The structure of the Arts & Humanities Citation Index: A mapping on the basis of aggregated citations among 1,157 journals

Using the Arts & Humanities Citation Index (A&HCI) 2008, we apply mapping techniques previously developed for mapping journal structures in the Science and Social Science Citation Indices. Citation relations among the 110,718 records were aggregated at the level of 1,157 journals specific to the A&HCI, and the journal structures are questioned on whether a cognitive structure can be reconstructed and visualized. Both cosine-normalization (bottom up) and factor analysis (top down) suggest a division into approximately twelve subsets. The relations among these subsets are explored using various visualization techniques. However, we were not able to retrieve this structure using the ISI Subject Categories, including the 25 categories which are specific to the A&HCI. We discuss options for validation such as against the categories of the Humanities Indicators of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, the panel structure of the European Reference Index for the Humanities (ERIH), and compare our results with the curriculum organization of the Humanities Section of the College of Letters and Sciences of UCLA as an example of institutional organization

Conceptualising dimensions of bibliometric assessment: From resource allocation systems to evaluative landscapes

The purpose of this paper is to discuss the conceptualisation of bibliometric analyses in terms of the levels on which they are performed, adding contextual factors to the dimension where the size of the unit being analysed is considered. Based on empirical investigations of resource allocation systems and research evaluation practices, as well as the previous literature conceptualising bibliometric analyses, a framework based on Whitley’s (2000) notion of research fields as ‘reputational work organisations’, is discussed. The results suggest adding a contextual ‘reputational dimension’ to the size-based dimension distinguishing between micro-, meso- and macro-level analyses. Furthermore, we propose that ‘evaluative landscapes’ (Brandter, 2017) might be a fruitful approach for further analysing how complex and multifaceted landscapes of research assessment affects the individual researcher

‘A very good field in which to operate’: patent literature and the post-war information industry

Patent systems rely on information infrastructures that enable searchers, examiners, and other specialists not only to consider legal requirements but also to gather market intelligence, competitor analysis, and other strategic business information. These resources are today considered fundamental to the assessment of a patent system's performance in terms of its reliability and legitimacy. However, this potential was constrained historically by the multiplicity of formats, languages, and time frames in which patents in different jurisdictions were published and issued. This essay traces how a secondary market for patent information materialised from a distinct commercial engagement with these peculiarities of patents as documents. In doing so, the essay explores how patent literature was abstracted, centralised, and filtered through private information providers such as Derwent Publications Ltd that began offering customised patent information products and services in the post-war decades

Advancing to the next level: the quantified self and the gamification of academic research through social networks

Measurement of performance using digital tools is now commonplace, even in institutional activities such as academic research. The phenomenon of the “quantified self” is particularly evident in academic social networks. Björn Hammarfelt, Sarah de Rijcke, Alex Rushforth, Iris Wallenburg and Roland Bal argue that ResearchGate and similar services represent a “gamification” of research, drawing on features usually associated with online games, like rewards, rankings and levels. This carries obvious dangers, potentially promoting an understanding of the professional self as a product in competition with others. But quantification of the self in this way can also be seen as a way of taking control of one’s own (self)-evaluation. A similar pattern may be observed in healthcare and the rise of platforms carrying patient “experience” ratings and direct feedback on clinical performance

On the importance of AI research beyond disciplines

As the impact of AI on various scientific fields is increasing, it is crucial to embrace interdisciplinary knowledge to understand the impact of technology on society. The goal is to foster a research environment beyond disciplines that values diversity and creates, critiques and develops new conceptual and theoretical frameworks. Even though research beyond disciplines is essential for understanding complex societal issues and creating positive impact it is notoriously difficult to evaluate and is often not recognized by current academic career progression. The motivation for this paper is to engage in broad discussion across disciplines and identify guiding principles fir AI research beyond disciplines in a structured and inclusive way, revealing new perspectives and contributing to societal and human wellbeing and sustainability

