Hacia las métricas de contextoclasificación de citas en Web of Science

  1. Enrique Orduña-Malea 1
  1. 1 Universidad Politécnica de Valencia
    info

    Universidad Politécnica de Valencia

    Valencia, España

    ROR https://ror.org/01460j859

Revista:
Anuario ThinkEPI

ISSN: 1886-6344

Año de publicación: 2022

Volumen: 16

Volumen: 1

Tipo: Artículo

DOI: 10.3145/THINKEPI.2022.E16A32 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openAcceso abierto editor

Otras publicaciones en: Anuario ThinkEPI

Objetivos de desarrollo sostenible

Resumen

The purpose of this note is to describe the new citation context classification feature provided by Web of Science, in which citations received by publications are classified into five categories (Back-ground, Basis, Support, Differ, and Discuss). To exemplify the functionality, two case studies have been carried out: one involving a journal (Profesional de la información; 1,604 publications) and the other, an author (Loet Leydesdorff; 341 publications). Both cases reflect the still low coverage of classified citations, which currently limits the use of this functionality. Finally, some of the questions that arise with the use of these context metrics (precision, comprehension, simplification, representativeness, comparability, lan-guage, evaluative use, effects, and extrapolation) are discussed.

Referencias bibliográficas

  • Bornmann, Lutz; Daniel, Hans-Dieter (2008). “What do citation counts measure? A review of studies on citing behavior”. Journal of documentation, v. 64, n. 1, pp. 45-80. https://doi.org/10.1108/00220410810844150
  • Clarivate Analytics (2022a). “New WoS February 18 release notes”. Clarivate, 18 febrero. https://clarivate.com/webofsciencegroup/release-notes/wos/new-wos-february-18-release-notes
  • Clarivate Analytics (2022b). “New WOS May 12 release notes. 12 de mayo”. Clarivate, 12 mayo. https://clarivate.com/webofsciencegroup/release-notes/wos/new-wos-may-12-release-notes
  • Cozzens, Susan E. (1989). “What do citations count? The rhetorical-first model”. Scientometrics, v. 15, n. 5-6, pp. 437-447. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02017064
  • Cronin, Blaise (1981). “The need for a theory of citing”. Journal of documentation, v. 37, n. 1, pp. 16-24. https://doi.org/10.1108/eb026703
  • Cronin, Blaise (1984). The Citation Process: the role and significance of citations in scientific communication. London: Taylor Graham. ISBN: 978 0 947568 01 8
  • Cronin, Blaise (1998). “Metatheorizing citation”. Scientometrics, v. 43, n. 1, pp. 45-55. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02458393
  • Cronin, Blaise; Snyder, Herbert W.; Rosenbaum, Howard; Martinson, Anna; Callahan, Ewa (1998). “Invoked on the Web”. Journal of the American society for information science, v. 49, n. 14, pp. 1319-1328. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-4571(1998)49:14%3C1319::AID-ASI9%3E3.0.CO;2-W
  • Garfield, Eugene (1998). “Random thoughts on citationology: Its theory and practice”. Scientometrics, v. 43, n. 1, pp. 69-76. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02458396
  • Gilbert, G. Nigel (1977). “Referencing as persuasión”. Social studies of science, v. 7, n. 1, pp. 113-122. https://doi.org/10.1177/030631277700700112
  • Glänzel, Wolfgang; Debackere, Koenraad; Thijs, Bart; Schubert, András (2006). “A concise review on the role of author self-citations in information science, bibliometrics and science policy”. Scientometrics, v. 67 n. 2, pp. 263-277. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-006-0098-9
  • Latour, Bruno (1987). Science in action: How to follow scientists and engineers through society. Cambridge, MA, USA: Harvard University Press. ISBN: ISBN: 978 0 674792913
  • Leydesdorff, Loet (1998). “Theories of citation?”. Scientometrics, v. 43, n. 1, pp. 5-25. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02458391
  • Luhmann, Niklas (2012). Theory of society (v. 1). Stanford, CA, USA: Stanford University Press. ISBN: 978 0 804739504
  • Ma, Lai (2022). “Information, platformized”. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, first online. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24713
  • Merton, Robert K. (1973). The sociology of science: Theoretical and empirical investigations. Chicago, IL, USA: University of Chicago press. ISBN: 0 226 52092 7
  • Moed, Henk F. (2005). Citation analysis in research evaluation. Berlin: Springer. ISBN: 978 1 4020 3714 6
  • Singh-Chawla, Dalmeet (2022). “Should AI have a role in assessing research quality?”. Nature news, 14 octubre. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-022-03294-3
  • Small, Henry (1982). “Citation context analysis”. In: Dervin, Brenda; Voigt, Melvin J. (eds.). Progress in communication sciences. Norwood, NJ: Ablex, pp. 287-310. ISBN: 0 89391 060 0
  • Small, Henry (2004). “On the shoulders of Robert Merton: Towards a normative theory of citation”. Scientometrics, v. 60, n. 1, pp. 71-79. https://doi.org/10.1023/b:scie.0000027310.68393.bc
  • Tahamtan, Imán; Bornmann, Lutz (2022). “The Social Systems Citation Theory (SSCT): A proposal to use the social systems theory for conceptualizing publications and their citations links”. Profesional de la información, v. 31, n. 4. https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2022.jul.11
  • Thelwall, Mike (2006). “Interpreting social science link analysis research: A theoretical framework”. Journal of the American Society for information science and technology, v. 57, n. 1, pp. 60-68. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.20253
  • Van-Raan, Anthony F. J. (1998). “In matters of quantitative studies of science the fault of theorists is offering too little and asking too much”. Scientometrics, v. 43, n. 1, pp. 129-139. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02458401
  • Wouters, Paul (1999). “Beyond the Holy Grail: From citation theory to indicator theories”. Scientometrics, v. 44, n. 3, pp. 561-580. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02458496
  • Yutong, Fei; Bertin, Marc (2022). “The multilingual aspect of citation contexts”. In: 26th International Conference on Science and Technology Indicators. Granada 7-9 septiembre. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6957504
Fuente de los datos: Dialnet