On the analogy between the evolution of thermodynamicand bibliometric systems: a breakthrough or justa bubble?

This paper presents an in depth study of an interesting analogy, recently proposed by Prathap (Scientometrics 87(3):515-524, 2011a), between the evolution of thermodynamic and bibliometric systems. The goal is to highlight some weaknesses and clarify some ‘‘dark sides'' in the conceptual framework of this analogy, discussing the formal validity and practical meaning of the concepts of Energy, Exergy and Entropy in bibliometrics. Specifically, this analogy highlights the following major criticalities: (1) the definitions of E and X are controversial, (2) the equivalence classes of E and X are questionable, (3) the parallel between the evolution of thermodynamic and bibliometric systems is forced, (4) X is a non-monotonic performance indicator, and (5) in bibliometrics the condition of ‘‘thermodynamic perfection'' is questionable. Argument is supported by many analytical demonstrations and practical example

DISSERTATION

This particular research aims to investigate the p-index or performance indicator proposed by Prathap in 2010. The concept of analogy between such branches of physics as mechanical and electrical physics, kinetics, thermodynamics and scientometric field was assumed, and it seems to be an incredibly interesting consilience. Perceiving standard bibliometric measures as an energy which each paper carries, allow us to operate with these numbers in a new way. P index, which is calculated as p=X1/3 =(iC)1/3=(c/pC)1/3=(c2/p)1/3, where C is the total number of citations received and P is the total number of publications, were computed for 499 top productive authors affiliated with Malaysian institutuions, who were retrieved from Web of Science Database..

Theories of Informetrics and Scholarly Communication

Scientometrics have become an essential element in the practice and evaluation of science and research, including both the evaluation of individuals and national assessment exercises. Yet, researchers and practitioners in this field have lacked clear theories to guide their work. As early as 1981, then doctoral student Blaise Cronin published "The need for a theory of citing" —a call to arms for the fledgling scientometric community to produce foundational theories upon which the work of the field could be based. More than three decades later, the time has come to reach out the field again and ask how they have responded to this call. This book compiles the foundational theories that guide informetrics and scholarly communication research. It is a much needed compilation by leading scholars in the field that gathers together the theories that guide our understanding of authorship, citing, and impact

Theories of Informetrics and Scholarly Communication

Scientometrics have become an essential element in the practice and evaluation of science and research, including both the evaluation of individuals and national assessment exercises. Yet, researchers and practitioners in this field have lacked clear theories to guide their work. As early as 1981, then doctoral student Blaise Cronin published The need for a theory of citing - a call to arms for the fledgling scientometric community to produce foundational theories upon which the work of the field could be based. More than three decades later, the time has come to reach out the field again and ask how they have responded to this call. This book compiles the foundational theories that guide informetrics and scholarly communication research. It is a much needed compilation by leading scholars in the field that gathers together the theories that guide our understanding of authorship, citing, and impact

Theories of Informetrics and Scholarly Communication

Scientometrics have become an essential element in the practice and evaluation of science and research, including both the evaluation of individuals and national assessment exercises. Yet, researchers and practitioners in this field have lacked clear theories to guide their work. As early as 1981, then doctoral student Blaise Cronin published "The need for a theory of citing" —a call to arms for the fledgling scientometric community to produce foundational theories upon which the work of the field could be based. More than three decades later, the time has come to reach out the field again and ask how they have responded to this call. This book compiles the foundational theories that guide informetrics and scholarly communication research. It is a much needed compilation by leading scholars in the field that gathers together the theories that guide our understanding of authorship, citing, and impact

THE FABRIC OF KNOWLEDGE. TOWARDS A DOCUMENTAL HISTORY OF LATE ANALYTIC PHILOSOPHY

The dissertation aims at presenting an innovative approach (called \uabdocumental history\ubb) to the study of the history of contemporary philosophy, focusing on the case of Late Analytic Philosophy (LAP). The methodological innovation consists in the application of citation analysis techniques, drawn from the field of scientometrics, to the analysis of the structure and the dynamics of LAP. The main empirical results are presented in four scientometric analyses of LAP, which focus, respectively, on the scientometric distributions of LAP, the co-citation mapping of LAP, the epistemological function of citations within LAP, and the aging of LAP literature. The main theoretical result is the \uabfeedback hypothesis\ubb, according to which the \uabdocumental space\ubb of LAP shapes the intellectual behavior of analytic philosophers. Thus, the documental space of LAP should be accounted as a factor of philosophical change, besides the traditional intellectual and sociological factors. A key aspect of the dissertation is the interdisciplinary integration of distant fields, such as scientometrics, history of philosophy, and philosophy of science

Psychoanalysis as an Interdisciplinary Science: From 19th Century Neuropsychology to Modern Neuropsychoanalysis

This dissertation explores interdisciplinarity from three perspectives. It emphasizes the intellectual foundations of Sigmund Freuds Project for a Scientific Psychology (1895) and Alexander Bains Mind and Body (1872). It argues that these neural networks were similar and created via borrowed and integrated knowledge. This thesis contributes to the scholarship on Bain and Freud by presenting an analysis of their models, thus, providing a qualitative comparative analysis to make explicit the continuities and discontinuities in their ideas. In comparing their works, this study finds that there is no evidence that Freud borrowed directly from Bain when he created the Project; the similarities in their models are likely due the common academic milieus they emerged from. The discontinuities, however, were due to the neuron doctrine and the new scientific methods that emerged between 1872 and 1895. Part two of this thesis posits that psychoanalysis began as an interdisciplinary field founded on the Project, and that this interdisciplinarity continues today in the field of neuropsychoanalysis. This study finds that psychoanalysis has had a long history of interaction with the various psy-disciplines, particularly experimental psychology, and that the connection between the creation of the Project and the emergence of the field of neuropsychoanalysis was not a linear one. A conceptual bibliometric citation analysis demonstrates that, while experimental academic psychologists were testing the validity of Freudian concepts via empirical methods, they were actually borrowing knowledge from psychoanalysis. This analysis expands on the work of Hornstein (1992) and presents the first quantitative analysis of the intense relationship between psychology and psychoanalysis as psychologists were testing Freudian concepts. This thesis ends with an exploration of the recently created field of neuropsychoanalysis and provides the scholarship with the first bibliometric citation analysis of the field. In so doing, this portrait of the discipline presents an analysis of the psychological concepts this field is interested in studying, the methods used, and an examination of the extent of collaboration between psychoanalysts and neuroscientists. This is followed with a brief discussion on the clinical and theoretical relevance of neuroscience to psychoanalysis and the increasing concern regarding the validity of imaging techniques