IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v117y2018i1d10.1007_s11192-018-2871-y.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Reply to Wray

Author

Listed:
  • Eugenio Petrovich

    (University of Milan)

Abstract

In this letter, I reply to two insightful remarks made by Wray on a study I recently published on Scientometrics. First, I clarify the method I used to assess the transition of Analytic Philosophy to a normal science phase, explaining in more details the epistemological role that different types of citations play. Second, I address the topic of the relationship between the normal science and the aging of the literature. I argue that more research is needed to understand the epistemological meaning of aging.

Suggested Citation

  • Eugenio Petrovich, 2018. "Reply to Wray," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 117(1), pages 651-654, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:117:y:2018:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-018-2871-y
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-018-2871-y
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-018-2871-y
    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/s11192-018-2871-y?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. L. Egghe, 2010. "A model showing the increase in time of the average and median reference age and the decrease in time of the Price Index," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 82(2), pages 243-248, February.
    2. K. Brad Wray, 2016. "No new evidence for a citation benefit for Author-Pay Open Access Publications in the social sciences and humanities," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 106(3), pages 1031-1035, March.
    3. Eugenio Petrovich, 2018. "Accumulation of knowledge in para-scientific areas: the case of analytic philosophy," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(2), pages 1123-1151, August.
    4. K. Brad Wray, 2018. "A note on measuring normal science," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 117(1), pages 647-650, October.
    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. K. Brad Wray, 2018. "A note on measuring normal science," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 117(1), pages 647-650, October.
    2. Parolo, Pietro Della Briotta & Pan, Raj Kumar & Ghosh, Rumi & Huberman, Bernardo A. & Kaski, Kimmo & Fortunato, Santo, 2015. "Attention decay in science," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 9(4), pages 734-745.
    3. Staša Milojević, 2012. "How Are Academic Age, Productivity and Collaboration Related to Citing Behavior of Researchers?," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(11), pages 1-13, November.
    4. Lutz Bornmann & K. Brad Wray & Robin Haunschild, 2020. "Citation concept analysis (CCA): a new form of citation analysis revealing the usefulness of concepts for other researchers illustrated by exemplary case studies including classic books by Thomas S. K," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 122(2), pages 1051-1074, February.
    5. Hajar Sotudeh & Zohreh Estakhr, 2018. "Sustainability of open access citation advantage: the case of Elsevier’s author-pays hybrid open access journals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 115(1), pages 563-576, April.
    6. Zhenyu Gou & Fan Meng & Zaida Chinchilla-Rodríguez & Yi Bu, 2022. "Encoding the citation life-cycle: the operationalization of a literature-aging conceptual model," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(8), pages 5027-5052, August.
    7. Aurelia Magdalena Pisoschi & Claudia Gabriela Pisoschi, 2016. "Is open access the solution to increase the impact of scientific journals?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(2), pages 1075-1095, November.
    8. Hamid Bouabid & Vincent Larivière, 2013. "The lengthening of papers’ life expectancy: a diachronous analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 97(3), pages 695-717, December.
    9. Craig Aaen-Stockdale, 2017. "Selfish Memes: An Update of Richard Dawkins’ Bibliometric Analysis of Key Papers in Sociobiology," Publications, MDPI, vol. 5(2), pages 1-9, May.
    10. Mikael Laakso & Andrea Polonioli, 2018. "Open access in ethics research: an analysis of open access availability and author self-archiving behaviour in light of journal copyright restrictions," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(1), pages 291-317, July.
    11. Sergio Copiello, 2019. "The open access citation premium may depend on the openness and inclusiveness of the indexing database, but the relationship is controversial because it is ambiguous where the open access boundary lie," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 121(2), pages 995-1018, November.
    12. Wang, Xianwen & Wang, Zhi & Mao, Wenli & Liu, Chen, 2014. "How far does scientific community look back?," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 8(3), pages 562-568.
    13. Siluo Yang & Feng Ma & Yanhui Song & Junping Qiu, 2010. "A longitudinal analysis of citation distribution breadth for Chinese scholars," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 85(3), pages 755-765, December.
    14. Mingkun Wei & Abdolreza Noroozi Chakoli, 2020. "Evaluating the relationship between the academic and social impact of open access books based on citation behaviors and social media attention," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(3), pages 2401-2420, December.
    15. Pan, Raj K. & Petersen, Alexander M. & Pammolli, Fabio & Fortunato, Santo, 2018. "The memory of science: Inflation, myopia, and the knowledge network," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 12(3), pages 656-678.
    16. Liwei Zhang & Liang Ma, 2024. "Different open access routes, varying societal impacts: evidence from the Royal Society biological journals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 129(6), pages 3407-3431, June.
    17. Andrea Polonioli, 2016. "Metrics, flawed indicators, and the case of philosophy journals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 108(2), pages 987-994, August.
    18. Dotti, Nicola Francesco & Walczyk, Julia, 2022. "What is the societal impact of university research? A policy-oriented review to map approaches, identify monitoring methods and success factors," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).

    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:117:y:2018:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-018-2871-y. 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.