (2017a). Investigating the effect of global data on topic detection. In J. Gläser, A. Scharnhorst & W. Glänzel (Eds.), Same data—different results? Towards a comparative approach to the identification of thematic structures in science, Special Issue of Scientometrics. doi:10.1007/s11192-017-2297-y.
4. Boyack, K. W. (2017b). Thesaurus-based methods for mapping contents of publication sets. In J. Gläser, A. Scharnhorst & W. Glänzel (Eds.), Same data—different results? Towards a comparative approach to the identification of thematic structures in science, Special Issue of Scientometrics. doi:10.1007/s11192-017-2304-3.
5. Boyack, K. W., & Klavans, R. (2010). Co-citation analysis, bibliographic coupling, and direct citation: Which citation approach represents the research front most accurately? Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 61(12), 2389–2404.
6. Boyack, K. W., Klavans, R., & Börner, K. (2005). Mapping the backbone of science. Scientometrics, 64(3), 351–374.
7. Callon, M., Courtial, J.-P., Turner, W. A., & Bauin, S. (1983). From translations to problematic networks: An introduction to co-word analysis. Social Science Information, 22(2), 191–235.
8. Cambrosio, A., & Keating, P. (1988). “Going monoclonal”: Art, science, and magic in the day-to-day use of hybridoma technology. Social Problems, 35(3), 244–260.
9. Chubin, D. E. (1976). The conceptualization of scientific specialties. Sociological Quarterly, 17(4), 448–476.
10. Collins, H. M. (1974). The TEA set: Tacit knowledge and scientific networks. Science Studies, 4, 165–186.
11. Collins, H. M. (1975). The seven sexes: A study in the sociology of a phenomenon, or the replication of experiments in physics. Sociology, 9, 205–224.
12. Crane, D. (1972). Invisible colleges: Diffusion of knowledge in scientific communities. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
13. Crawford, S. (1971). Informal communication among scientists in sleep research. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 22, 301–310.
14. de Solla Price, D. (1986). [1963]. Little science, big science… and beyond. New York: Columbia University Press.
15. Edge, D., & Mulkay, M. J. (1976). Astronomy transformed: The emergence of radio astronomy in Britain. New York: Wiley.
16. Fortunato, S., & Barthélemy, M. (2007). Resolution limit in community detection. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 104(1), 36–41.
17. Glänzel, W. (1996). The need for standards in bibliometric research and technology. Scientometrics, 35(2), 167–176.
18. Glänzel, W., & Czerwon, H. J. (1996). A new methodological approach to bibliographic coupling and its application to the national, regional and institutional level. Scientometrics, 37(2), 195–221.
19. Glänzel, W., Katz, S., Moed, H., & Schoepflin, U. (1996). Preface. Scientometrics, 35(2), 165–166.
20. Glänzel, W., & Schoepflin, U. (1994). Little scientometrics, big scientometrics… and beyond. Scientometrics, 30(2–3), 375–384.
21. Glänzel, W., & Schoepflin, U. (1995). A bibliometric study on ageing and reception processes of scientific literature. Journal of Information Science, 21(1), 37–53.
22. Glänzel, W., & Thijs, B. (2017). Using hybrid methods and `core documents’ for the representation of clusters and topics: The astronomy dataset. In J. Gläser, A. Scharnhorst & W. Glänzel (Eds.), Same data—different results? Towards a comparative approach to the identification of thematic structures in science, Special Issue of Scientometrics. doi:10.1007/s11192-017-2301-6.
23. Gläser, J. (2017). Topic identification challenge. In J. Gläser, A. Scharnhorst & W. Glänzel (Eds.), Same data—different results? Towards a comparative approach to the identification of thematic structures in science, Special Issue of Scientometrics. doi:10.1007/s11192-017-2307-0.
