Search results

The purpose of this study is to examine the historical continuity of James March’s contributions to management scholarship by tracing the co-citations that appear within the textual contexts of articles in premier management journals that cite both March and Simon’s 1958 book Organizations and other works co-authored by March.

This study uses within-citation context analysis to examine 522 passages from eight premier management journals that contain co-citations to Organizations and any another work co-authored by March. This entails coding the citing passages to identify the specific knowledge claims from March’s works and how citing authors used them, which establishes linkages between the content in different works of March’s works as used by citing authors.

This study finds that 31 other works by March are co-cited within the same citation contexts along with Organizations. The vast majority (71%) of these co-citations of March’s later works are to Cyert and March’s A Behavioral Theory of the Firm. The four other most highly co-cited works are Levitt and March (1988); March (1991); Cohen et al. (1972); and Levinthal and March (1993). Of the eight summary codes used in the analysis corresponding with the contents of Organizations, two summary codes – “Routines and Programs” and “Cognitive Limits” – accounted for the clear majority (60.1%) of all co-citation contexts in this study.

This study only examined the co-citations to Organizations in eight premier journals in organization studies, and a larger selection of journals might have altered the results to some degree. A truly comprehensive analysis might consider every citation context in the published literature where citing authors jointly mention any two or more of March’s works. Given the extraordinarily large number of citations to March’s works, this was impractical and unfeasible.

A time-bound and rigorous review of co-citations in common contexts allows both scholars and practitioners to recognize the genuine threads of theory presented by leading scholars and trace them through subsequent works to see how theories have evolved both in practice – reflected in empirical work – and in conception – reflected in theoretical development.

Prior research into citation methodology has shown the proliferation of references over time. It is not uncommon for contemporary works to list 100 or more references for a single paper. This research encourages and facilitates a greater discipline in understanding and using citations by tracing the roots of citations and the extent of their importance in citing works.

This paper presents an historical perspective of the influence of James March’s body of scholarship by tracking within context co-citations that link a seminal early work of March to his most cited works in premier journals. This study tracks specific knowledge claims that have persisted throughout March’s corpus of scholarship. This historical method is a systematic approach to tracing how subsequent scholarship ties together and uses multiple works to support specific knowledge claims, enabling an objective analysis of the commonalities among a scholar’s works over time. This is the first example of research using this bibliographic method to form an historical perspective of a seminal author or a classic work.

Citation contexts have been found useful in many scenarios. However, existing context-based recommendations ignored the importance of diversity in reducing the redundant issues and thus cannot cover the broad range of user interests. To address this gap, the paper aims to propose a novelty task that can recommend a set of diverse citation contexts extracted from a list of citing articles. This will assist users in understanding how other scholars have cited an article and deciding which articles they should cite in their own writing.

This research combines three semantic distance algorithms and three diversification re-ranking algorithms for the diversifying recommendation based on the CiteSeer^X data set and then evaluates the generated citation context lists by applying a user case study on 30 articles.

Results show that a diversification strategy that combined “word2vec” and “Integer Linear Programming” leads to better reading experience for participants than other diversification strategies, such as CiteSeer^X using a list sorted by citation counts.

This diversifying recommendation task is valuable for developing better systems in information retrieval, automatic academic recommendations and summarization.

The originality of the research lies in the proposal of a novelty task that can recommend a diversification context list describing how other scholars cited an article, thereby making citing decisions easier. A novel mixed approach is explored to generate the most efficient diversifying strategy. Besides, rather than traditional information retrieval evaluation, a user evaluation framework is introduced to reflect user information needs more objectively.

This study explored the influence of Dervin’s sensemaking methodology (SMM).

Citation context analysis was used to identify the most influential SMM concepts in 948 articles citing 34 SMM-related studies by Dervin that were published between 1983 and 2017. Moreover, the bibliometric method and content analysis were incorporated to examine the disciplines and research topics influenced by the SMM-related studies and the role of cited content in SMM-related studies.

The influence of SMM is concentrated in information behavior research in the field of library and information science (LIS). The 1992 book chapter From the mind’s eye of the user was most frequently cited, followed by the first SMM study from 1983; 14 of the 18 content categories were relevant to SMM. “Sensemaking,” at the core of SMM, was the most influential cited concept, primarily cited from the 1983 SMM-related study. Although the SMM was developed as a research method, it has not been primarily applied to design research methods in other studies.

