IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v114y2018i1d10.1007_s11192-017-2566-9.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparing discrimination powers of text and citation-based context types

Author

Listed:
  • Hajar Sotudeh

    (Shiraz University)

  • Mojgan Houshyar

    (Shiraz University)

Abstract

Different context types have different potentialities in representing subjects of documents. However, little is known on their probable differences regarding discriminating documents with different subjects. The present study aimed to compare the discrimination powers of five context types (i.e. title, textual, text-citation, reference, and reference-title contexts). Using a content analysis method, a test collection consisted of 3637 papers containing 15 English homographs in 54 subject clusters were analyzed by discriminant analysis to determine the discrimination among the clusters. The results confirmed that the homograph context types significantly discriminate between the clusters. The contexts can correctly cluster the documents from about 40 to 80%, with text and reference-title context types being stronger in differentiating the clusters. This is the first study to compare the powers of different textual contexts kinds and recommend to concentrate on context types to discriminate between documents with homographs to improve the effectiveness of their retrieval. It is suggested that a comparison of the context types be used as a tool in re-ranking or clustering of the retrieved results.

Suggested Citation

  • Hajar Sotudeh & Mojgan Houshyar, 2018. "Comparing discrimination powers of text and citation-based context types," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 114(1), pages 229-251, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:114:y:2018:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-017-2566-9
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-017-2566-9
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-017-2566-9
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11192-017-2566-9?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jeong, Yoo Kyung & Song, Min & Ding, Ying, 2014. "Content-based author co-citation analysis," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 8(1), pages 197-211.
    2. Dietmar Wolfram, 2015. "The symbiotic relationship between information retrieval and informetrics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(3), pages 2201-2214, March.
    3. Henry Small, 2011. "Interpreting maps of science using citation context sentiments: a preliminary investigation," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 87(2), pages 373-388, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Maryam Yaghtin & Hajar Sotudeh & Mahdieh Mirzabeigi & Seyed Mostafa Fakhrahmad & Mehdi Mohammadi, 2019. "In quest of new document relations: evaluating co-opinion relations between co-citations and its impact on Information retrieval effectiveness," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 119(2), pages 987-1008, May.
    2. Min Song & Keun Young Kang & Tatsawan Timakum & Xinyuan Zhang, 2020. "Examining influential factors for acknowledgements classification using supervised learning," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(2), pages 1-21, February.
    3. Rey-Long Liu, 2017. "A new bibliographic coupling measure with descriptive capability," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 110(2), pages 915-935, February.
    4. Yi Bu & Binglu Wang & Win-bin Huang & Shangkun Che & Yong Huang, 2018. "Using the appearance of citations in full text on author co-citation analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(1), pages 275-289, July.
    5. Sergey Parinov & Mikhail Kogalovsky, 2014. "Semantic linkages in research information systems as a new data source for scientometric studies," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 98(2), pages 927-943, February.
    6. Dangzhi Zhao & Andreas Strotmann, 2020. "Telescopic and panoramic views of library and information science research 2011–2018: a comparison of four weighting schemes for author co-citation analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(1), pages 255-270, July.
    7. Yang, Siluo & Han, Ruizhen & Wolfram, Dietmar & Zhao, Yuehua, 2016. "Visualizing the intellectual structure of information science (2006–2015): Introducing author keyword coupling analysis," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 132-150.
    8. Ding, Ying & Liu, Xiaozhong & Guo, Chun & Cronin, Blaise, 2013. "The distribution of references across texts: Some implications for citation analysis," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 7(3), pages 583-592.
    9. Dongin Nam & Jiwon Kim & Jeeyoung Yoon & Chaemin Song & Seongdeok Kim & Min Song, 2024. "Examining knowledge entities and its relationships based on citation sentences using a multi-anchor bipartite network," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 129(11), pages 7197-7228, November.
    10. Margarida Rodrigues & Cidália Oliveira & MárioFranco & Ana Daniel, 2024. "A Bibliometric Study About the Rural Creative Class: Proposal of a Conceptual Framework and Future Agenda," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 15(3), pages 15278-15303, September.
    11. Marianna Mauro & Monica Giancotti & Giovanna Talarico, 2017. "Mapping the field: A bibliometric analysis of accountability literature in healthcare," MECOSAN, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2017(101), pages 7-30.
    12. Mingyang Wang & Jiaqi Zhang & Shijia Jiao & Xiangrong Zhang & Na Zhu & Guangsheng Chen, 2020. "Important citation identification by exploiting the syntactic and contextual information of citations," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(3), pages 2109-2129, December.
    13. Kim, Ha Jin & Jeong, Yoo Kyung & Song, Min, 2016. "Content- and proximity-based author co-citation analysis using citation sentences," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(4), pages 954-966.
    14. Michel Zitt, 2015. "Meso-level retrieval: IR-bibliometrics interplay and hybrid citation-words methods in scientific fields delineation," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(3), pages 2223-2245, March.
    15. Dorsa Alipour & Hussein Dia, 2023. "A Systematic Review of the Role of Land Use, Transport, and Energy-Environment Integration in Shaping Sustainable Cities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(8), pages 1-29, April.
    16. Jensen, Scott & Liu, Xiaozhong & Yu, Yingying & Milojevic, Staša, 2016. "Generation of topic evolution trees from heterogeneous bibliographic networks," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 606-621.
    17. Chao Lu & Ying Ding & Chengzhi Zhang, 2017. "Understanding the impact change of a highly cited article: a content-based citation analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 112(2), pages 927-945, August.
    18. Kai Li & Jason Rollins & Erjia Yan, 2018. "Web of Science use in published research and review papers 1997–2017: a selective, dynamic, cross-domain, content-based analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 115(1), pages 1-20, April.
    19. Margarida Rodrigues & Mário Franco, 2019. "The Corporate Sustainability Strategy in Organisations: A Systematic Review and Future Directions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(22), pages 1-22, November.
    20. Chaker Jebari & Enrique Herrera-Viedma & Manuel Jesus Cobo, 2021. "The use of citation context to detect the evolution of research topics: a large-scale analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(4), pages 2971-2989, April.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:114:y:2018:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-017-2566-9. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.