IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v94y2013i3d10.1007_s11192-012-0849-8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Visualizing and comparing four facets of scholarly communication: producers, artifacts, concepts, and gatekeepers

Author

Listed:
  • Chaoqun Ni

    (Indiana University)

  • Cassidy R. Sugimoto

    (Indiana University)

  • Blaise Cronin

    (Indiana University)

Abstract

This paper extends Borgman’s (Communication Research 16: 583, 1989) three-facet framework (artifacts, producers, concepts) for bibliometric analyses of scholarly communication by adding a fourth gatekeepers. The four-facet framework was applied to the field of Library and Information Science to test for variations in the networks produced using operationalizations of each of these four facets independently. Fifty-eight journals from the Information Science and Library Science category in the 2008 Journal Citation Report were studied and the network proximity of these journals based on Venue-Author-Coupling (producer), journal co-citation analysis (artifact), topic analysis (concept) and interlocking editorial board membership (gatekeeper) was measured. The resulting networks were examined for potential correlation using the Quadratic Assignment Procedure. The results indicate some consensus regarding core journals, but significant differences among some networks. Holistic measures of scholarly communication that take multiple facets into account are proposed. This work is relevant in an assessment-conscious and metrics-driven age.

Suggested Citation

  • Chaoqun Ni & Cassidy R. Sugimoto & Blaise Cronin, 2013. "Visualizing and comparing four facets of scholarly communication: producers, artifacts, concepts, and gatekeepers," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 94(3), pages 1161-1173, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:94:y:2013:i:3:d:10.1007_s11192-012-0849-8
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-012-0849-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-012-0849-8
    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/s11192-012-0849-8?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. Cassidy R. Sugimoto & Jean A. Pratt & Karina Hauser, 2008. "Using field cocitation analysis to assess reciprocal and shared impact of LIS/MIS fields," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 59(9), pages 1441-1453, July.
    2. van Rijnsoever, Frank J. & Hessels, Laurens K. & Vandeberg, Rens L.J., 2008. "A resource-based view on the interactions of university researchers," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 1255-1266, September.
    3. Cassidy R. Sugimoto & Daifeng Li & Terrell G. Russell & S. Craig Finlay & Ying Ding, 2011. "The shifting sands of disciplinary development: Analyzing North American Library and Information Science dissertations using latent Dirichlet allocation," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 62(1), pages 185-204, January.
    4. Staša Milojević & Cassidy R. Sugimoto & Erjia Yan & Ying Ding, 2011. "The cognitive structure of Library and Information Science: Analysis of article title words," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 62(10), pages 1933-1953, October.
    5. Cassidy R. Sugimoto & Daifeng Li & Terrell G. Russell & S. Craig Finlay & Ying Ding, 2011. "The shifting sands of disciplinary development: Analyzing North American Library and Information Science dissertations using latent Dirichlet allocation," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 62(1), pages 185-204, January.
    6. Erjia Yan & Ying Ding, 2012. "Scholarly network similarities: How bibliographic coupling networks, citation networks, cocitation networks, topical networks, coauthorship networks, and coword networks relate to each other," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 63(7), pages 1313-1326, July.
    7. M. M. Kessler, 1965. "Comparison of the results of bibliographic coupling and analytic subject indexing," American Documentation, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(3), pages 223-233, July.
    8. Erjia Yan & Ying Ding, 2012. "Scholarly network similarities: How bibliographic coupling networks, citation networks, cocitation networks, topical networks, coauthorship networks, and coword networks relate to each other," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 63(7), pages 1313-1326, July.
    9. Ying Ding, 2011. "Topic-based PageRank on author cocitation networks," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 62(3), pages 449-466, March.
    10. Frank J. van Rijnsoever & Laurens K. Hessels & Rens L.J. Vandeberg, 2008. "A resource-based view on the interactions of university researchers," Innovation Studies Utrecht (ISU) working paper series 08-14, Utrecht University, Department of Innovation Studies, revised Apr 2008.
    11. Katherine W. McCain, 1991. "Mapping economics through the journal literature: An experiment in journal cocitation analysis," Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 42(4), pages 290-296, May.
    12. 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.
    13. Stuart Glogoff, 1988. "Reviewing the gatekeepers: A survey of referees of library journals," Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 39(6), pages 400-407, November.
    14. Baccini, Alberto & Barabesi, Lucio, 2011. "Seats at the table: The network of the editorial boards in information and library science," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 5(3), pages 382-391.
    15. Tianwei He, 2009. "International scientific collaboration of China with the G7 countries," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 80(3), pages 571-582, September.
    16. Loet Leydesdorff, 1997. "Why words and co‐words cannot map the development of the sciences," Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 48(5), pages 418-427, May.
    17. 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.
    18. Blaise Cronin, 2009. "A seat at the table," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 60(12), pages 2387-2387, December.
    19. Eugene L. Lawler, 1963. "The Quadratic Assignment Problem," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 9(4), pages 586-599, July.
    20. 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.
    21. Staša Milojević & Cassidy R. Sugimoto & Erjia Yan & Ying Ding, 2011. "The cognitive structure of Library and Information Science: Analysis of article title words," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 62(10), pages 1933-1953, October.
    22. Caroline S. Wagner, 2005. "Six case studies of international collaboration in science," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 62(1), pages 3-26, January.
    23. 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.
    24. Bart Thijs & Wolfgang Glänzel, 2010. "A structural analysis of collaboration between European research institutes," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 19(1), pages 55-65, March.
    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. Urdiales, Cristina & Guzmán, Eduardo, 2024. "An automatic and association-based procedure for hierarchical publication subject categorization," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 18(1).
    2. Walters, William H., 2017. "Do subjective journal ratings represent whole journals or typical articles? Unweighted or weighted citation impact?," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 11(3), pages 730-744.
    3. A. Abrizah & A. Noorhidawati & A. N. Zainab, 2015. "LIS journals categorization in the Journal Citation Report: a stated preference study," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(2), pages 1083-1099, February.
    4. Mu-hsuan Huang & Wang-Ching Shaw & Chi-Shiou Lin, 2019. "One category, two communities: subfield differences in “Information Science and Library Science” in Journal Citation Reports," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 119(2), pages 1059-1079, May.
    5. Baccini, Federica & Barabesi, Lucio & Baccini, Alberto & Khelfaoui, Mahdi & Gingras, Yves, 2022. "Similarity network fusion for scholarly journals," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(1).
    6. Xie, Yundong & Wu, Qiang & Zhang, Peng & Li, Xingchen, 2020. "Information Science and Library Science (IS-LS) journal subject categorisation and comparison based on editorship information," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 14(4).
    7. William H. Walters & Esther Isabelle Wilder, 2015. "Worldwide contributors to the literature of library and information science: top authors, 2007–2012," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 103(1), pages 301-327, April.
    8. 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.
    9. Yu-Wei Chang, 2018. "Examining interdisciplinarity of library and information science (LIS) based on LIS articles contributed by non-LIS authors," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(3), pages 1589-1613, September.
    10. Rons, Nadine, 2018. "Bibliometric approximation of a scientific specialty by combining key sources, title words, authors and references," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 12(1), pages 113-132.