24. Gläser, J., Heinz, M., & Havemann, F. (2015). Epistemic diversity as distribution of paper dissimilarities. In A. A. Salah, Y. Tonta, A. A. A. Salah, C. Sugimoto, & U. Al (Eds.), Proceedings of ISSI 2015 Istanbul: 15th International society of scientometrics and informetrics conference, Istanbul, Turkey, 29 June to 3 July, 2015 (pp. 1006–1017). Istanbul: Boğaziçi University Printhouse.
25. Glenisson, P., Glänzel, W., Janssens, F., & De Moor, B. (2005). Combining full text and bibliometric information in mapping scientific disciplines. Information Processing and Management, 41(6), 1548–1572.
26. Griffith, B. C., Small, H. G., Stonehill, J. A., & Dey, S. (1974). The structure of scientific literatures II: Toward a macro- and microstructure for science. Science Studies, 4(4), 339–365.
27. Havemann, F., Gläser, J., & Heinz, M. (2017). Memetic search for overlapping topics based on a local evaluation of link communities. In J. Gläser, A. Scharnhorst & W. Glänzel (Eds.), Same data—different results? Towards a comparative approach to the identification of thematic structures in science, Special Issue of Scientometrics. doi:10.1007/s11192-017-2302-5.
28. Healey, P., Rothman, H., & Hoch, P. K. (1986). An experiment in science mapping for research planning. Research Policy, 15(5), 233–251.
29. Hric, D., Darst, R. K., & Fortunato, S. (2014). Community detection in networks: Structural communities versus ground truth. Physical Review E, 90(062805), 1–19.
30. Janssens, F., Glänzel, W., & De Moor, B. (2007). Dynamic hybrid clustering of bioinformatics by incorporating text mining and citation analysis. Proceedings of the 13th ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining. San Jose, California, USA, ACM, pp 360–369.
31. Jarneving, B. (2001). The cognitive structure of current cardiovascular research. Scientometrics, 50(3), 365–389.
32. Katz, J. S. (1999). The self-similar science system. Research Policy, 28(5), 501–517.
33. Kedrow, B. M. (1975/76 [1961/65]). Klassifizierung der Wissenschaften (Vols. 2). (German translation of: B. M. Kedrov, Klassifikatsiya Nauk. Moscow: Mysl', Vol. 1: 1961, Vol. 2: 1965). Berlin: Akademie-Verlag.
34. Kessler, M. M. (1963). Bibliographic coupling between scientific papers. American Documentation, 14(1), 10–25.
35. Klavans, R., & Boyack, K. W. (2011). Using global mapping to create more accurate document-level maps of research fields. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62(1), 1–18.
36. Klavans, R., & Boyack, K. W. (2015). Which type of citation analysis generates the most accurate taxonomy of scientific and technical knowledge? http://arxiv.org/abs/1511.05078. Accessed 21 Dec 2016.
37. Koopman, R., & Wang, S. (2017). Mutual information based labelling and comparing clusters. In J. Gläser, A. Scharnhorst & W. Glänzel (Eds.), Same data—different results? Towards a comparative approach to the identification of thematic structures in science, Special Issue of Scientometrics. doi:10.1007/s11192-017-2305-2.
38. Koopman, R., Wang, S., & Scharnhorst, A. (2017). Contextualization of topics (extended): Browsing through the universe of bibliographic information. In J. Gläser, A. Scharnhorst & W. Glänzel (Eds.), Same data—different results? Towards a comparative approach to the identification of thematic structures in science, Special Issue of Scientometrics. doi:10.1007/s11192-017-2303-4.
39. Kuhn, T. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
40. Law, J., Bauin, S., Courtial, J.-P., & Whittaker, J. (1988). Policy and the mapping of scientific change: A co-word analysis of research into environmental acidification. Scientometrics, 14(3–4), 251–264.
41. Leydesdorff, L. (1986). The development of frames of references. Scientometrics, 9(3–4), 103–125.
42. Leydesdorff, L. (1987). Various methods for the mapping of science. Scientometrics, 11(5–6), 295–324.
43. Leydesdorff, L. (2004). Clusters and maps of science journals based on bi-connected graphs in journal citation reports. Journal of Documentation, 60(4), 371–427.
