IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v89y2011i1d10.1007_s11192-011-0430-x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Science models as value-added services for scholarly information systems

Author

Listed:
  • Peter Mutschke

    (GESIS-Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences)

  • Philipp Mayr

    (GESIS-Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences)

  • Philipp Schaer

    (GESIS-Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences)

  • York Sure

    (GESIS-Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences)

Abstract

The paper introduces scholarly Information Retrieval (IR) as a further dimension that should be considered in the science modeling debate. The IR use case is seen as a validation model of the adequacy of science models in representing and predicting structure and dynamics in science. Particular conceptualizations of scholarly activity and structures in science are used as value-added search services to improve retrieval quality: a co-word model depicting the cognitive structure of a field (used for query expansion), the Bradford law of information concentration, and a model of co-authorship networks (both used for re-ranking search results). An evaluation of the retrieval quality when science model driven services are used turned out that the models proposed actually provide beneficial effects to retrieval quality. From an IR perspective, the models studied are therefore verified as expressive conceptualizations of central phenomena in science. Thus, it could be shown that the IR perspective can significantly contribute to a better understanding of scholarly structures and activities.

Suggested Citation

  • Peter Mutschke & Philipp Mayr & Philipp Schaer & York Sure, 2011. "Science models as value-added services for scholarly information systems," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 89(1), pages 349-364, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:89:y:2011:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-011-0430-x
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-011-0430-x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-011-0430-x
    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/s11192-011-0430-x?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. Leydesdorff, Loet & Wagner, Caroline S., 2008. "International collaboration in science and the formation of a core group," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 2(4), pages 317-325.
    2. Kevin W. Boyack & Richard Klavans, 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, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 61(12), pages 2389-2404, December.
    3. Zi‐Lin He, 2009. "International collaboration does not have greater epistemic authority," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 60(10), pages 2151-2164, October.
    4. Yichuan Jiang, 2008. "Locating active actors in the scientific collaboration communities based on interaction topology analyses," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 74(3), pages 471-482, March.
    5. Linton Freeman, 1980. "The gatekeeper, pair-dependency and structural centrality," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 14(4), pages 585-592, August.
    6. Donald deB. Beaver, 2004. "Does collaborative research have greater epistemic authority?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 60(3), pages 399-408, August.
    7. Loet Leydesdorff & Félix de Moya-Anegón & Vicente P. Guerrero-Bote, 2010. "Journal maps on the basis of Scopus data: A comparison with the Journal Citation Reports of the ISI," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 61(2), pages 352-369, February.
    8. Haiyang Lu & Yuqiang Feng, 2009. "A measure of authors’ centrality in co-authorship networks based on the distribution of collaborative relationships," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 81(2), pages 499-511, November.
    9. Kevin W. Boyack & Richard Klavans, 2010. "Co-citation analysis, bibliographic coupling, and direct citation: Which citation approach represents the research front most accurately?," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 61(12), pages 2389-2404, December.
    10. Chen, Chaomei & Chen, Yue & Horowitz, Mark & Hou, Haiyan & Liu, Zeyuan & Pellegrino, Donald, 2009. "Towards an explanatory and computational theory of scientific discovery," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 3(3), pages 191-209.
    11. Christian Plaunt & Barbara A. Norgard, 1998. "An association‐based method for automatic indexing with a controlled vocabulary," Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 49(10), pages 888-902.
    12. Wolfgang Glänzel & Frizo Janssens & Bart Thijs, 2009. "A comparative analysis of publication activity and citation impact based on the core literature in bioinformatics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 79(1), pages 109-129, April.
    13. Barabási, A.L & Jeong, H & Néda, Z & Ravasz, E & Schubert, A & Vicsek, T, 2002. "Evolution of the social network of scientific collaborations," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 311(3), pages 590-614.
    14. Peter Mutschke & Anabel Quan Haase, 2001. "Collaboration and Cognitive Structures in Social Science Research Fields. Towards Socio-Cognitive Analysis in Information Systems," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 52(3), pages 487-502, November.
    15. Erjia Yan & Ying Ding, 2009. "Applying centrality measures to impact analysis: A coauthorship network analysis," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 60(10), pages 2107-2118, October.
    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. Muhammad Kamran Abbasi & Ingo Frommholz, 2015. "Cluster-based polyrepresentation as science modelling approach for information retrieval," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(3), pages 2301-2322, March.
    2. Ameni Kacem & Philipp Mayr, 2018. "Analysis of search stratagem utilisation," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(2), pages 1383-1400, August.
    3. Peter Mutschke & Philipp Mayr, 2015. "Science models for search: a study on combining scholarly information retrieval and scientometrics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(3), pages 2323-2345, March.
    4. Alexander Karlsson & Björn Hammarfelt & H. Joe Steinhauer & Göran Falkman & Nasrine Olson & Gustaf Nelhans & Jan Nolin, 2015. "Modeling uncertainty in bibliometrics and information retrieval: an information fusion approach," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(3), pages 2255-2274, March.
    5. Dietmar Wolfram, 2015. "The symbiotic relationship between information retrieval and informetrics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(3), pages 2201-2214, March.
    6. Eunice Maria M. N. Dos Santos & João J. Ferreira, 2017. "Analyzing Informal Entrepreneurship: A Bibliometric Survey," Journal of Developmental Entrepreneurship (JDE), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 22(04), pages 1-20, December.
    7. Estevão, Cristina & Costa, Carlos & Fernandes, Cristina, 2019. "Competitiveness in the tourism sector: A bibliometric analysis," Journal of Tourism, Sustainability and Well-being, Cinturs - Research Centre for Tourism, Sustainability and Well-being, University of Algarve, vol. 7(1), pages 4-21.
    8. Timo Breuer & Philipp Schaer & Dirk Tunger, 2022. "Relevance assessments, bibliometrics, and altmetrics: a quantitative study on PubMed and arXiv," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(5), pages 2455-2478, May.
    9. Philipp Mayr & Andrea Scharnhorst, 2015. "Scientometrics and information retrieval: weak-links revitalized," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(3), pages 2193-2199, March.
    10. Fernandes, Cristina & Ferreira, João J. & Veiga, Pedro Mota & Kraus, Sascha & Dabić, Marina, 2022. "Digital entrepreneurship platforms: Mapping the field and looking towards a holistic approach," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    11. Ferreira, João J. & Fernandes, Cristina I. & Schiavone, Francesco & Mahto, Raj V., 2021. "Sustainability in family business – A bibliometric study and a research agenda," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    12. Alves, Helena & Fernandes, Cristina & Raposo, Mário, 2016. "Value co-creation: Concept and contexts of application and study," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(5), pages 1626-1633.
    13. 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.