    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. 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.
    2. Bo Wang & Shengbo Liu & Kun Ding & Zeyuan Liu & Jing Xu, 2014. "Identifying technological topics and institution-topic distribution probability for patent competitive intelligence analysis: a case study in LTE technology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 101(1), pages 685-704, October.
    3. Erjia Yan, 2014. "Topic-based Pagerank: toward a topic-level scientific evaluation," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 100(2), pages 407-437, August.
    4. Pin Li & Guoli Yang & Chuanqi Wang, 2019. "Visual topical analysis of library and information science," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 121(3), pages 1753-1791, December.
    5. 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.
    6. Yan, Erjia, 2014. "Research dynamics: Measuring the continuity and popularity of research topics," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 8(1), pages 98-110.
    7. Yosuke Miyata & Emi Ishita & Fang Yang & Michimasa Yamamoto & Azusa Iwase & Keiko Kurata, 2020. "Knowledge structure transition in library and information science: topic modeling and visualization," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(1), pages 665-687, October.
    8. McLevey, John & McIlroy-Young, Reid, 2017. "Introducing metaknowledge: Software for computational research in information science, network analysis, and science of science," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 11(1), pages 176-197.
    9. 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.
    10. Julian Andrés Diaz Tautiva & Felipe Ignacio Rifo Rivera & Sebastian Andrés Barros Celume & Sergio Andrés Rifo Rivera, 2024. "Mapping the research about organisations in the latin american context: a bibliometric analysis," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 74(1), pages 121-169, February.
    11. Yuen-Hsien Tseng & Ming-Yueh Tsay, 2013. "Journal clustering of library and information science for subfield delineation using the bibliometric analysis toolkit: CATAR," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 95(2), pages 503-528, May.
    12. Beibei Hu & Xianlei Dong & Chenwei Zhang & Timothy D. Bowman & Ying Ding & Staša Milojević & Chaoqun Ni & Erjia Yan & Vincent Larivière, 2015. "A lead-lag analysis of the topic evolution patterns for preprints and publications," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 66(12), pages 2643-2656, December.
    13. Chen, Guo & Xiao, Lu, 2016. "Selecting publication keywords for domain analysis in bibliometrics: A comparison of three methods," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 212-223.
    14. Yan, Erjia & Zhu, Yongjun, 2015. "Identifying entities from scientific publications: A comparison of vocabulary- and model-based methods," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 9(3), pages 455-465.
    15. Abhijit Thakuria & Dipen Deka, 2024. "A decadal study on identifying latent topics and research trends in open access LIS journals using topic modeling approach," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 129(7), pages 3841-3869, July.
    16. Bo Liu & Wei Song & Qian Sun, 2022. "Status, Trend, and Prospect of Global Farmland Abandonment Research: A Bibliometric Analysis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(23), pages 1-30, November.
    17. 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.
    18. Jean A. Pratt & Karina Hauser & Cassidy R. Sugimoto, 2012. "Defining the intellectual structure of information systems and related college of business disciplines: a bibliometric analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 93(2), pages 279-304, November.
    19. Rons, Nadine, 2018. "Bibliometric approximation of a scientific specialty by combining key sources, title words, authors and references," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 12(1), pages 113-132.
    20. Yu-Wei Chang, 2018. "Examining interdisciplinarity of library and information science (LIS) based on LIS articles contributed by non-LIS authors," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(3), pages 1589-1613, September.

    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:94:y:2013:i:3:d:10.1007_s11192-012-0849-8. 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.