IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v51y2001i3d10.1023_a1019655305286.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Scholarly communication as a socioecological system

Author

Listed:
  • Pamela E. Sandstrom

    (Indiana University-Purdue University Fort Wayne)

Abstract

Among Belver C. Griffith's many contributions to disciplinary communication is the idea that science and scholarship at large constitute a social system to be investigated empirically. This paper reports findings of an author co-citation analysis of the field of human behavioral ecology that expands Griffith's concept of the social system of scientific communication to fit a socioecological framework. Cluster analysis and multidimensional scaling techniques are used to characterize the research specialty at large and portray five respondents' individual resource maps. The techniques reveal co-citation relationships among authors whose work they had referenced in recent articles. Survey data on searching and handling behaviors for an aggregated sample of 180 cited references are correlated with core-periphery zones of the individual maps. Findings that types of socially mediated communication and distinctive information foraging behaviors correlate with different zones of a bibliographic microhabitat support an interpretation that active specialty members conform to foraging efficiency principles as predicted by prey-choice models from optimal foraging theory.

Suggested Citation

  • Pamela E. Sandstrom, 2001. "Scholarly communication as a socioecological system," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 51(3), pages 573-605, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:51:y:2001:i:3:d:10.1023_a:1019655305286
    DOI: 10.1023/A:1019655305286
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1023/A:1019655305286
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1023/A:1019655305286?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. I. Rowlands, 1999. "Patterns of author cocitation in information policy: Evidence of social, collaborative and cognitive structure," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 44(3), pages 533-546, March.
    2. Henry Small, 1973. "Co‐citation in the scientific literature: A new measure of the relationship between two documents," Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 24(4), pages 265-269, July.
    3. Howard D. White & Belver C. Griffith, 1981. "Author cocitation: A literature measure of intellectual structure," Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 32(3), pages 163-171, May.
    4. Patrick Wilson, 1995. "Unused relevant information in research and development," Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 46(1), pages 45-51, January.
    5. Katherine W. McCain, 1986. "Cocited author mapping as a valid representation of intellectual structure," Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 37(3), pages 111-122, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Peter Wittek & Sándor Darányi & Gustaf Nelhans, 2017. "Ruling out static latent homophily in citation networks," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 110(2), pages 765-777, February.
    2. Bar-Ilan, Judit, 2008. "Informetrics at the beginning of the 21st century—A review," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 2(1), pages 1-52.

    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. Pamela E. Sandstrom, 2001. "Scholarly communication as a socioecological system," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 50(3), pages 573-605, January.
    2. Georg Groh & Christoph Fuchs, 2011. "Multi-modal social networks for modeling scientific fields," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 89(2), pages 569-590, November.
    3. Yun, Jinhyuk & Ahn, Sejung & Lee, June Young, 2020. "Return to basics: Clustering of scientific literature using structural information," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 14(4).
    4. Antonio Rafael Ramos-Rodriguez & Salustiano Martinez-Fierro & Jose Aurelio Medina-Garrido & Jose Ruiz-Navarro, 2023. "Global Entrepreneurship Monitor versus Panel Study of Entrepreneurial Dynamics: comparing their intellectual structures," Papers 2401.13684, arXiv.org.
    5. Dzikowski, Piotr, 2018. "A bibliometric analysis of born global firms," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 281-294.
    6. Markus Gmür, 2003. "Co-citation analysis and the search for invisible colleges: A methodological evaluation," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 57(1), pages 27-57, January.
    7. Hsiao, Chun Hua & Yang, Chyan, 2011. "The intellectual development of the technology acceptance model: A co-citation analysis," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 128-136.
    8. Sandra Miguel & Félix Moya-Anegón & Víctor Herrero-Solana, 2008. "A new approach to institutional domain analysis: Multilevel research fronts structure," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 74(3), pages 331-344, March.
    9. Dennys Eduardo Rossetto & Roberto Carlos Bernardes & Felipe Mendes Borini & Cristiane Chaves Gattaz, 2018. "Structure and evolution of innovation research in the last 60 years: review and future trends in the field of business through the citations and co-citations analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 115(3), pages 1329-1363, June.
    10. Peter Wittek & Sándor Darányi & Gustaf Nelhans, 2017. "Ruling out static latent homophily in citation networks," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 110(2), pages 765-777, February.
    11. Jarneving, Bo, 2007. "Complete graphs and bibliographic coupling: A test of the applicability of bibliographic coupling for the identification of cognitive cores on the field level," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 1(4), pages 338-356.
    12. Guan-Can Yang & Gang Li & Chun-Ya Li & Yun-Hua Zhao & Jing Zhang & Tong Liu & Dar-Zen Chen & Mu-Hsuan Huang, 2015. "Using the comprehensive patent citation network (CPC) to evaluate patent value," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 105(3), pages 1319-1346, December.
    13. Tsung Teng Chen, 2012. "The development and empirical study of a literature review aiding system," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 92(1), pages 105-116, July.
    14. Gaviria-Marin, Magaly & Merigó, José M. & Baier-Fuentes, Hugo, 2019. "Knowledge management: A global examination based on bibliometric analysis," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 194-220.
    15. Dixit, Aasheesh & Jakhar, Suresh Kumar, 2021. "Airport capacity management: A review and bibliometric analysis," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    16. Zhong, Xiang & Liu, Jiajun & Gao, Yong & Wu, Lun, 2017. "Analysis of co-occurrence toponyms in web pages based on complex networks," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 466(C), pages 462-475.
    17. Jianhua Hou, 2017. "Exploration into the evolution and historical roots of citation analysis by referenced publication year spectroscopy," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 110(3), pages 1437-1452, March.
    18. Ying Huang & Wolfgang Glänzel & Lin Zhang, 2021. "Tracing the development of mapping knowledge domains," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(7), pages 6201-6224, July.
    19. João J. M. Ferreira & Cristina I. Fernandes & Sascha Kraus, 2019. "Entrepreneurship research: mapping intellectual structures and research trends," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 13(1), pages 181-205, February.
    20. Raphaël Maucuer & Alexandre Renaud & Sébastien Ronteau & Laurent Muzellec, 2022. "What can we learn from marketers? A bibliometric analysis of the marketing literature on business model research," Post-Print hal-03718522, HAL.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:51:y:2001:i:3:d:10.1023_a:1019655305286. 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.