Discipline

Discipline is commonly used to denote particular areas of knowledge, research and education. Yet, the concept is often not very well defined or even explicitly discussed when used in knowledge organization and related fields. The aim of this article is to encourage and facilitate further reflections on academic disciplines, while at the same time offering insights on how this elusive concept might be understood. An overarching argument is that discipline should foremost be understood in relation to institutional and organizational features and this is what distinguishes it from related terms such as, field, domain or topic. The paper reviews the etymology and history of the concept, it discusses attempts to define and conceptualise disciplines and it offers insights on how disciplines can be studied. Regardless of our views of disciplines, either as inherently out-dated constructs or as important features of a well-functioning academia, it is concluded that further precision or care in explicating the concept is needed

Following the Footnotes : A Bibliometric Analysis of Citation Patterns in Literary Studies

This thesis provides an in-depth study of the possibilities of applying bibliometric methods to the research field of literary studies. The four articles that constitute the backbone of this thesis focus on different aspects of references and citations in literary studies: from the use of references in the text to citation patterns among 34 literature journals. The analysis covers both an Anglo-Saxon context as well as research in Swedish literary studies, and the materials used include Web of Science data, references in the Swedish literature journal TFL (Tidskrift för Litteraturvetenskap) and applications to the Swedish Research Council (Vetenskapsrådet). A study is also made of the influence of one single publication—Walter Benjamin’s Illuminations—and its impact in literary studies and in wider academia. The results from the four articles are elaborated upon using a theoretical framework that focuses on differences in the social and intellectual organization of research fields. According to these theories literary studies can be described as a fragmented, heterogenic, interdisciplinary and ‘rural’ field with a diverse audience. The fragmented and rural organization of the field is reflected in low citation frequencies as well as in the difficulties in discerning research specialities in co-citation mappings, while the analysis of the intellectual base (highly cited authors) is an example of the heterogenic and interdisciplinary character of the field, as it includes authors from many fields across the humanities and the social sciences. The thesis emphasizes that bibliometric studies of research fields in the humanities need to incorporate non-English and non-journal publications in order to produce valid and fair results. Moreover, bibliometric methods must be modified in accordance with the organization of research in a particular field, and differences in referencing practices and citation patterns ought to be considered. Consequently, it is advised that bibliometric measures for evaluating research in these fields should, if used at all, be applied with great caution.© Björn Hammarfelt 2012</p

Taking Comfort in Points : The Appeal of the Norwegian Model in Sweden

Purpose: The “Norwegian model” has become widely used for assessment and resource allocation purposes. This paper investigates why this model has becomes so widespread and influential. Approach: A theoretical background is outlined in which the reduction of “uncertainty” is highlighted as a key feature of performance measurement systems. These theories are then drawn upon when revisiting previous studies of the Norwegian model, its use, and reactions to it, in Sweden. Findings: The empirical examples, which concern more formal use on the level of universities as well as responses from individual researchers, shows how particular parts—especially the “publication indicator”—are employed in Swedish academia. The discussion posits that the attractiveness of the Norwegian model largely can be explained by its ability to reduce complexity and uncertainty, even in fields where traditional bibliometric measurement is less applicable. Research limitations: The findings presented should be regarded as examples that can be used for discussion, but one should be careful to interpret these as representative for broader sentiments and trends. Implications: The sheer popularity of the Norwegian model, leading to its application in contexts for which it was not designed, can be seen as a major challenge for the future. Originality: This paper offers a novel perspective on the Norwegian model by focusing on its general “appeal”, rather than on its design, use or (mis)-use

What is a discipline? : The conceptualization of research areas and their operationalization in bibliometric research

This paper highlights disadvantages of conceptual impreciseness, and advocates further attention to the labels and concepts used when classifying clusters or groups based on bibliographic data. The main focus of the analysis is on the concept of ‘discipline’ and how it is used in bibliometric research, but the implications concern a broader array of related terms.