Abstract
What makes a scientific article significant? This paper-part of a larger study which will examine how various kinds of significance can be related to one another in a coherent theoretical framework-focusses on the processes by which new knowledge claims are being integrated into the cognitive structure when they are cited in other papers. Citations appear both as “threads” linking the citing papers to the existing literature in the field, and as elements fulfilling specific functions within the arguments made in these papers. We have found that (1) it is misleading to equate every article with a single knowledge claim, let alone with an attempt to construct “a fact”; (2) even when the same “sentence” is cited repeatedly, it can be put to quite different uses in the citing papers; and (3) the process of codification of scientific knowledge through the use of references appears to be far more complex and multi-dimensional than citation context analyses focussing on the use and the gradual disappearance of modalities would lead us to believe. Some consequences for the use use of citation analysis to reconstruct cognitive structures will be discussed.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes and references
G. N. GILBERT, Referencing as persuasion,Social Studies of Science, 7 (1977) 113–122.
S. COZZENS, Taking the measure of science: A review of citation theories,Newsletter of the International Society for the Sociology of Knowledge, 8 (May, 1981) 16.
N. KAPLAN, The norms of citation behavior: Prolegomena to the footnote,American Documentation, 16 (1965) 179–184; G. N. GILBERT, 1977.Op. cit. note 1 Referencing as persuasion,Social Studies of Science, 7 (1977) 113–122; H. G. SMALL, Cited documents as concept symbols,Social Studies of Science, 8 (1978) 327–340.
M. H. MacROBERTS, B. R. MacROBERTS, Testing the Ortega Hypothesis: Facts and artifacts,Scientometrics, 12 (1987) 293–295.
L. LEYDESDORFF, Towards a theory of citation,Scientometrics, 12 (1987) 287–291.
See also: H. R. BERNARD, P. D. KILLWORTH, Informant accuracy in social network data IV: A comparison of clique-level structure in behavioral and cognitive network data,Social Networks, 2 (1980) 191–218.
W. V. O. QUINE, Carnap and logical truth, in:Logic and Language: Studies Dedicated to Professor Rudolf Carnap, Reidel, Dordrecht, 1962, p. 63.
Cf. M. HESSE,Revolutions and Reconstructions in the Philosophy of Science, Harvester Press, London, 1980.
Each of these levels may be associated with specific units of analysis, e.g. disoiplines with journals, concepts with words, etc. See also: K. E. STUDER, D. E. CHUBIN,The Cancer Mission. Social Contexts of Biomedical Research. Sage, Beverly Hills, etc., 1980, 269f.; L. LEYDESDORFF, The development of frames of references,Scientometrics, 9 (1986) 122; L. LEYDESDORFF, Words and Co-Words as Indicators of the Intellectual Organization of the Sciences, Paper presented at theXIth Annual Meeting of the Society for the Social Study of Science (4S), Worcester, Nov. 1987.
B. LATOUR,Science in Action, Open University Press, Milton Keynes, 1987.
It is indeed ironic, that the most radical critics of the empiricist tradition, such asLatour resort ultimately to such a simplistic view of scientific knowledge. (Ibid.).
K. KNORR,The Manufacture of Knowledge: An Essay on the Constructivist and Contextual Nature of Science, Pergamon Press, New York, 1981.
D. BLOOR,Knowledge and Social Imagery. Routledge & Kegan Paul, London/Boston, 1976; B. BARNES,Interests and the Growth of Knowledge, Routledge & Kegan Paul, London, 1977.
G. MYERS, Texts as knowledge claims: The social construction of two biology articles,Social Studies of Science, 15 (1985) 593–630.
R. D. WHITLEY,The Intellectual and Social Organization of the Sciences, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1984.
T. PINCH, Towards an analysis of scientific observation: The externality and evidential significance of observational reports in physics,Social Studies of Science, 15 (1985) 3–36.
Latour andWoolgar as well asCozzens used citation context analysis in order to trace the transformations (loss of modalities) which a knowledge claim undergoes when it is cited. See B. LATOUR, S. WOOLGAR,Laboratory Life, Sage, Beverly Hills, 1979; and S. COZZENS, Comparing the sciences: Citation context analysis of papers from Neuropharmacology and the Sociology of Science,Social Studies of Science, 15 (1985), 127–153. Citation context analysis offers an excellent opportunity to examine the structure of knowledge, but the analysis has been used most often in order to study the social processes of citing behavior.Latour most explicitly examines articles as if they were only complicated (rhetorical) devices designed to provide the necessary defense systems against any and all opponents to a knowledge claim. See particularly his 1987,op. cit., note 11. B. LATOUR,Science in Action, Open University Press, Milton Keynes, 1987.
For an earlier sociological study of this debate see: G. N. GILBERT, M. MULKAY,Opening Pandora's Box. A Sociological Analysis of Scientists' Discourse, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1984.
The four articles are: H. J. SIPS, A. K. GROEN, J. M. TAGER, Plasma membrane transport of analine is rate limiting for its metabolism in rat-liver parenchymal cells,FEBS Letters, 119 (1980) 271.
The four articles are: H. V. WESTERHOFF, A. L. M. SIMONETTI, K. Van DAM, The hypothesis of localized chemiosmosis is unsatisfactory,Biochemical Journal, 200 (1981) 193.
The four articles are: B. J. SCHOLTE, A. R. SCHUITEMA, P. W. POSTMA, Isolation of IIIGlc of the phosphoenolpyruvate-dependent glucose phosphotransferase system of salmonella typhimurium,Journal of Bacteriology, 148 (1981) 257.
The four articles are: R. L. BERNSTEIN, C. ROSSIER, R. Van DRIEL, M. BRUNNER, G. GERISCH, Folate deaminase and cyclic-AMP phosphodiesterase in dictyostelium discoideum-their regulation by extracellular cyclic-AMP and folic acid,Cell Differentiation, 10 (1981) 79.
Interview with Prof. dr.K. van Dam, January 8, 1987.
Sips et al.,op. cit., nt. 21 The four articles are:, p. 271.
PINCH,op. cit., note 17.
R. E. BURTON, R. W. KLEBER, The ‘half-time’ of some scientific and technical literature,American Documentation, 11 (1960) 18; D. De SOLLA PRICE, Networks of scientific papers,Science, 149 (1965) 510–515.
See T. S. KUHN'sStructure of Scientific Revolutions (University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1962) “anomaly” has a meaning only in the light of a theory being in crisis. See also: L. LAUDAN,Progress and its Problems, University of California Press, Berkeley, etc., 1977.
M. HESSE, 1980.Op. cit., note 8.
“When the assumption of structural equivalence within content categories is violated, therefore, the erroneously aggregated actor categories should be disaggregated until they are composed solely of actors who are at least equivalent under a weak criterion of equivalence.” [R. S. BURT, Network data from archival records, in: R. S. BURT, M. J. MINOR (Eds),Applied Network Analysis, Sage, Beverly Hills, etc., 1983, p. 171 f.].
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Amsterdamska, O., Leydesdorff, L. Citations: Indicators of significance?. Scientometrics 15, 449–471 (1989). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02017065
Received:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02017065