Bibliography for Citing Theory, Behavior and Context

Mon Aug 26 11:33:04 EDT 2013

Dear all,

Having sent this information to Loet, I decided it was important enough 
to share with The Group. I regret that it isn't available in a shorter 
form, but I consider the paper (and the papers cited) of at least 
historical interest.

http://info.ils.indiana.edu/~davisc/BertramDissertation.pdf

Cordially,

Charles Davis
_______________________________
Charles H. Davis, BSc, MA, PhD
Senior Fellow, Informatics
http://soic.iu.edu/
Indiana University at Bloomington
http://mypage.iu.edu/~davisc

Quoting "Bornmann, Lutz" <lutz.bornmann at GV.MPG.DE>:

> Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe):
> http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html
>
> You can find an (more or less up to date) overview on papers on
> citing behavior, citation theory etc. in the attached paper. However,
> it would be interesting to analyze the papers quantitatively.
>
> Lutz
>
> From: ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics
> [mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU] On Behalf Of Kevin Boyack
> Sent: Monday, August 12, 2013 9:23 PM
> To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU
> Subject: [SIGMETRICS] Bibliography for Citing Theory, Behavior and Context
>
> Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe):
> http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html
> Dear David and All,
>
> I don't think Yves is suggesting that there is nothing left to be
> learned, but rather that some of the posts to this topic have seemed
> ignorant of the extensive history on this topic. I agree with both
> views - that much history has been ignored, and that there is a huge
> amount left to learn.
>
> My suggestion is that we, as a community, put together a bibliography
> on the subject. This will serve to inform us from the perspective of
> history (which is extensive), and also help us know of recent work
> that can help us figure out where to go next. To that end, I
> volunteer to start the bibliography. I am by no means an expert in
> this area, but rather have been an interested observer, collecting
> literature. The attached list is not in any way exhaustive - it
> doesn't even include all of the works that have been mentioned in
> this thread (which I have renamed). My interest comes from the
> perspective of citation context (and related topics), which builds
> directly on the earlier work on citation theory, behavior,
> motivation, reasoning, classification, etc. Thus, you'll see that the
> attached file is slanted in the citation context direction. This list
> is not completely my own - some of the references have come from Dick
> Klavans and (particularly) Henry Small, who has done much work in
> citation content/context.
>
> You will see a number of computer science and biomedical references
> in this list. My perception is that we are not paying enough
> attention to relevant work being done in those fields. Biomedical and
> computer scientists are currently doing far more work with full text
> sources than are we. Unfortunately, there is very little
> cross-citation between similar efforts in the three fields.
>
> In any case, to those of you who are interested, please add to the
> bibliography and re-post it. I think a joint effort can be of great
> benefit to us all.
>
> Best regards,
> Kevin
>
>
>
> From: ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics
> [mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU] On Behalf Of David Wojick
> Sent: Monday, August 12, 2013 12:16 PM
> To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU<mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU>
> Subject: Re: [SIGMETRICS] The Wisdom of Citing Scientists
>
> Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe):
> http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html
> Dear Yves,
>
> If you are claiming that this topic has been exhausted by past work,
> such that there is nothing important left to discover, then I
> disagree strongly. Exciting new methods, data and insights are being
> brought to bear, ranging from altmetrics to network theory. In fact
> one can argue that when one applies a new approach the vast existing
> literature is largely irrelevant by definition. (For example I am
> sure that no one has applied my work on the structure of reasoning,
> so I need not look to see what they have found.)
>
> I suspect this is one reason why historical citations are often found
> only after the research is done.
>
> Regards,
>
> David Wojick
>
> At 10:01 AM 8/12/2013, you wrote:
> Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe):
> http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html Hello all
>
> With all due respect for everyone discussing here the many reasons why people
> cite a given paper, I cannot but be struck by the tendency of some to
> reinvent
> the wheel or think (and write) as if nobody had raised those very questions
> decades before... One cannot imagine a physics discussion group where someone
> would write a comment saying "I think that apples do not fall at
> constant speed"
> or "I think classical mechanics does not apply at the atomic level".
> It is taken
> for granted that before talking physics one must READ the previous
> literature.
> WHy should it be different in scientometrics?
>
> Here it seems to be accepted that one can lunch a "serious"
> discussion about the
> "fact" that there "can be" negative citations...
>
