Boyack, KW; Klavans, R. 2010. Co-Citation Analysis, Bibliographic Coupling, and Direct Citation: Which Citation Approach Represents the Research Front Most Accurately?. JASIST. 61 (12): 2389-2404

[Johan Bollen]

Hi Kevin,

interesting discussion and work!

> Nevertheless, I'm sure I'm not the only one who would love to have  
> more
> information on the actual working front.

I think that is where usage data comes into the picture. It's not the  
end-all-be-all, but may provide some perspective on emerging trends/ 
working fronts.

Kind regards,

Johan.

>
> Cheers!
> Kevin
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics
> [mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU] On Behalf Of David Wojick
> Sent: Saturday, January 08, 2011 11:46 AM
> To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU
> Subject: Re: [SIGMETRICS] Boyack, KW; Klavans, R. 2010. Co-Citation
> Analysis, Bibliographic Coupling, and Direct Citation: Which Citation
> Approach Represents the Research Front Most Accurately?. JASIST. 61  
> (12):
> 2389-2404
>
> Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe):
> http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html
>
> I would think these clustering methods were useful in finding the  
> research
> body, not the front, as it were. By the time attention clusters the  
> front
> has already passed. It is like the difference between prospectors and
> miners. These clusters show us where the producing mines are, not  
> where the
> prospectors are working.
>
> David
>
> At 01:05 PM 1/8/2011, you wrote:
>> Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe):
>> http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html
>>
>> Boyack, KW; Klavans, R. 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 61 (12): 2389-2404.
>>
>> Author Full Name(s): Boyack, Kevin W.; Klavans, Richard
>> Language: English
>> Document Type: Article
>> KeyWords Plus: COMBINING FULL-TEXT; SCIENCE; DOCUMENTS;
>> CLASSIFICATION; MAPS
>>
>> Abstract: In the past several years studies have started to appear
> comparing
>> the accuracies of various science mapping approaches. These studies
> primarily
>> compare the cluster solutions resulting from different similarity
>> approaches, and
>> give varying results. In this study we compare the accuracies of  
>> cluster
>> solutions of a large corpus of 2,153,769 recent articles from the
> biomedical
>> literature (2004-2008) using four similarity approaches: co-citation
>> analysis,
>> bibliographic coupling, direct citation, and a bibliographic  
>> coupling-based
>> citation-text hybrid approach. Each of the four approaches can be
> considered
>> a way to represent the research front in biomedicine, and each is  
>> able to
>> successfully cluster over 92% of the corpus. Accuracies are  
>> compared using
>> two metrics-within-cluster textual coherence as defined by the  
>> Jensen-
>> Shannon divergence, and a concentration measure based on the grant- 
>> to-
>> article linkages indexed in MEDLINE. Of the three pure citation-based
>> approaches, bibliographic coupling slightly outperforms co-citation
> analysis
>> using both accuracy measures; direct citation is the least accurate  
>> mapping
>> approach by far. The hybrid approach improves upon the bibliographic
> coupling
>> results in all respects. We consider the results of this study to be
>> robust given
>> the very large size of the corpus, and the specificity of the  
>> accuracy
>> measures
>> used.
>>
>> Addresses: [Boyack, Kevin W.] SciTech Strategies Inc, Albuquerque,  
>> NM 87122
>> USA; [Klavans, Richard] SciTech Strategies Inc, Berwyn, PA 19312 USA
>>
>> Reprint Address: Boyack, KW, SciTech Strategies Inc, Albuquerque,  
>> NM 87122
>> USA.
>>
>> E-mail Address: kboyack at mapofscience.com; rklavans at mapofscience.com
>> ISSN: 1532-2882
>> DOI: 10.1002/asi.21419
>> fulltext: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/asi.21419/abstract