Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Citation analysis and the complex problem of intellectual influence

  • Published:
Scientometrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

“... No man knoweth how he came to the knowledge which he hath obtained.” (Francis Bacon)

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. E. GARFIELD, Citation indexes in sociological and historical research,American Documentation, 14 (1963) 289.

    Google Scholar 

  2. N. KAPLAN, The norms of citation behavior: Prolegomena to the footnote,American Documentation, 16 (1965) 179–184.

    Google Scholar 

  3. S. A. GOUDSMIT, Citation analysis,Science, 183 (1968) 28.

    Google Scholar 

  4. J. COLE, S. COLE, Measuring the quality of sociological research: Problems in the use of the ‘Science Citation Index’,The American Sociologist, 6 (1971) 23.

    Google Scholar 

  5. D. CHUBIN, On the use of the Science citation Index in Sociology,The American Sociologist, 8 (1973) 187.

    Google Scholar 

  6. E. GARFIELD,Citation Indexing: Its Theory and Application in Science, Technology and Humanities, New York, Wiley, 1979.

    Google Scholar 

  7. D. EDGE, Quantitative measures of communication in science: A critical review,History of Science, 17 (1979) 102.

    Google Scholar 

  8. M. H. MACROBERTS, B. R. MACROBERTS, Testing the Ortega hypothesis: Facts and artifacts,Scientometrics, 12 (1987) 293.

    Google Scholar 

  9. J. ORTEGA Y GASSET,The Revolt of the Masses, New York, Norton, 1932, p. 84–85.

    Google Scholar 

  10. J. R. COLE, S. COLE, The Ortega hypothesis,Science, 178 (1972) 368.

    Google Scholar 

  11. G. S. GREEN, A test of the Ortega hypothesis in criminology,Criminology, 19 (1981) 45.

    Google Scholar 

  12. M. OROMANER, The Ortega hypothesis and influential articles in American Sociology,Scientometrics, 7 (1985) 3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. W. E. SNIZEK, A re-examination of the Ortega Hypothesis: The Dutch case,Scientometrics, 9 (1986) 3.

    Google Scholar 

  14. J. R. COLE, S. COLE,Social Stratification in Science, Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1973.

    Google Scholar 

  15. E. GARFIELD, The 1000 most-cited contemporary authors. Part 2A. Details on authors in the Physical and Chemical Sciences and some comments about Nobels and Academy Memberships,Current Contents, March 1 (1982) 5.

    Google Scholar 

  16. H. ZUCKERMAN,Scientific Elite: Nobel Laureates in the United States, New York, Free Press, 1977, p. 37–38.

    Google Scholar 

  17. N. C. MULLINS, L. L. HARGENS, P. K. HECHT, E. L. KICK, The group structure of co-citation clusters: A comparative study,American Sociological Review, 42 (1977) 552.

    Google Scholar 

  18. H. G. SMALL, A co-citation model of a scientific specialty: A longitudinal study of collagen research,Social Studies of Science, 7 (1977) 139.

    Google Scholar 

  19. D. SULLIVAN, D. H. WHITE, E. J. BARBONI, Co-citation analysis of science: An evaluation,Social Studies of Science, 7 (1977) 223.

    Google Scholar 

  20. M. H. MACROBERTS, B. R. MACROBERTS, Quantitative measures of communication in science: A study of the formal level,Social Studies of Science, 16 (1986) 151.

    Google Scholar 

  21. G. N. GILBERT, Referencing as persuasion,Social Studies of Science, 7 (1977) 113.

    Google Scholar 

  22. R. K. MERTON, The Matthew effect in scinece,Science, 159 (1968) 156.

    Google Scholar 

  23. S. M. STIGLER, Precise measurement in the face of error,Social Studies of Science, 17 (1987) 332.

    Google Scholar 

  24. R. K. MERTON,On Theoretical Sociology, New York, Free Press, 1967, p. 27–28, 35–37.

    Google Scholar 

  25. J. LEDERBERG, Reply to H. V. Wyatt,Nature, 239 (1972) 234.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. E. GARFIELD, The ‘Obliteration Phenomenon’ in science — and the advantage of being obliterated!, in: E. GARFIELD,Essays of an Information Scientist, Vol. 2. Philadelphia; ISI Press (1975) 1977, p. 396–398.

