IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v95y2013i1d10.1007_s11192-012-0881-8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Citation choice and innovation in science studies

Author

Listed:
  • Kyle Siler

    (McMaster University)

Abstract

What are the factors which render an article more likely to be cited? Using social network analysis of citations between published scholarly works, the nascent field around Social Studies of Science is examined from its incipience in 1971 until 2008. To gauge intellectual positioning, closeness centrality and orthodoxy rates are derived from bibliographic networks. Bibliographic orthodoxy is defined as the propensity of an article to cite other highly popular works. Orthodoxy and closeness centrality have differing effects on citation rates, varying across historical periods of development in the field. Effects were modest, but significant. In early time periods, articles with higher orthodoxy rates were cited more, but this effect dissipated over time. In contrast, citations associated with closeness centrality increased over time. Early SSS citation networks were smaller, less structurally cohesive and less modular than later networks. In contrast, later networks were larger, more structurally cohesive, more modular and less dense. These changes to the global SSS knowledge networks are linked to changes in the scientific reward structure ensconced in the network, particularly regarding orthodoxy and closeness centrality.

Suggested Citation

  • Kyle Siler, 2013. "Citation choice and innovation in science studies," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 95(1), pages 385-415, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:95:y:2013:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-012-0881-8
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-012-0881-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-012-0881-8
    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/s11192-012-0881-8?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.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Donald Mackenzie & Fabian Muniesa & Lucia Siu, 2007. "Do Economists Make Markets? On the Performativity of Economics," Post-Print halshs-00149145, HAL.
    2. J Mingers, 2008. "Exploring the dynamics of journal citations: Modelling with s-curves," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 59(8), pages 1013-1025, August.
    3. Ronald S. Burt, 1998. "The Gender Of Social Capital," Rationality and Society, , vol. 10(1), pages 5-46, February.
    4. Rosen, Sherwin, 1981. "The Economics of Superstars," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 71(5), pages 845-858, December.
    5. Mirowski, Philip & Sent, Esther-Mirjam (ed.), 2002. "Science Bought and Sold," University of Chicago Press Economics Books, University of Chicago Press, edition 1, number 9780226538563, September.
    6. Ganz, Marshall Louis, 2000. "Resources and Resourcefulness: Strategic Capacity in the Unionization of California Agriculture, 1959-1966," Scholarly Articles 12641805, Harvard Kennedy School of Government.
    7. McCloskey,Deirdre N., 1994. "Knowledge and Persuasion in Economics," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521436038.
    8. McCloskey,Deirdre N., 1994. "Knowledge and Persuasion in Economics," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521434751.
    9. Leo Katz, 1953. "A new status index derived from sociometric analysis," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 18(1), pages 39-43, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Corinne Cortese & Claire Wright, 2018. "Developing a Community of Practice: Michael Gaffikin and Critical Accounting Research," Abacus, Accounting Foundation, University of Sydney, vol. 54(3), pages 247-276, September.
    2. Saikou Y. Diallo & Christopher J. Lynch & Ross Gore & Jose J. Padilla, 2016. "Identifying key papers within a journal via network centrality measures," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 107(3), pages 1005-1020, June.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Robert Garnett, 2006. "Paradigms and pluralism in heterodox economics," Review of Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(4), pages 521-546.
    2. Turan Yay & Huseyin Tastan, 2010. "Invisible Hand in the Process of Making Economics or on the Method and Scope of Economics," Panoeconomicus, Savez ekonomista Vojvodine, Novi Sad, Serbia, vol. 57(1), pages 61-83, March.
    3. Ioana Negru, 2013. "Revisiting the Concept of Schools of Thought in Economics: The Example of the Austrian School," American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 72(4), pages 983-1008, October.
    4. Claus Dierksmeier, 2011. "The Freedom–Responsibility Nexus in Management Philosophy and Business Ethics," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 101(2), pages 263-283, June.
    5. Graupe, Silja & Steffestun, Theresa, 2018. ""The market deals out profit and losses": Wie ökonomische Standardlehrbücher das unreflektierte Denken in Metaphern fördern," Working Paper Series Ök-38, Cusanus Hochschule für Gesellschaftsgestaltung, Institut für Ökonomie.
    6. McCloskey Deirdre Nansen, 2018. "The Two Movements in Economic Thought, 1700–2000: Empty Economic Boxes Revisited," Man and the Economy, De Gruyter, vol. 5(2), pages 1-20, December.
    7. Rod O'Donnell, 2006. "Keynes's Principles of Writing (Innovative) Economics," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 82(259), pages 396-407, December.
    8. Warren Samuels, 1995. "Some thoughts on multiplicity," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 2(2), pages 287-292.
    9. Yalcintas, Altug, 2012. "İktisat doga bilimlerinin Mekke’si mi oluyor?: Toplumsal ve doga bilimleri iliskisi uzerine bir atıf analizi [Is economics becoming the Mecca of Biology?: A citation analysis of the relationship be," MPRA Paper 43493, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Simon Mohun, 1999. "Markets, Money and Ideology," Working Papers 402, Queen Mary University of London, School of Economics and Finance.
    11. David C. Batten, 1999. "The Mismatch Argument: The Construction of a Housing Orthodoxy in Australia," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 36(1), pages 137-151, January.
    12. Spencer, David A, 2000. "The Demise of Radical Political Economics? An Essay on the Evolution of a Theory of Capitalist Production," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 24(5), pages 543-564, September.
    13. Andrew Yuengert, 2006. "Model selection and multiple research goals: The case of rational addiction," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(1), pages 77-96.
    14. Wilfred Dolfsma & Patrick J. Welch, 2009. "Paradigms and Novelty in Economics: The History of Economic Thought as a Source of Enlightenment," American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 68(5), pages 1085-1106, November.
    15. Mary Morgan, 2001. "Models, stories and the economic world," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(3), pages 361-384.
    16. Michael Perelman, 2011. "Retrospectives: X-Efficiency," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 25(4), pages 211-222, Fall.
    17. Deirdre Nansen McCloskey, 2019. "Lachmann practiced humanomics, beyond the dogma of behaviorism," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer;Society for the Development of Austrian Economics, vol. 32(1), pages 47-61, March.
    18. Irmi Seidl & Clement A Tisdell & Steve Harrison, 2002. "Environmental Regulation of Land Use and Public Compensation: Principles, and Swiss and Australian Examples," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 20(5), pages 699-716, October.
    19. Hugh Rockoff, 1998. "By Way of Analogy: The Expansion of the Federal Government in the 1930s," NBER Chapters, in: The Defining Moment: The Great Depression and the American Economy in the Twentieth Century, pages 125-154, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    20. Peter Maskell & Mark Lorenzen, 2004. "The Cluster as Market Organisation," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 41(5-6), pages 991-1009, May.

    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:95:y:2013:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-012-0881-8. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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.