> As a rader of sigmetrics I find a bit depressing the lack of respect for
> previous work. I do not have the time to construct a reference list on the
> question of the many kinds of reasons for citing but at least a good minimum
> beginning would be Blaise Cronin 1984 (!) book on "The citation
> process". A more
> recent review is Loet's 1998  paper in Scientometrics on "Theories of
> citations" But the literature is huge...
>
> I guess you will now have understood why I rarely write on those discussion
> groups... But it is Sunday and an exception does not change a rule...
>
> :)
>
> Cordially to all
>
> Yves Gingras
>
>
> Le 11/08/13 11:05, « Loet Leydesdorff »
> <loet at LEYDESDORFF.NET<mailto:loet at LEYDESDORFF.NET>> a écrit :
> Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe):
> http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html
> Dear David,
> This is precisely the approach about "reasons" which one can
> attribute to citations in the first article in Scientometrics 1989.
> For example, a citation can function as a warrant or a legitimation.
> Best,
> Loet
> On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 3:40 PM, David Wojick
> <dwojick at craigellachie.us<mailto:dwojick at craigellachie.us>> wrote:
> Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe):
> http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html
> The concept of the "reason" for a citaion is ambiguous because there
> are different kinds of reasons, some of which have been alluded to in
> our discussion. There are psychological reasons such as motivation,
> sociological reasons such as convention, strategic reasons, etc.
> Being a logician my interest is simply the role that the citation
> plays in the reasoning presented in the article. Science is after all
> a system of reasoning, often linked by citations. Every article is
> itself a complex structure of reasoning. I just wrote about this at
>
> <<http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2013/07/10/the-issue-tree-structure-of-expressed-thought/> http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2013/07/10/the-issue-tree-structure-of-expressed-thought/ 
> ><http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2013/07/10/the-issue-tree-structure-of-expressed-thought/>
> http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2013/07/10/the-issue-tree-structure-of-expressed-thought/.<http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2013/07/10/the-issue-tree-structure-of-expressed-thought/>
> For example a citation may be part of the introductory historical
> narrative or it may be offering evidence supporting a strong claim,
> and this is a significant difference. We might call these the
> epistemic reasons for the citations. What role does the citation play
> in the reasoning?
> The point is that there are different kinds of reasons, which need to
> be sorted out in any scientific inquiry into the reasons for
> citations.
> David Wojick
> On Aug 10, 2013, at 9:56 AM, James Hartley <
> <<mailto:j.hartley at KEELE.AC.UK> mailto:j.hartley at KEELE.AC.UK
> ><mailto:j.hartley at KEELE.AC.UK>
> j.hartley at KEELE.AC.UK<mailto:j.hartley at KEELE.AC.UK>> wrote:
> Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe):
> <<http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html>
> http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html
> ><http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html>
> http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html
> Peter Willett ( <<mailto:p.willett at sheffield.ac.uk>
> mailto:p.willett at sheffield.ac.uk ><mailto:p.willett at sheffield.ac.uk>
> <<mailto:p.willett at sheffield.ac.uk> mailto:p.willett at sheffield.ac.uk
> ><mailto:p.willett at sheffield.ac.uk>
> p.willett at sheffield.ac.uk<mailto:p.willett at sheffield.ac.uk>)
> published an interesting paper in the Journal of Documentation, 2012,
> 69, 1 pp??
> Showing that most readers found it difficult to detect why authors
> had cited their references..
>
> I (James Hartley) ( <<mailto:J.hartley at keele.ac.uk>
> mailto:J.hartley at keele.ac.uk ><mailto:J.hartley at keele.ac.uk>
> <<mailto:J.hartley at keele.ac.uk> mailto:J.hartley at keele.ac.uk
> ><mailto:J.hartley at keele.ac.uk>
> J.hartley at keele.ac.uk<mailto:J.hartley at keele.ac.uk>) suggested 8
> reasons for citing other work (based on other scholars views)  and
> argued that one should count citations in the reference lists and not
> in the texts to avoid overcounting.  (Scientometrics. 92,2, 313-317.)
>
>
> From: ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics [
> mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU] On Behalf Of David Wojick
> Sent: 10 August 2013 14:40
> To:  <<mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU>
> mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU
> ><mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU>
> <<mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU>
> mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU
> ><mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU>
> SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU<mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU>
> Subject: Re: [SIGMETRICS] The Wisdom of Citing Scientists
>
> Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe):
> <<http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html>
> http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html
> ><http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html>
> <<http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html>
