Search results

The aim of this paper is to analyse the structure of evolving debates in online discussion forums to see how science‐related debates evolve over time.

A graph‐based approach is applied to analyse the structure of graphs of connected terms in online debates. A number of different graph properties, such as the Densification Power Law (DPL), diameter (γ) and effective diameter (δ), are used to observe the properties of the graphs over time.

The graphs of connected terms obey the DPL and the effective diameters (δ) of the graphs tend to shrink as the debates progress. Slight fluctuations can occur, however, when new terms are integrated into the graphs. These two properties suggest that a graph of connected terms can be modelled through a number of blocks of terms, each of which becomes densely connected over time as indicated by δ and DPL plots.

This paper proposes observing the dynamic changes of evolving debates by using graphs of connected terms. The structures and properties of these graphs may be useful for understanding the evolution of public debates about controversial science‐related topics, such as embryonic stem cell research, and to track debates that can potentially explode into major issues.

The purpose of this study is to attempt to suggest an adjustment in Iran's national publication strategy based on the country‐specific Matthew core journals. It investigates Iran's performance in its national journal set, and proposes a more prominent journal subset.

A citation analysis method is applied to study Iran's scientific performance in its national journal set. The data were extracted from the Science Citation Index at Web of Science and JCR and imported to SPSS for further refinement and analysis.

The results showed that Iran experienced comparatively considerable citation loss. Surplus citations are concentrated in a small number of journals, presented as Iran's positive Matthew core journals. The results also confirm a relatively poor publication strategy adopted by Iranian scientists and that a publication concentration does not necessarily enhance the chance of being widely cited.

These findings imply that Iran needs to watch more vigilantly the functioning of its science system. To improve its presence at the international level, Iran should re‐orient its publication strategy towards a more prominent one. This may be the case for similar science systems, where the emphasis is given to quantity rather than quality.

Country‐specific Matthew core journals, with serious citation competition, can serve as an important criterion to monitor the functioning of science systems regarding publication strategy. This is the first empirical study to employ the concept to suggest improvements in a country's publication strategy.