Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

iMetrics: the development of the discipline with many names

  • Published:
Scientometrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Different research traditions have developed over time to study the quantitative aspects of information and knowledge production, such as scientometrics, bibliometrics, librametrics, informetrics, cybermetrics, webometrics, or altmetrics. These information metrics, or iMetrics, as they were labeled by Milojević and Leydesdorff in Scientometrics 95(1):141–157, 2013, are unified by the usage of quantitative data analysis, applying various statistical methods and techniques and are often used to supplement and complement each other. Representing different research traditions, they jointly form a common research field, a “discipline with many names”. In this article, we look at the development of iMetrics field and its evolution over time using bibliometric network analysis and identify its common basis, formed by the most important publications, journals, scholars and topics. The dataset consists of articles from the Web of Science database (26,414 records with complete descriptions). Analyzing the citation network, we evaluate the field’s growth and identify the most cited works. Using the Search path count (SPC) approach, we extract the Main path, Key routes paths, and Link islands in the citation network. The results show that in the last forty years the number of published papers increased, and it doubles every 8 years; the number of single author papers dropped from 50 to 10 %, and the number of papers authored by 3 or more authors is increasing. We make the conclusions about the field’s development and its current state. We also present the main authors, journals and keywords from the field, which form its common basis.

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. There is a special field ORCID Identifier (Open Researcher and Contributor ID), OI, among the names of WoS field (Web of Science Core Collection Field Tags 2020).

References

  • Åström, F. (2002). Visualizing library and information science concept spaces through keyword and citation based maps and clusters. In H. Bruce, R. Fidel, P. Ingwersen, & P. Vakkari (Eds.), Emerging frameworks and methods. CoLIS4: Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Conceptions of Library and Information Science (pp. 185–197). Greenwood Village, CO: Libraries Unlimited.

    Google Scholar 

  • Åström, F. (2007). Changes in the LIS research front: Time-sliced co-citation analysis of LIS journal articles, 1990–2004. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(7), 947–957.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bar-Ilan, J. (2008). Informetrics at the beginning of the 21st century-A review. Journal of Informetrics, 2(1), 1–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Batagelj, V. (2007). WoS2Pajek. Networks from Web of Science. Version 1.5 (2017). http://vladowiki.fmf.uni-lj.si/doku.php?id=pajek:wos2pajek.

  • Batagelj, V., & Cerinšek, M. (2013). On bibliographic networks. Scientometrics, 96(3), 845–864.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Batagelj, V. (2003). Efficient algorithms for citation network analysis. arXiv:cs/0309023.

  • Batagelj, V., Doreian, P. V., Ferligoj, A., & Kejžar, N. (2014). Understanding large temporal networks and spatial networks: Exploration, pattern searching, visualization and network evolution. Hoboken: Wiley.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Batagelj, V., Ferligoj, A., & Squazzoni, F. (2017). The emergence of a field: A network analysis of research on peer review. Scientometrics, 113, 503.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bjorneborn, L., & Ingwersen, P. (2001). Perspectives of webometrics. Scientometrics, 50(1), 65–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boell, S. K. (2007). A scientometric method to analyze scientific journals as exemplified by the area of information science [Master Dissertation]. Germany: Saarland University. Retrieved on March, 30, 2017.

  • Janssens, F., Leta, J., Glänzel, W., & De Moor, B. (2006). Towards mapping library and information science. Information Processing and Management, 42(6), 1614–1642.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harzing, A. W. (2015). Health warning: Might contain multiple personalities-the problem of homonyms in Thomson Reuters essential science indicators. Scientometrics, 105(3), 2259–2270.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harter, S. P., & Hooten, P. A. (1992). Information science and scientists - JASIS, 1972–1990. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 43(9), 583–593.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hood, W., & Wilson, C. (2001). The literature of bibliometrics, scientometrics, and informetrics. Scientometrics, 52(2), 291–314.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khasseh, A. A., Soheili, F., & Chelak, A. M. (2017a). Co-authorship network analysis of iMetrics researchers. Library Philosophy and Practice.

  • Khasseh, A. A., Soheili, F., Moghaddam, H. S., & Chelak, A. M. (2017b). Intellectual structure of knowledge in iMetrics: A co-word analysis. Information Processing and Management, 53(3), 705–720.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khasseh, A. A., Soheili, F., & Chelak, A. M. (2018). An author co-citation analysis of 37 years of iMetrics. The Electronic Library.