> http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html
> ><http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html>
> http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html
> I did a small study that found the majority of citations occurring in
> the introductory part of most of the articles. Over 60% of the
> citations occurred in the first 25% of the text on average. This
> section of the article is basically an historical narrative that
> explains the origin and nature of the research problem being reported
> on. The cited works need not have directly influenced the research
> being reported.
>
> Then the article typically goes on to explain what was done and what
> was found. Here the citations often identify the sources of methods
> used or data or some such. Direct influence is much more likely but
> the percentage of citations may be low. Finally there may be a
> broader discussion section, with relatively more citations.
>
> The point is that many citations may not be indicators of direct
> influence (or impact), but rather of historical relevance. In some
> cases the citations may well be found only after the research is done.
> David Wojick
> On Aug 9, 2013, at 12:45 PM, "Smalheiser, Neil" <
> <<mailto:Nsmalheiser at PSYCH.UIC.EDU> mailto:Nsmalheiser at PSYCH.UIC.EDU
> ><mailto:Nsmalheiser at PSYCH.UIC.EDU>
> <<mailto:Nsmalheiser at PSYCH.UIC.EDU> mailto:Nsmalheiser at PSYCH.UIC.EDU
> ><mailto:Nsmalheiser at PSYCH.UIC.EDU>
> Nsmalheiser at PSYCH.UIC.EDU<mailto:Nsmalheiser at PSYCH.UIC.EDU>> wrote:
> Since Katy covered one aspect of this issue, let me raise a
> complementary aspect that I have not seen discussed yet in this forum.
> When people DO cite references in a paper, they do so possibly for
> very different reasons, each with a different rationale and pattern
> of citing.
> 1.        Ideally, in my opinion, an author should accurately cite
> the previous works that influenced them in the research that they are
> reporting. A research paper tells a story, and it is important to
> know what papers they read, and when, and how they were influenced.
> So if they were unaware of some relevant research at the time, it is
> not important (and even intellectually misleading) to cite it!
> 2.        Another reason that authors omit citations is on purpose -
> they wish to make their own contribution seem new and fresh, and even
> if they were aware of some prior relevant work, they may find some
> excuse not to cite it [e.g. it was done in Drosophila but my study is
> in rats].
> 3.      More often, authors attempt to identify all relevant prior
> research, in a prospective attempt to satisfy reviewers who are
> likely to give them a hard time if they don't. Some authors even do
> this out of scholarliness, though that is not a particularly valued
> attribute in experimental science. As review articles appear on a
> given topic, it is often acceptable to simply cite one or two reviews
> which hides the impact of the primary papers (except for those that
> are most closely relevant to the present article, regardless of their
> impact to the field at large). This also means that papers will
> preferentially cite the most similar prior papers.
> 4.      Even more often, authors go out of their way to cite papers
> by potential reviewers or editorial board members of the journal that
> is considering the paper, or folks likely to be reviewing their
> grants.
> 5.      A subtle variation of this is that an author will want to
> cite papers that appeared in prestigious journals, and avoid papers
> that were published in obscure or questionable places, to make their
> own paper look more classy and more likely to be reviewed favorably.
> 6.      Some papers, particularly methods papers or famous papers,
> are almost pop references that provide bonding between author and
> reader. Citing the Watson-Crick double-helix paper (or the Mullis PCR
> method paper) is not just citing that paper, but is really a nod to a
> lot of related connotations and historical associations. These papers
> are highly cited because they are celebrities (famous for being
> famous), which does reflect impact but of a different sort.
> So counting citations to measure impact is like characterizing a
> person's health by heart rate - it means something; it is important
> for sure; but you need to know a lot more to interpret it properly.
>
> Neil
> From: ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics [
> <<mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU>
> mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU
> ><mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU>
> <<mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU>
> mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU
> ><mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU>
> mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU] On Behalf Of Katy Borner
> Sent: Friday, August 09, 2013 8:29 AM
> To:  <<mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU>
> mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU
> ><mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU>
> <<mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU>
> mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU
> ><mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU>
> SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU<mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU>
> Subject: Re: [SIGMETRICS] The Wisdom of Citing Scientists
>