44. Leydesdorff, L., & Bornmann, L. (2011). How fractional counting of citations affects the impact factor: Normalization in terms of differences in citation potentials among fields of science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62(2), 217–229.
45. Leydesdorff, L., & Cozzens, S. E. (1993). The delineation of specialities in terms of journals using the dynamic journal set of the SCI. Scientometrics, 26(1), 135–156.
46. Leydesdorff, L., & Rafols, I. (2009). A global map of science based on the ISI subject categories. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60(2), 348–362.
47. Leydesdorff, L., Rotolo, D., & Rafols, I. (2012). Bibliometric perspectives on medical innovation using the medical subject headings of PubMed. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 63(11), 2239–2253.
48. Leydesdorff, L., Wagner, C., & Bornmann, L. (2016a). Replicability and the public/private divide, Letter to the Editor. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 67(7), 1777–1778. doi:10.1002/asi.23672.
49. Leydesdorff, L., Wouters, P., & Bornmann, L. (2016b). Professional and citizen bibliometrics: Complementarities and ambivalences in the development and use of indicators—a state-of-the-art report. Scientometrics, 109(3), 1–22.
50. Marshakova, I. V. (1973). A system of document connection based on references (in Russian). Scientific and Technical Information Serial of VINITI, 6(2), 3–8.
51. Moed, H. F. (Ed.). (2005). Citation analysis in research evaluation. Dordrecht: Springer.
52. Moed, H. F., Burger, J. M., Frankfort, J. G., & van Raan, A. F. J. (1985). The application of bibliometric indicators: Important field- and time-dependent factors to be considered. Scientometrics, 8(3–4), 177–203.
53. Mulkay, M. J. (1977). Sociology of the scientific research community. In I. Spiegel-Rösing & D. de Solla Price (Eds.), Science, technology and society: A cross-disciplinary perspective (pp. 93–148). London: Sage.
54. Mulkay, M. J., Gilbert, G. N., & Woolgar, S. (1975). Problem areas and research networks in science. Sociology, 9(2), 187–203.
55. Noyons, E. C. M. (2001). Bibliometric mapping of science in a science policy context. Scientometrics, 50(1), 83–98.
56. Noyons, E. C. M. (2004). Science maps within a science policy context. In H. F. Moed, W. Glänzel, & U. Schmoch (Eds.), Handbook of quantitative science and technology research: The use of publication and patent statistics in studies of S&T systems (pp. 237–256). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
57. Noyons, E. C. M., & van Raan, A. F. J. (1998). Monitoring scientific developments from a dynamic perspective: Self-organized structuring to map neural network research. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 49(1), 68–81.
58. Peel, L., Larremore, D. B., & Clauset, A. (2016). The ground truth about metadata and community detection in networks. Cornell University Library. https://arxiv.org/abs/1608.05878. Accessed 21 Dec 2016.
59. Rip, A., & Courtial, J.-P. (1984). Co-word maps of biotechnology: An example of cognitive scientometrics. Scientometrics, 6(6), 381–400.
60. Schiminovich, S. (1971). Automatic classification and retrieval of documents by means of a bibliographic pattern discovery algorithm. Information Storage and Retrieval, 6(6), 417–435.
61. Sirtes, D., Waltman, L., Archambault, É., Glänzel, W., Hornbostel, S., & Wouters, P. (2013). Bibliometric evaluation standards debate: Introductory presentation and panel discussion. In S. Hinze & A. Lottmann (Eds.), Translational twists and turns: Science as a socio-economic endeavor (pp. 373–377). Berlin: Institute for Research Information and Quality Assurance.
62. Small, H. G. (1973). Co-citation in the scientific literature: A new measure of the relationship between two documents. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 24(4), 265–269.
63. Small, H. G. (1977). A co-citation model of a scientific specialty: A longitudinal study of collagen research. Social Studies of Science, 7(2), 139–166.
64. Small, H. G., Boyack, K. W., & Klavans, R. (2014). Identifying emerging topics in science and technology. Research Policy, 43(8), 1450–1467.
