Search results

Citation content in academic papers and academic monographs promotes the knowledge flow among different publications. However, existing citation content analysis (CCA) focuses on academic papers and monographs have not received much research attention. We want to know if monographs are appropriate objects of CCA and whether existing methods of analyzing citation in papers are suitable for citation in monographs. Therefore, this paper aims to learn more about features of cited references and citation content in monographs and compare the characteristic of citation pattern between monographs and papers.

The authors manually annotate the references and syntactic citation content in academic monographs published by Morgan & Claypool and automatically extracted the references and citation content from academic papers published by Public Library of Science. Five features in two types citation pattern, namely, pattern of cited reference (including year, source and mention frequency of reference) and pattern of citation content (including location, length of citation content) are used to examine similarities and differences between monographs and papers.

The results indicate that between monographs and papers, differences are shown in location, length of citation content and year, source of reference, whereas frequency of mention of reference is similar.

Previous studies have explored the patter of citation content in academic papers. However, none of the existing literature, as far as the authors know, has considered the citation content in academic monographs and the similarities or differences among academic documents when studying the citation pattern.

The methodology and findings are presented of an empirical study comparing local citation patterns with the holdings lists of a number of sources of journal articles. These sources were the British Library Document Supply Centre (BLDSC) and the BL inside service, library holdings, ProQuest Direct, SearchBank, EiText and a linking system including both the Geobase database and the BLDSC. The value of local citation figures is discussed, as is the concept of a “core” of journal titles, from both theoretical and practical perspectives. Using these figures to represent the local use of journal articles, the coverage of the document sources was found to vary widely. Unsurprisingly, the BLDSC was found to offer the widest coverage. Newer, electronic systems generally fared less well, but may offer other advantages.

The purpose of this paper is to sensitize researchers to qualitative citation patterns that characterize original research, contribute toward the growth of knowledge and, ultimately, promote scientific progress.

This study describes how ideas are intertextually inserted into citing works to create new concepts and theories, thereby contributing to the growth of knowledge. By combining existing perspectives and dimensions of citations with Foucauldian theory, this study develops a typology of qualitative citation patterns for the growth of knowledge and uses examples from two classic works to illustrate how these citation patterns can be identified and applied.

A clearer understanding of the motivations behind citations becomes possible by focusing on the qualitative patterns of citations rather than on their quantitative features. The proposed typology includes the following patterns: original, conceptual, organic, juxtapositional, peripheral, persuasive, acknowledgment, perfunctory, inconsistent and plagiaristic.

In contrast to quantitative evaluations of the role and value of citations, this study focuses on the qualitative characteristics of citations, in the form of specific patterns of citations that engender original and novel research and those that may not. By integrating Foucauldian analysis of discourse with existing theories of citations, this study offers a more nuanced and refined typology of citations that can be used by researchers to gain a deeper semantic understanding of citations.

The purpose of this study was to determine the rate of self‐citation in the library and information science literature. A sample of 1,058 articles was examined. 50% of the articles examined contained at least one self‐citation. Articles that were reports of research, that were written by a faculty member, that addressed a theoretical topic, or that had multiple authors were all more likely to have to higher self‐citation rates. The self‐citation rate of 50% was higher than that reported in studies of self‐citation rates in the sciences and social sciences. However, the percentage of self‐citations as related to total citations of 6.6% falls between the percentage reported in the sciences and that reported in other social sciences.

A citation study of the 692 staff that makes up unit of assessment 58 (archaeology), in the 2001 UK Research Assessment Exercise (RAE) was undertaken. Unlike earlier studies, which were obliged to make assumptions on who and what had been submitted for assessment, these were, for the first time available from the RAE Web site. This study, therefore, used the specific submission details of authors and their publications. Using the Spearman rank‐order correlation coefficient, all results showed high statistically significant correlation between the RAE result and citation counts. The results were significant at 0.01 per cent. The findings confirm earlier studies. Given the comparative cost and ease of citation analysis, it is recommended that, correctly applied, it should be the initial tool of assessment for the RAE. Panel members would then exercise their judgement and skill to confirm final rankings.

The purpose of this paper is to analyze the disciplinary orientation of scientific publications that were mentioned on different social media platforms, focussing on their differences and similarities with citation counts.

Social media metrics and readership counts, associated with 500,216 publications and their citation data from the Web of Science database, were collected from Altmetric.com and Mendeley. Results are presented through descriptive statistical analyses together with science maps generated with VOSviewer.

The results confirm Mendeley as the most prevalent social media source with similar characteristics to citations in their distribution across fields and their density in average values per publication. The humanities, natural sciences, and engineering disciplines have a much lower presence of social media metrics. Twitter has a stronger focus on general medicine and social sciences. Other sources (blog, Facebook, Google+, and news media mentions) are more prominent in regards to multidisciplinary journals.