    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. Peter Mutschke & Philipp Mayr, 2015. "Science models for search: a study on combining scholarly information retrieval and scientometrics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(3), pages 2323-2345, March.
    2. Yan, Erjia & Ding, Ying & Milojević, Staša & Sugimoto, Cassidy R., 2012. "Topics in dynamic research communities: An exploratory study for the field of information retrieval," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 6(1), pages 140-153.
    3. Caloffi, Annalisa & Colovic, Ana & Rizzoli, Valentina & Rossi, Federica, 2023. "Innovation intermediaries' types and functions: A computational analysis of the literature," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    4. 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.
    5. Jun-Ping Qiu & Ke Dong & Hou-Qiang Yu, 2014. "Comparative study on structure and correlation among author co-occurrence networks in bibliometrics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 101(2), pages 1345-1360, November.
    6. Alireza Abbasi & Mahdi Jalili & Abolghasem Sadeghi-Niaraki, 2018. "Influence of network-based structural and power diversity on research performance," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 117(1), pages 579-590, October.
    7. 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.
    8. Alireza Abbasi & Liaquat Hossain & Shahadat Uddin & Kim J. R. Rasmussen, 2011. "Evolutionary dynamics of scientific collaboration networks: multi-levels and cross-time analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 89(2), pages 687-710, November.
    9. Yiming Xiao & Han Wu & Guohua Wang & Hong Mei, 2021. "Mapping the Worldwide Trends on Energy Poverty Research: A Bibliometric Analysis (1999–2019)," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(4), pages 1-22, February.
    10. He, Bing & Ding, Ying & Tang, Jie & Reguramalingam, Vignesh & Bollen, Johan, 2013. "Mining diversity subgraph in multidisciplinary scientific collaboration networks: A meso perspective," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 7(1), pages 117-128.
    11. Aparna Basu & Roland Wagner Dobler, 2012. "‘Cognitive mobility’ or migration of authors between fields used in mapping a network of mathematics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 91(2), pages 353-368, May.
    12. Ortega, José Luis, 2014. "Influence of co-authorship networks in the research impact: Ego network analyses from Microsoft Academic Search," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 8(3), pages 728-737.
    13. Benatti, Alexandre & Ferraz de Arrruda, Henrique & Nascimento Silva, Filipi & da Fontoura Costa, Luciano, 2021. "Enriching and analyzing small citation networks: A case study on transistor’s history," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 573(C).
    14. Jianlin Zhou & An Zeng & Ying Fan & Zengru Di, 2018. "Identifying important scholars via directed scientific collaboration networks," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 114(3), pages 1327-1343, March.
    15. Prathap, Gangan & Ujum, Ephrance Abu & Kumar, Sameer & Ratnavelu, Kuru, 2021. "Scoring the resourcefulness of researchers using bibliographic coupling patterns," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 15(3).
    16. Bart Thijs & Edgar Schiebel & Wolfgang Glänzel, 2013. "Do second-order similarities provide added-value in a hybrid approach?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 96(3), pages 667-677, September.
    17. Small, Henry & Boyack, Kevin W. & Klavans, Richard, 2014. "Identifying emerging topics in science and technology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(8), pages 1450-1467.
    18. Jacob Wood & Gohar Feroz Khan, 2015. "International trade negotiation analysis: network and semantic knowledge infrastructure," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 105(1), pages 537-556, October.
    19. Piñeiro-Chousa, Juan & López-Cabarcos, M. Ángeles & Romero-Castro, Noelia María & Pérez-Pico, Ada María, 2020. "Innovation, entrepreneurship and knowledge in the business scientific field: Mapping the research front," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 475-485.
    20. 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.

    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:89:y:2011:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-011-0430-x. 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.