65. Small, H. G., & Griffith, B. C. (1974). The structure of scientific literatures I: Identifying and graphing specialities. Science Studies, 4(1), 17–40.
66. Smiraglia, R. P. (2015). Domain analysis of domain analysis for knowledge organization: Observations on an emergent methodological cluster. Knowledge Organization, 42(8), 602–611.
67. Šubelj, L., van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2016). Clustering scientific publications based on citation relations: A systematic comparison of different methods. PLoS ONE, 11(4), e0154404.
68. Tijssen, R. J. W. (1992). A quantitative assessment of interdisciplinary structures in science and technology: Co-classification analysis of energy research. Research Policy, 21(1), 27–44.
69. Van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2017). Citation-based clustering of publications using CitNetExplorer and VOSviewer. In J. Gläser, A. Scharnhorst & W. Glänzel (Eds.), Same data—different results? Towards a comparative approach to the identification of thematic structures in science, Special Issue of Scientometrics. doi:10.1007/s11192-017-2300-7.
70. Van Raan, A. F. J. (1990). Fractal dimension of co-citations. Nature, 347, 626.
71. Van Raan, A. F. J. (2000). On growth, ageing, and fractal differentiation of science. Scientometrics, 47(2), 347–362.
72. Van Raan, A. F. J., & Tijssen, R. J. W. (1993). The neural net of neural network research: An exercise in bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics, 26(1), 169–192.
73. Velden, T., Boyack, K. W., Gläser, J., Koopman, R., Scharnhorst, A., & Wang, S. (2017a). Comparison of topic extraction approaches and their results. In J. Gläser, A. Scharnhorst & W. Glänzel (Eds.), Same data—different results? Towards a comparative approach to the identification of thematic structures in science, Special Issue of Scientometrics. doi:10.1007/s11192-017-2306-1.
74. Velden, T., Yan, S., & Lagoze, C. (2017b). Mapping the cognitive structure of astrophysics by infomap: Clustering of the citation network and topic affinity analysis. In J. Gläser, A. Scharnhorst & W. Glänzel (Eds.), Same data—different results? Towards a comparative approach to the identification of thematic structures in science, Special Issue of Scientometrics. doi:10.1007/s11192-017-2299-9.
75. Verspagen, B., & Werker, C. (2003). The invisible college of the economics of innovation and technological change. Estudios de Economía Aplicada, 21(3), 393–419.
76. Waltman, L., & van Eck, N. J. (2012). A new methodology for constructing a publication-level classification system of science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 63(12), 2378–2392.
77. Wang, S., & Koopman, R. (2017). Clustering articles based on semantic similarity. In J. Gläser, A. Scharnhorst & W. Glänzel (Eds.), Same data—different results? Towards a comparative approach to the identification of thematic structures in science, Special Issue of Scientometrics. doi:10.1007/s11192-017-2298-x.
78. 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), 163–171.
79. White, H. D., & McCain, K. W. (1998). Visualizing a discipline: An author co-citation analysis of information science, 1972–1995. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 49(4), 327–355.
80. Whitley, R. (Ed.). (1974). Cognitive and social institutionalization of scientific specialties and research areas. In social processes of scientific development (pp. 69–95). London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
81. Whitley, R. (2000 [1984]). The intellectual and social organization of the sciences. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
82. Woolgar, S. (1976). The identification and definition of scientific collectivities. In G. Lemaine, R. Macleod, M. Mulkay, & P. Weingart (Eds.), Perspectives on the emergence of scientific disciplines (pp. 233–245). Paris: Mouton.
83. Yau, C.-K., Porter, A., Newman, N., & Suominen, A. (2014). Clustering scientific documents with topic modeling. Scientometrics, 100(3), 767–786.
84. Zitt, M., & Bassecoulard, E. (2006). Delineating complex scientific fields by an hybrid lexical-citation method: An application to nanosciences. Information Processing and Management, 42(6), 1513–1531.