    Google Scholar 

  27. P. MESSERI, Obliteration by Incorporation: Toward a Problematics, Theory and Metric of the Use of Scientific Literature, Paper presented to the American Sociological Association (5 September 1978).

  28. R. K. MERTON, In: P. SZTOMPKA,Robert K. Merton: An Intellectual Profile, New York; St. Martin's Press, 1986, p. 61–62.

    Google Scholar 

  29. H. ZUCKERMAN, Nobel laureates in science: Patterns of productivity, collaboration and authorship,American Sociological Review, 32 (1967) 391.

    Google Scholar 

  30. F. BACON,Advancement of Learning, Vol. 2 ofThe Works of Francis Bacon. Edited by B. MONTEGU, London; William Pickering, 1825. p. 202.

    Google Scholar 

  31. R. K. MERTON, Priorities in scientific discovery, in:The Sociology of Science, Chicago, University of Chicago Press [1957] 1973, p. 286–324.

    Google Scholar 

  32. S. COLE, The growth of scientific knowledge: Theories of deviance as a case study, in: L. A. COSER, (Ed.),The Idea of Social Structure: Papers in Honor of Robert K. Merton, New York, Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1975, p. 175–220.

    Google Scholar 

  33. M. J. MORAVCSIK, P. MURUGESAN, Some results on the functions and quality of citations,Social Studies of Science, 5 (1975) 82.

    Google Scholar 

  34. D. S. CHUBIN, S. MOITRA, Content analysis of references: Adjunct of alternative to citation counting?Social Studies of Science, 5 (1975) 423.

    Google Scholar 

  35. T. A. BROOKS, Private acts and public objects: An investigation of citer motivations,Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 36 (1985) 223.

    Google Scholar 

  36. T. A. BROOKS, Evidence for complex citer motivations,Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 37 (1986) 34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. E. GARFIELD, The uses and misuses of citation frequency, in:Essays of an Information Scientist; Ghostwriting and Other Essays, Vol. 8, Philadelphia, ISI Press, 1986, p. 403–409.

    Google Scholar 

  38. P. F. LAZARSFELD,Radio and the Printed Page: An Introduction to the Study of Radio and Its Role in the Communication of Ideas, New York, Duell, 1940.

    Google Scholar 

  39. R. K. MERTON, (with the assistance of MARJORIE FISKE, ALBERTA CURTIS),Mass Persuasion, New York, Harper & Bros., 1946.

    Google Scholar 

  40. H. ZUCKERMAN, Patterns of name-ordering among authors of scientific papers: A study of social symbolism and its ambiguity,American Journal of Sociology, 74 (1968) 276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. M. J. MULKAY, Methodology in the sociology of science: Some reflections on the study of radio astronomy,Social Science Information, 13 (1974) 107.

    Google Scholar 

  42. S. COZZENS, Taking the measure of science: A review of citation theories.,Newsletter of the International Society for the Sociology of Knowledge, 7 (1981) 16.

    Google Scholar 

  43. B. CRONIN, The need for a theory of citing.,Journal of Documentation, 37 (1981) 16.

    Google Scholar 

  44. H. W. MENARD,Science: Growth and Change, Cambridge, Harvard University Press, 1972, p. 125, 127.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Columbia University, 10027, New York, NY, USA

    Harriet Zuckerman

Authors
  1. Harriet Zuckerman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

A comment on “Testing the Ortega Hypothesis: Facts and Artifacts” by M. H. MACROBERTS and B. R. MACROBERTS,Scientometrics, 12 (1987), 293.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Zuckerman, H. Citation analysis and the complex problem of intellectual influence. Scientometrics 12, 329–338 (1987). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02016675

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02016675

Keywords

Search

Navigation