This paper reinforces the relevance of Mendeley as a social media source for analytical purposes from a disciplinary perspective, being particularly relevant for the social sciences (together with Twitter). Key implications for the use of social media metrics on the evaluation of research performance (e.g. the concentration of some social media metrics, such as blogs, news items, etc., around multidisciplinary journals) are identified.

This paper aims to map information literacy literature in social sciences and humanities published during the period of 2001-2012.

The data for the study are obtained from Scopus, accessible at www.scopus.com. Study used the Transformative Activity Index (TAI) and relative citation impact (RCI) to know the impact of most productive countries and prolific institutions. The SCImago Journal and Country Rank accessible at www.scimagojr.com/ was used to determine the SCImago Journal Rank and source normalized impact per paper.

The study found that 1990 documents originating from 79 countries were published in this study area. These papers are published in 160 journals with an average ∼12.51 papers per journal. These papers have been cited 10,025 times with ∼5.0. average citations per publication. Study also found that information literacy literature is published in 16 languages and the majority of the papers are in English, 1,879 (94.4 per cent). The highest growth of publications (106.7 per cent) was found in 2005. The USA contributed the highest number, 1,035 (52 per cent) papers. Moreover, of the 15 most productive countries, three recorded TAIs >100, and 12 countries recorded TAIs <100. In all, 160 institutions worldwide have contributed in information literacy research. Study also found that maximum literature published on the subject by a single author is 828 (41.6 per cent). Universidad de Granada, Granada, Spain has produced the highest number of papers (24, or 1.2 per cent) and received 61 (0.6 per cent) citations, while University of Strathclyde has the highest RCI (∼2.7) for its publications. Pintos, María from Universidad de Granada has published the maximum number of papers (18) that have been cited 78 times.

The study endeavors to showcase information literacy research outcomes in social sciences and humanities. It involves quantitative analysis of the literature in this domain using bibliographic elements such as keywords, authors, affiliation, publication and citations.

No study has been conducted so far to map the information literacy literature in social sciences and humanities. Study will be useful in understanding the progress on information literacy in the area of social sciences and humanities. The study is significant for social scientists to foster further research in this emerging area.

Anyone who has tried to review studies relating to use of academic libraries may argue that a great deal of research exists on college students and how they use their libraries. Studies of reading habits and library use among college students have been appearing for more than fifty years, and the diligent student can compile an impressive bibliography of these studies. In spite of all we have learned about student interaction with library resources, there is still much we do not know.

The purpose of this paper is to explore knowledge creation processes in small innovative hi‐tech firms operating in the software industry.

The research framework examines specific action and interaction processes aiming at creating knowledge. This exploratory research is constituted by five case studies, each of them being represented by a small Canadian software firm. Analysis draws upon four sources of data. A total of 15 interviews (three per case) had been conducted and subsequently transcribed and coded using qualitative software – Nvivo 07.

The results of the study reveal that interaction processes permitting the creation of knowledge in small hi‐tech firms can take place via: formal meetings; informal communities; project teams; external interaction; and information technology‐tools. Rapid prototyping represents the kernel activity of knowledge creation through action. Details of the results, implications of the findings, and conclusions are presented and discussed.

This paper is based on a limited number of case studies, therefore empirical results cannot be generalized. Future research on larger samples of small Canadian software firms is needed, using the same eligibility criteria and comparing the same knowledge creation processes as those explored in this study. Other promising avenues of inquiry include such questions as the way small knowledge‐based firms operating in turbulent environments organize internally to create knowledge, the conditions enabling the generation of knowledge, and the particular “spaces” in which knowledge creation occurs in these firms.

The systematic description and comparison of knowledge creation processes in each explored company contribute to the better understanding of specific “interaction” and “action” processes through which knowledge is generated, enabling practitioners in small innovative hi‐tech firms to design appropriate policies and procedures for enhancing knowledge creation behaviors of their employees.

This research is among the first and most exhaustive exploratory and comparative studies carried out in the Canadian context of small firms operating in the software industry.

The aim of this article is to study a locally‐oriented and book‐based research field using two Swedish language sources. Knowledge about citation patterns outside journal‐based, English language databases is scarce; thus a substantial part of research in the humanities and the social sciences is neglected in bibliometric studies.

Citation characteristics (publication type, language, gender and age) in the journal Tidskrift för Litteraturvetenskap (2000‐2009) and in grant applications (2006‐2009) are studied. The datasets are analyzed further, adopting an author‐co‐citation approach for depicting and comparing the “intellectual base” of the field.

It is shown that monographs and anthologies are the main publication channel in Swedish literary research. English, followed by Swedish, is the major language, and the gender of authors seems to influence citation practices. Furthermore, a common intellectual base of literary studies that is independent of publication type and language could be identified.

Bibliometric analysis of fields within the humanities needs to go beyond established databases and materials. The extensive use of recent English language monographs in Swedish literary studies informs the acquisition policy of university libraries serving literature scholars.

Citation analysis of non‐English sources offers further knowledge about scholarly fields with a local and “rural” profile. The approach of using references in grant applications provides a novel and promising venue for bibliometric research.