This study explored the interdisciplinary influence of Dervin’s SMM from several aspects and demonstrated the complex information dynamics between SMM-related works and citing articles.

The Method section of research articles offers an important space for researchers to describe their research processes and research objects they utilize. To understand the relationship between these research materials and their representations in scientific publications, this paper offers a quantitative examination of the citation contexts of the most frequently cited references in the Method section of the paper sample, many of which belong to the category of research material objects.

In this research, the authors assessed the extent to which these references appear in the Method section, which is regarded as an indicator of the instrumentality of the reference. The authors also examined how this central measurement is connected to its other citation contexts, such as key linguistic attributes and verbs that are used in citation sentences.

The authors found that a series of key linguistic attributes can be used to predict the instrumentality of a reference. The use of self-mention phrases and the readability score of the citances are especially strong predictors, along with boosters and hedges, the two measurements that were not included in the final model.

This research focuses on a single research domain, psychology, which limits the understanding of how research material objects are cited in different research domains or interdisciplinary research contexts. Moreover, this research is based on 200 frequently cited references, which are unable to represent all references cited in psychological publications.

With the identified relationship between instrumental citation contexts and other characteristics of citation sentences, this research opens the possibility of more accurately identifying research material objects from scientific references, the most accessible scholarly data.

This is the first large-scale, quantitative analysis of the linguistic features of citations to research material objects. This study offers important baseline results for future studies focusing on scientific instruments, an increasingly important type of object involved in scientific research.

The peer review history for this article is available at: 10.1108/OIR-03-2021-0171

Citations have been used as a common basis to measure the academic accomplishments of scientific books. However, traditional citation analysis ignored content mining and without consideration of citation equivalence, which may lead to the decline of evaluation reliability. Hence, this paper aims to integrate multi-level citation information to conduct multi-dimensional analysis.

In this paper, books’ academic impacts were measured by integrating multi-level citation resources, including books’ citation frequencies and citation-related contents. Specifically, firstly, books’ citation frequencies were counted as the frequency-level metric. Secondly, content-level metrics were detected from multi-dimensional citation contents based on finer-grained mining, including topic extraction on the metadata and citation classification on the citation contexts. Finally, differential metric weighting methods were compared with integrate the multi-level metrics and computing books’ academic impacts.

The experimental results indicate that the integration of multiple citation resources is necessary, as it can significantly improve the comprehensiveness of the evaluation results. Meanwhile, compared with the type differences of books, disciplinary differences need more attention when evaluating the academic impacts of books.

Academic impact assessment of books via integrating multi-level citation information can provide more detailed evaluation information and cover shortcomings of methods based on single citation data. Moreover, the method proposed in this paper is publication independent, which can be used to measure other publications besides books.

The purpose of this paper is to propose a novel citation recommendation system that inputs a text and recommends publications that should be cited by it. Its goal is to help researchers in finding related works. Further, this paper seeks to explore the effect of using relational features in addition to textual features on the quality of recommended citations.

In order to propose a novel citation recommendation system, first a new relational similarity measure is proposed for calculating the relatedness of two publications. Then, a recommendation algorithm is presented that uses both relational and textual features to compute the semantic distances of publications of a bibliographic dataset from the input text.

The evaluation of the proposed system shows that combining relational features with textual features leads to better recommendations, in comparison with relying only on the textual features. It also demonstrates that citation context plays an important role among textual features. In addition, it is concluded that different relational features have different contributions to the proposed similarity measure.

A new citation recommendation system is proposed which uses a novel semantic distance measure. This measure is based on textual similarities and a new relational similarity concept. The other contribution of this paper is that it sheds more light on the importance of citation context in citation recommendation, by providing more evidences through analysis of the results. In addition, a genetic algorithm is developed for assigning weights to the relational features in the similarity measure.

The purpose of this article was to provide an outline of the citation practices of “Evolving to a new dominant logic for marketing” by Vargo and Lusch (2004) to identify and discuss the most prominent research topics in which citations were used and to suggest future research based on the results of the analysis.

The authors used a comprehensive framework of citation practices based on iterations of previous literature to analyze the relevant literature, which they identified by accessing, systematically and rigorously, every available contribution matching a set of criteria. The authors then categorized these contributions and highlighted the main topics of research interest in each category.

The findings identify some of the factors in the continuous development of SDL, the way this new marketing logic permeated the scientific debate, the infusion of Vargo and Lusch (2004) into several contributions framed in the new logic or justified through it, and a general perception of a default reference. Additionally, the findings highlight the main topics of research interest in each category.

The analysis enabled the detection of the original paper's influence through advances in service studies, pollination into other fields of research and continuous scientific debate. The authors have highlighted several avenues for research and proposed future research directions.

This research analyzed the effects of the spread of the SDL cornerstone article and emphasized the advantage of using an in-depth approach to the analysis of studies through a framework applied to more than 4,600 studies.

The purpose of this paper is to present a narrative review of studies on the citing behavior of scientists, covering mainly research published in the last 15 years. Based on the results of these studies, the paper seeks to answer the question of the extent to which scientists are motivated to cite a publication not only to acknowledge intellectual and cognitive influences of scientific peers, but also for other, possibly non‐scientific, reasons.

The review covers research published from the early 1960s up to mid‐2005 (approximately 30 studies on citing behavior‐reporting results in about 40 publications).

The general tendency of the results of the empirical studies makes it clear that citing behavior is not motivated solely by the wish to acknowledge intellectual and cognitive influences of colleague scientists, since the individual studies reveal also other, in part non‐scientific, factors that play a part in the decision to cite. However, the results of the studies must also be deemed scarcely reliable: the studies vary widely in design, and their results can hardly be replicated. Many of the studies have methodological weaknesses. Furthermore, there is evidence that the different motivations of citers are “not so different or ‘randomly given’ to such an extent that the phenomenon of citation would lose its role as a reliable measure of impact”.

Given the increasing importance of evaluative bibliometrics in the world of scholarship, the question “What do citation counts measure?” is a particularly relevant and topical issue.

The purpose of this study is to diagnose the trajectory of influential conceptual articles in developing a research stream. The authors uncover the knowledge diffusion through influential conceptual articles and identify characteristics that make conceptual articles influential in their field.

This study draws on scientometrics, specifically an integrated approach combining quantitative citation counts with qualitative citation practices analysis that offers a comprehensive understanding of the nature and context of citations. The authors use the case of customer engagement – a prominent contemporary marketing and service research stream – to explore the trajectory of influential articles in shaping a new research stream.

This research shows that influential articles contribute to the reciprocal knowledge diffusion within and outside their home discipline. They provide anchor points for conceptual framing, conceptual refining and conceptual reconciliation – three application patterns of citations that are pivotal to navigate theory discovery and theory justification in a research field.

The study analyzes the early impact period of two influential customer engagement articles to understand the developments leading to the establishment of a new research stream. Future research drawing on automated citation and bibliometric methods may consider extended time periods.

This study traces the trajectory of influential articles in marketing and service research. The authors identify characteristics of influential conceptual articles, and recommend practices to develop a conceptual paper with the potential for an influential trajectory. It shows that while marketing and service research has a tradition of “borrowing” theories from other fields, seminal articles “lend” theories to other fields.

To ascertain the diffusion and influence of Savolainen's ELIS model and its use as a theoretical and/or methodological basis for research.

A context citation analysis was made of the work where this researcher published his model. Analysis covered the year of publication, the type of work and the subject matter of the citing documents concerned. In-context citations were analysed for their frequency in each citing text, style, location and content cited.

The ELIS model received 18.5 cites/year. 20.2 per cent of them corresponded to papers published in journals in other areas, mainly computer science. The average of cites per paper was 1.8; 64.5 percent of the citing works cited them only once. 60 per cent of the cites were considered essential. Only 13.7 per cent of these cites appear in theory or methods. 37 per cent of the citing documents contained no concept relating to the model.

The method used focuses on the most direct context of a cite (sentence or paragraph), but isolates it from the general context (full document, other documents by the author or their social capital). It has, however, allowed this research issue to be dealt with under laboratory conditions and revealed nuances hidden by the absolute number of cites.

It has become evident that the dissemination and influence of the ELIS model are less than what the total number of cites indicates and that it has scarcely been incorporated into research design. Despite its popularity, it is not being validated and/or refuted by way of empirical data.