  • Leydesdorff, L. (2007). Mapping interdisciplinarity at the interfaces between the science citation index and the social science citation index. Scientometrics, 71(3), 391–405.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leydesdorff, L., Bornmann, L., Marx, W., & Milojević, S. (2014). Referenced publication years spectroscopy applied to iMetrics: Scientometrics, Journal of Informetrics, and a relevant subset of JASIST. Journal of Informetrics, 8(1), 162–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lipetz, B. A. (1999). Aspects of JASIS authorship through five decades. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 50(11), 994–1003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, J. (2003). A bibliometric study: Author productivity and co-authorship features of JASIST 2001–2002. Mississippi Libraries, 67(4), 110–112.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu, J. S., & Lu, L. Y. Y. (2012). An integrated approach for main path analysis: Development of the hirsch index as an example. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 63(3), 528–542.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nisonger, T. E. (1999). JASIS and library and information science journal rankings: A review and analysis of the last half-century. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 50(11), 1004–1019.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maltseva, D., & Batagelj, V. (2019). Social network analysis as a field of invasions: Bibliographic approach to study SNA development. Scientometrics, 121(2), 1085–1128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martín-Martín, A., Orduna-Malea, E., Ayllín, J.M. & Delgado López-Cózar, E. (2016). The counting house: measuring those who count. Presence of Bibliometrics, Scientometrics, Informetrics, Webometrics and Altmetrics in the Google Scholar Citations, ResearcherID, ResearchGate, Mendeley & Twitter. EC3 Working Papers, 21. 19th of January 2015.

  • Milojević, S., Sugimoto, C. R., Yan, E., & Ding, Y. (2011). The cognitive structure of library and information science: Analysis of article title words. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62(10), 1933–1953.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Milojević, S., & Leydesdorff, L. (2013). Information metrics (iMetrics): A research specialty with a socio-cognitive identity? Scientometrics, 95(1), 141–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moya-Anegón, F., Herrero-Solana, V., & Jiménez-Contreras, E. (2006). A connectionist and multivariate approach to science maps: The SOM, clustering and MDS applied to library and information science research. Journal of Information Science, 32(1), 63–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peritz, B. (1990). A Bradford distribution for bibliometrics. Scientometrics, 18(5–6), 323–329.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Persson, O. (1994). The intellectual base and research fronts of 1986–1990. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 45(1), 31–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van den Besselaar, P. (2000). Communication between science and technology studies journals: A case study in differentiation and integration in scientific fields. Scientometrics, 47, 169–193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van den Besselaar, P., & Heimeriks, G. (2006). Mapping research topics using word-reference co-occurrences: A method and an exploratory case study. Scientometrics, 68(3), 377–393.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • White, H. D., & McCain, K. W. (1998). Visualizing a discipline: An author co-citation analysis of information science, 1972–1995. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 49(4), 327–356.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wouters, P., & Leydesdorff, L. (1994). Has Price’s dream come true: Is scientometrics a hard science? Scientometrics, 31(2), 193–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Web of Science Core Collection Field Tags (2020). https://images.webofknowledge.com/images/help/WOS/hs_wos_fieldtags.html.

  • Yang S., Yuan, Q., & Yu, Y. (2017). Are scientometrics, informetrics, and bibliometrics different? In 16th International Society of Scientometrics and Informetrics Conference.

  • Zhao, D., & Strotmann, A. (2008). Evolution of research activities and intellectual influences in information science 1996–2005: Introducing author bibliographic-coupling analysis. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(13), 2070–2086.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We appreciate the help of David Connolly (Academic Writing Center, Higher School of Economics, Moscow) with the proofreading of the article. We would like to thank the anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments and suggestions. This work is supported in part by the Slovenian Research Agency (research program P1-0294 and research projects J1-9187 and J7-8279), project COSTNET (COST Action CA15109), and by Russian Academic Excellence Project ‘5-100’. The funding sources had no involvement in the study and article.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. National Research University Higher School of Economics, Pokrovsky Boulevard 10, Moscow, Russia, 101000

    Daria Maltseva & Vladimir Batagelj

  2. Institute of Mathematics, Physics and Mechanics, Jadranska 19, 1000, Ljubljana, Slovenia

    Vladimir Batagelj

  3. University of Primorska, Andrej Marušič Institute, 6000, Koper, Slovenia

    Vladimir Batagelj

Authors
  1. Daria Maltseva
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Vladimir Batagelj
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Daria Maltseva.

Appendix: main publications

Appendix: main publications

See Table 5.

Table 5 Citation CiteT net: overlapping of important subnetworks (1—CPM main path, 2—Key routes, 3—Island 1)
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Maltseva, D., Batagelj, V. iMetrics: the development of the discipline with many names. Scientometrics 125, 313–359 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03604-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03604-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation