IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v45y1999i2d10.1007_bf02458434.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The “own-language preference”: Measures of relative language self-citation

Author

Listed:
  • L. Egghe

    (LUC
    UIA, IBW)

  • R. Rousseau

    (LUC
    UIA, IBW)

  • M. Yitzhaki

    (Bar-Ilan University)

Abstract

It has already been pointed out that the foreign language barrier is probably the greatest impediment to the free flow and transfer of information. This barrier is even growing as scientists of more and more countries publish in their own languages. Almost all studies addressing the language barrier problem were conducted from an Anglo-Saxon perspective, limiting their scope to English-language sources or English speakers. Little research has been devoted to studying and measuring language preference among non-English-speaking scholars. This article reviews measures proposed in former studies such as the “relative own-language preference” indicator, and the “straight odds ratio”, pointing out their advantages and drawbacks. Two new refined measures (in both “raw” and normalised versions) are offered, claiming to be free of these drawbacks, and thus enabling a better and more reliable comparison between journals of different languages. Practical use of the proposed measures is illustrated by applying them to findings of a former language-citation study done on nine sociology journals.

Suggested Citation

  • L. Egghe & R. Rousseau & M. Yitzhaki, 1999. "The “own-language preference”: Measures of relative language self-citation," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 45(2), pages 217-232, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:45:y:1999:i:2:d:10.1007_bf02458434
    DOI: 10.1007/BF02458434
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/BF02458434
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/BF02458434?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Zaida Chinchilla-Rodríguez & Grisel Zacca-González & Benjamín Vargas-Quesada & Félix Moya-Anegón, 2015. "Latin American scientific output in Public Health: combined analysis using bibliometric, socioeconomic and health indicators," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(1), pages 609-628, January.
    2. Maxim N. Kotsemir & Tatiana E. Kuznetsova & Elena G. Nasybulina & Anna G. Pikalova, 2015. "Empirical Analysis of Multinational S&T Collaboration Priorities –The Case of Russia," HSE Working papers WP BRP 53/STI/2015, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    3. Victoria Bakare & Grant Lewison, 2017. "Country over-citation ratios," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 113(2), pages 1199-1207, November.
    4. Maxim Kotsemir, 2012. "Dynamics of Russian and World Science through the Prism of International Publications," Foresight and STI Governance (Foresight-Russia till No. 3/2015), National Research University Higher School of Economics, vol. 6(1), pages 38-58.
    5. Liu, Weishu & Hu, Guangyuan & Tang, Li, 2018. "Missing author address information in Web of Science—An explorative study," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 12(3), pages 985-997.
    6. Leo Egghe & Ronald Rousseau, 2004. "How to measure own-group preference? A novel approach to a sociometric problem," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 59(2), pages 233-252, February.
    7. Ed J. Rinia & Thed N. van Leeuwen & Eppo E. W. Bruins & Hendrik G. van Vuren & Anthony F. J. van Raan, 2002. "Measuring knowledge transfer between fields of science," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 54(3), pages 347-362, July.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:45:y:1999:i:2:d:10.1007_bf02458434. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.