> Adminstrative info for SIGMETRICS (for example unsubscribe):
> <<http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html>
> http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html
> ><http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html>
> <<http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html>
> http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html
> ><http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html>
> http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html
> Good discussion. Quick comment:
> Work by Bollen et al. shows that science maps generated from download
> (click stream) data have a substantially enlarged medical area.
> Medical papers, e.g., freely available via Medline, are
> downloaded/read/used widely by practitioners/doctors interested to
> improve health/save lives. However, these practitioners/doctors might
> not necessarily produce papers with citation references.
> Ideally, 'research evaluation' should aim to capture output and outcomes.
> Many of us spent a substantial amount of our time training others,
> developing educational materials, in administration, or improving
> legal regulations. Research Networking systems like VIVO and others,
> see  <<http://nrn.cns.iu.edu/> http://nrn.cns.iu.edu
> ><http://nrn.cns.iu.edu/>  <<http://nrn.cns.iu.edu/>
> http://nrn.cns.iu.edu ><http://nrn.cns.iu.edu/>
> http://nrn.cns.iu.edu, provide access to more holistic data (papers,
> grants, courses; some systems are connected to even more detailed
> annual faculty report data) on scholar's roles in the S&T system--as
> researchers, mentors, administrators.
> k
> <<http://scimaps.org/maps/map/a_clickstream_map_of_83/>
> http://scimaps.org/maps/map/a_clickstream_map_of_83/
> ><http://scimaps.org/maps/map/a_clickstream_map_of_83/>
> <<http://scimaps.org/maps/map/a_clickstream_map_of_83/>
> http://scimaps.org/maps/map/a_clickstream_map_of_83/
> ><http://scimaps.org/maps/map/a_clickstream_map_of_83/>
> http://scimaps.org/maps/map/a_clickstream_map_of_83/
> Bollen, Johan, Lyudmila Balakireva, Luís Bettencourt, Ryan Chute,
> Aric Hagberg, Marko A. Rodriguez, and Herbert Van de Sompel. 2009.
> "Clickstream Data Yields High-Resolution Maps of Science." PLoS One 4
> (3): 1-11.
>
> On 8/9/2013 3:22 AM, Bornmann, Lutz wrote:
> The Wisdom of Citing Scientists
> Lutz Bornmann
> <<http://arxiv.org/find/cs/1/au:+Bornmann_L/0/1/0/all/0/1>
> http://arxiv.org/find/cs/1/au:+Bornmann_L/0/1/0/all/0/1
> ><http://arxiv.org/find/cs/1/au:+Bornmann_L/0/1/0/all/0/1> , Werner
> Marx <<http://arxiv.org/find/cs/1/au:+Marx_W/0/1/0/all/0/1>
> http://arxiv.org/find/cs/1/au:+Marx_W/0/1/0/all/0/1
> ><http://arxiv.org/find/cs/1/au:+Marx_W/0/1/0/all/0/1>
> (Submitted on 7 Aug 2013)
>
> This Brief Communication discusses the benefits of citation analysis
> in research evaluation based on Galton's "Wisdom of Crowds" (1907).
> Citations are based on the assessment of many which is why they can
> be ascribed a certain amount of accuracy. However, we show that
> citations are incomplete assessments and that one cannot assume that
> a high number of citations correlate with a high level of usefulness.
> Only when one knows that a rarely cited paper has been widely read is
> it possible to say (strictly speaking) that it was obviously of
> little use for further research. Using a comparison with 'like' data,
> we try to determine that cited reference analysis allows a more
> meaningful analysis of bibliometric data than times-cited analysis.
>
> URL:  <<http://arxiv.org/abs/1308.1554>
> http://arxiv.org/abs/1308.1554 ><http://arxiv.org/abs/1308.1554>
> <<http://arxiv.org/abs/1308.1554> http://arxiv.org/abs/1308.1554
> ><http://arxiv.org/abs/1308.1554> http://arxiv.org/abs/1308.1554
>
> ---------------------------------------
>
> Dr. Dr. habil. Lutz Bornmann
> Division for Science and Innovation Studies
> Administrative Headquarters of the Max Planck Society
> Hofgartenstr. 8
> 80539 Munich
> Tel.: +49 89 2108 1265 <tel:%2B49%2089%202108%201265>
> Mobil: +49 170 9183667 <tel:%2B49%20170%209183667>
> Email:  <<mailto:bornmann at gv.mpg.de> mailto:bornmann at gv.mpg.de
> ><mailto:bornmann at gv.mpg.de>  <<mailto:bornmann at gv.mpg.de>
> mailto:bornmann at gv.mpg.de ><mailto:bornmann at gv.mpg.de>
> bornmann at gv.mpg.de<mailto:bornmann at gv.mpg.de>
> WWW:  <<http://www.lutz-bornmann.de/> http://www.lutz-bornmann.de
> ><http://www.lutz-bornmann.de/>  <<http://www.lutz-bornmann.de/>
> http://www.lutz-bornmann.de ><http://www.lutz-bornmann.de/>
> www.lutz-bornmann.de<http://www.lutz-bornmann.de/>
> <<http://www.lutz-bornmann.de/> http://www.lutz-bornmann.de
> ><http://www.lutz-bornmann.de/>
> ResearcherID:  <<http://www.researcherid.com/rid/A-3926-2008>
> http://www.researcherid.com/rid/A-3926-2008
> ><http://www.researcherid.com/rid/A-3926-2008>
> <<http://www.researcherid.com/rid/A-3926-2008>
> http://www.researcherid.com/rid/A-3926-2008
> ><http://www.researcherid.com/rid/A-3926-2008>
> http://www.researcherid.com/rid/A-3926-2008
>
>
>
>
> Yves Gingras
>
> Professeur
> Département d'histoire
> Centre interuniversitaire de recherche
> sur la science et la technologie (CIRST)
> Chaire de recherche du Canada en histoire
> et sociologie des sciences
> Observatoire des sciences et des technologies (OST)
> UQAM
> C.P. 8888, Succ. Centre-Ville
> Montréal, Québec
> Canada, H3C 3P8
>
> Tel: (514)-987-3000-7053
> Fax: (514)-987-7726
>
> http://www.chss.uqam.ca
> http://www.cirst.uqam.ca<http://www.cirst.uqam.ca/>
> http://www.ost.uqam.ca
>