Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A comparative study of first and all-author co-citation counting, and two different matrix generation approaches applied for author co-citation analyses

  • Published:
Scientometrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Aim

The present article contributes to the current methodological debate concerning author co-citation analyses. (ACA) The study compares two different units of analyses, i.e. first- versus inclusive all-author co-citation counting, as well as two different matrix generation approaches, i.e. a conventional multivariate and the so-called Drexel approach, in order to investigate their influence upon mapping results. The aim of the present study is therefore to provide more methodological awareness and empirical evidence concerning author co-citation studies.

Method

The study is based on structured XML documents extracted from the IEEE collection. These data allow the construction of ad-hoc citation indexes, which enables us to carry out the hitherto largest all-author co-citation study. Four ACA are made, combining the different units of analyses with the different matrix generation approaches. The results are evaluated quantitatively by means of multidimensional scaling, factor analysis, Procrustes and Mantel statistics.

Results

The results show that the inclusion of all cited authors can provide a better fit of data in two-dimensional mappings based on MDS, and that inclusive all-author co-citation counting may lead to stronger groupings in the maps. Further, the two matrix generation approaches produce maps that have some resemblances, but also many differences at the more detailed levels. The Drexel approach produces results that have noticeably lower stress values and are more concentrated into groupings. Finally, the study also demonstrates the importance of sparse matrices and their potential problems in connection with factor analysis.

Conclusion

We can confirm that inclusive all-ACA produce more coherent groupings of authors, whereas the present study cannot clearly confirm previous findings that first-ACA identifies more specialties, though some vague indication is given. Most crucially, strong evidence is given to the determining effect that matrix generation approaches have on the mapping of author co-citation data and thus the interpretation of such maps. Evidence is provided for the seemingly advantages of the Drexel approach.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ahlgren, P., Jarneving, B., Rousseau, R. (2003), Requirements for a cocitation similarity measure, with special reference to Pearson’s correlation coefficient. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 54(6): 550–560.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Borg, I., Groenen, P. J. F. (2005), Modern Multidimensional Scaling: Theory and applications. 2nd. Springer Science & Business Media: New York.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Boyack, K. (2004), Mapping knowledge domains: Characterizing PNAS. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 101: 5192–5199.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, C. (1999), Visualising semantic spaces and author co-citation networks in digital libraries. Information Processing & Management, 35(3): 401–420.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cronbach, L. J. (1951), Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16(3): 297–334.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eom, S. B. (2003), Author Cocitation Analysis using Custom Bibliographical Databases: An Introduction to the SAS systems. The Edwin Mellen Press, Lewiston, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giles, C. L., Bollacker, K., Lawrence, S. (1998), CiteSeer: An Automatic Citation Indexing System. In: Third ACM Conference on Digital Libraries. ACM Press, New York, pp. 89–98.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Glänzel, W. (1996), The need for standards in bibliometric research and technology, Scientometrics, 35(2): 167–176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gower, J. C. (1971), Statistical methods for comparing different multivariate analyses of the same data. In: Hodson, Kendall, Tautu (Eds), Mathematics in the Archaeological and Historical Sciences. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, pp. 138–149.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klavans, D., Boyack, K. (2006), Identifying a better measure of relatedness for mapping science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 57(2): 251–263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lattin, J., Carroll, J. D., Green, P. E. (2003), Analyzing Multivariate Data. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole - Thompson Learning.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leydesdorff, L., Bensman, S. (2006), Classification and powerlaws: The logarithmic transformation. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 57(11): 1470–1486.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leydesdorff, L., Vaughan, L. (2006), Co-occurrence matrices and their application in information science: Extending ACA to the Web Environment. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 57(12): 1616–1628.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lok, C. K. W, Chan, M. T. W., Martinson, I. M. (2001), Risk factors for citation errors in peer-reviewed nursing journals. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 32(2): 223–229.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malik, S., Kazai, G., Lalmas, M., Fuhr, N. (2006), Overview of INEX 2005. In: Fuhr & AL.: Proceedings of INEX 2005. Berlin: Springer 2006, pp. 1–15. (LNCS 3977)

    Google Scholar 

  • Mantel, N. (1967), A technique of disease clustering and a generalized regression approach. Cancer Research, 27: 209–220.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCain, K. W. (1990), Mapping authors in intellectual space: A technical overview. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 41(6): 433–443.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mulaik, S. A. (1972), The foundations of factor analysis. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nunnally, J. C. (1978), Psychometric theory. 2nd edition. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Persson, O. (2001), All author citations versus first author citations. Scientometrics, 50(2): 339–344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Price, D. J. de Solla (1981), The analysis of square matrices of scientometric transaction, Scientometrics, 3(1) (1981) 55–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rousseau, R., Zuccala, A. (2004), A classification of author co-citations: definitions and search strategies. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 55(6): 513–629.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schneider, J. W., Borlund, P. (2007a): Matrix comparison, Part 1: Motivation and important issues for measuring the resemblance between proximity measures or ordination results. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(11): 1586–1595.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schneider, J. W., Borlund, P. (2007b): Matrix comparison, Part 2: Measuring the resemblance between proximity measures or ordination results by use of the Mantel and Procrustes statistics. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(11): 1596–1609.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schneider, J. W., Larsen, B., Ingwersen, P. (2007), Comparative study between first and all-author cocitation analysis based on citation indexes generated from XML data. In: Proceedings of ISSI 2007, 11 th International Conference of the International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics, Eds. Torres-Salinas, D. & Moed, H. CINCDOC, Madrid, pp. 696–707.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schönemann, P. H., Carroll, R. M. (1970), Fitting one matrix to another under choice of a central dilation and a rigid motion. Psychometrika, 35(2): 245–256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shannon, C. E., Weaver, W. (1949), The Mathematical Theory of Communication. University of Illinois

  • White, H. D. (2003a), Pathfinder networks and author cocitation analysis: A remapping of paradigmatic information scientists. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 54(5): 423–434.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • White, H. D. (2003b), Author Cocitation Analysis and Pearson’s r. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 54(31): 250–259.

    Google Scholar 

  • White, H. D., Griffith, B. C. (1981), Author co-citation: A literature measure of intellectual structure. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 32(3): 163–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • White, H. D., McCain, K. (1998), Visualizing a discipline: An author cocitation analysis of information science, 1972–1995. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 49(4): 327–355.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhao, D. (2006), Towards all-author co-citation analysis. Information Processing & Management, 42 (6): 1578–1591.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhao, D., Strotmann, A. (2007), Can citation analysis of web publications better detect research fronts? Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(9): 1285–1302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Royal School of Library and Information Science, Aalborg, Denmark

    Jesper W. Schneider

  2. Royal School of Library and Information Science, Copenhagen, Denmark

    Birger Larsen & Peter Ingwersen

Authors
  1. Jesper W. Schneider
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Birger Larsen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Peter Ingwersen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jesper W. Schneider.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Schneider, J.W., Larsen, B. & Ingwersen, P. A comparative study of first and all-author co-citation counting, and two different matrix generation approaches applied for author co-citation analyses. Scientometrics 80, 103–130 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-007-2019-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-007-2019-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation