Abstract
In the first part of our study (Zhang and Glänzel in Scientometrics, 2017) we provided a view of the literature ageing based on a synchronous approach. Taking up the ideas by Egghe (Scientometrics 27(2):195–214, 1993) and Glänzel et al. (Scientometrics 109(3):2165–2179, 2016) we extend our study in the second part by applying a diachronous approach on the basis of citing literature. For this purpose we used the Prospective Price Index which was recently introduced by Glänzel et al. (Scientometrics 109(3):2165–2179, 2016). Finally, we compare the two aspects of literature ageing. In particular, we analyze the correlation between the share of recent references and the share of fast response, and found a generally positive correlation between both aspects at different levels of aggregation (subfields, major fields and the individual paper level). However, the consistence varies among different aggregations. For examples, on the level of subject fields, Chemistry, Biology, Neuroscience & Behavior are found with evidently better ranks by Prospective Price Index than Price Index, indicating their faster ageing process in the mirror of citations than references, while Engineering and Social sciences are found with the opposite ageing features. At the journal level, we observed a striking divergence between the reference and citation ageing patterns in some cases. Thus several journals proved ‘hard’ from the perspective of information sources (cited papers) but, at the same time, rather ‘soft’ in the light of information targets (citing papers).
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Avramescu, A. (1979). Actuality and obsolescence of scientific literature. Journal of the American Society for Information Science (pre-1986), 30(5), 296–303.
Bouabid, H. (2011). Revisiting citation aging: A model for citation distribution and life-cycle prediction. Scientometrics, 88(1), 199–211.
Bouabid, H., & Larivière, V. (2013). The lengthening of papers’ life expectancy: A diachronous analysis. Scientometrics, 97(3), 695–717.
Burrell, QL. (2003). Predicting future citation behavior. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 54(5), 372–378.
Corbyn, Z. (2010). An easy way to boost a paper’s citations. Nature. doi:10.1038/news.2010.406, http://www.nature.com/news/2010/100813/full/news.2010.406.html.
Egghe, L. (1993). On the influence of growth on obsolescence. Scientometrics, 27(2), 195–214.
Egghe, L., & Ravichandra Rao, I. K. (1992). Citation age data and the obsolescence function: Fits and explanations. Information and Processing Management, 28(2), 201–217.
Finardi, U. (2014). On the time evolution of received citations, in different scientific fields: An empirical study. Journal of Informetrics, 8(1), 13–24.
Glänzel, W. (1997). On the reliability of predictions based on stochastic citation processes. Scientometrics, 40(3), 481–492.
Glänzel, W. (2004). Towards a model for diachronous and synchronous citation analyses. Scientometrics, 60(3), 511–522.
Glänzel, W., & Garfield, E. (2004). The myth of delayed recognition. The Scientist, 18(11), 8–9.
Glänzel, W., Schlemmer, B., & Thijs, B. (2003). Better late than never? On the chance to become highly cited only beyond the standard bibliometric time horizon. Scientometrics, 58(3), 571–586.
Glänzel, W., & Schoepflin, U. (1995). A bibliometric study on ageing and reception processes of scientific literature. Journal of Information Science, 21(1), 37–53.
Glänzel, W., & Schoepflin, U. (1999). A bibliometric study of reference literature in the sciences and social sciences. Information Processing and Management, 35(1), 31–44.
Glänzel, W., & Schubert, A. (1995). Predictive aspects of a stochastic model for citation processes. Information Processing and Management, 31(1), 69–80.
Glänzel, W., Thijs, B., & Chi, P. S. (2016). The challenges to expand bibliometric studies from periodical literature to monographic literature with a new data source: The book citation index. Scientometrics, 109(3), 2165–2179.
Lercher, A., & Smolinsky, L. (2016). Persistent value of older scientific journal articles. Scientometrics, 108(3), 1205–1220.
Mingers, J., & Burrell, Q. L. (2006). Modeling citation behavior in management science journals. Information Processing and Management, 42(6), 1451–1464.
Nadarajah, S., & Kotz, S. (2007). Models for citation behaviour. Scientometrics, 72(2), 291–305.
Nakamoto, H. (1988). Synchronous and dyachronous citation distributions. In L. Egghe & R. Rousseau (Eds.), Informetrics 87/88 (pp. 157–163). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Peritz, B. C. (1983). Are methodological papers more cited than theoretical or empirical ones? The case of sociology. Scientometrics, 5(4), 211–218.
Price, D. J. D. (1970). Citation measures of hard science, soft science, technology, and nonscience. In C. E. Nelson & D. K. Pollock (Eds.), Communication among scientists and engineers (pp. 3–22). Lexington, MA: Heath.
Stinson, E. R., & Lancaster, F. W. (1987). Synchronous versus diachronous methods in the measurement of obsolescence by citation studies. Journal of Information Science, 13, 65–74.
Yu, G., & Li, Y. J. (2010). Identification of referencing and citation processes of scientific journals based on the citation distribution model. Scientometrics, 82, 249–261.
Zhang, L., & Glänzel, W. (2017). A citation-based cross-disciplinary study on literature aging. Part I: The synchronous approach. Scientometrics. doi:10.1007/s11192-017-2289-y.
Zhang, L., Rousseau, R., & Glänzel, W. (2016). Diversity of references as an indicator for interdisciplinarity of journals: Taking similarity between subject fields into account. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 67(5), 1257–1265.
Acknowledgements
Lin Zhang acknowledges the National Natural Science Foundation of China Grants 71573085 and 71103064, the Innovation talents of science and technology in HeNan Province (16HASTIT038; 2015GGJS-108) and the research center of information technology & economic and social development in Zhejiang Province. We are grateful for two anonymous reviewers’ insightful comments and valuable advices.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Appendix
Appendix
See Table 4.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Zhang, L., Glänzel, W. A citation-based cross-disciplinary study on literature ageing: part II—diachronous aspects. Scientometrics 111, 1559–1572 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2288-z
Received:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2288-z