The emergence of a field: a network analysis of research on peer review

Scientometrics

Volumn 113, Issue 1, 2017, Pages 503-532

  Batagelj, Vladimir ^a,b   Ferligoj, Anuška ^c   Squazzoni, Flaminio ^d  

^a INSTITUTE OF MATHEMATICS   (Slovenia)

^b UNIVERSITY OF PRIMORSKA   (Slovenia)

^c UNIVERSITY OF LJUBLJANA   (Slovenia)

^d UNIVERSITY OF BRESCIA   (Italy)

Author keywords

Authors; Citation networks; Journals; Main path; Peer review

Indexed keywords

EID: 85030321184     PISSN: 01389130     EISSN: 15882861     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11192-017-2522-8     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Batagelj, V. (2003) Efficient algorithms for citation network analysis. http://arxiv.org/abs/cs/0309023.
2. Batagelj, V. (2007). WoS2Pajek. Manual for version 1.4, July 2016. http://vladowiki.fmf.uni-lj.si/doku.php?id=pajek:wos2pajek.
3. Batagelj, V., & Cerinšek, M. (2013). On bibliographic networks. Scientometrics, 96(3), 845–864.
4. Batagelj, V., Doreian, P., Ferligoj, A., & Kejžar, N. (2014). Understanding large temporal networks and spatial networks: Exploration, pattern searching, visualization and network evolution. London: Wiley series in computational and quantitative social science, Wiley.
5. Bornmann, L. (2011). Scientific peer review. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 45(1), 197–245.
6. Casnici, N., Grimaldo, F., Gilbert, N., & Squazzoni, F. (2017). Attitudes of referees in a multidisciplinary journal: An empirical analysis. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 68(7), 1763–1771.
7. Cole, S., & Cole, J. R. (1973). Visibility and the structural bases of awareness of scientific research. American Sociological Review, 33, 397–413.
8. De Nooy, W., Mrvar, A., & Batagelj, V. (2011). Exploratory social network analysis with Pajek. Structural analysis in the social sciences (Revised and Expanded Second ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
9. Edwards, M. A., & Roy, S. (2016). Academic research in the 21st century: Maintaining scientific integrity in a climate of perverse incentives and hypercompetition. Environmental Engineering Science, 34(1), 51–61.
10. Fyfe, A., Coate, K., Curry, S., Lawson, S., Moxham, N., & Røstvik, C. M. (2017). Untangling academic publishing: A history of the relationship between commercial interests, academic prestige and the circulation of research. Zenodo project. doi:10.5281/zenodo.546100.
11. Garfield E., Pudovkin, A. I., Istomin, V. S., Histcomp—(compiled Historiography program). http://garfield.library.upenn.edu/histcomp/guide.html.
12. Garfield, E., Pudovkin, A. I., & Istomin, V. S. (2003). Why do we need algorithmic historiography? Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 54(5), 400–412.
13. Gauffriau, M., Larsen, P. O., Maye, I., Roulin-Perriard, A., & von Ins, M. (2007). Publication, cooperation and productivity measures in scientific research. Scientometrics, 73(2), 175–214.
14. Gross, C. (2016). Scientific misconduct. Annual Review of Psychology, 67(1), 693–711.
15. Halevi, G., Moed, H., & Bar-Ilan, J. (2017). Suitability of Google Scholar as a source of scientific information and as a source of data for scientific evaluation—Review of the literature. Journal of Informetrics, 11(3), 823–834.
16. Halevi, G., Nicolas, B., & Bar-Ilan, J. (2016). The complexity of measuring the impact of books. Publishing Research Quarterly, 32(3), 187–200.
17. Hummon, N. P., & Doreian, P. (1989). Connectivity in a citation network: The development of DNA theory. Social Networks, 11, 39–63.
18. Leydesdorff, L., & Ahrweiler, P. (2014). In search of a network theory of innovations: Relations, positions, and perspectives. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 65(11), 2359–2374.
19. Liu, J. S., & Lu, L. Y. Y. (2012). An integrated approach for main path analysis: Development of the Hirsch index as an example. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 63, 528–542.
20. Squazzoni, F., Bravo, G., & Takács, K. (2013). Does incentive provision increase the quality of peer review? An experimental study. Research Policy, 42(1), 287–294.
21. Squazzoni, F., Grimaldo, F., & Marušić, A. (2017). Publishing: Journals could share peer-review data. Nature, 546(7658), 352–352.
22. Squazzoni, F., & Takács, K. (2011). Social simulation that ‘peers into peer review’. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, 14(4), 3.
23. van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2010). Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics, 84(2), 523–538.
24. van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2014). CitNetExplorer: A new software tool for analyzing and visualizing citation networks. Journal of Informetrics, 8(4), 802–823.
25. Wikipedia. Chinese surname. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_surname.
26. Wikipedia. Histcite. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Histcite.
27. Wikipedia. Peer review. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peer_review.
28. Zaveršnik, M., & Batagelj, V. (2004) Islands. XXIV. International sunbelt social network conference. Portorož, May 12–16. http://vlado.fmf.uni-lj.si/pub/networks/doc/sunbelt/islands.pdf.