科学出版物节奏的网络效应

Q3 Social Sciences
Iulian Oană
{"title":"科学出版物节奏的网络效应","authors":"Iulian Oană","doi":"10.2478/irsr-2018-0016","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Studies based on bibliometric records have introduced the idea of ‘rhythmicity’ when it comes to the publication of research articles. However, the main approach of this particular topic was to analyze journal specific data on rates of manuscript and review submissions. This study takes another path, by analyzing aspects of publication rhythmicity based not on individual, attribute data, but taking into account the fact that publication of research results and the efforts leading to a certain manuscript are often collective endeavors. Thus, co-authorship ego networks are interpreted through the theoretical lenses of ‘social time’ (for temporality), and ‘homophily’ and ‘preferential attachment’ (for network characteristics). For this article, the same data analyzed by M.-G. Hâncean and M. Perc in their 2016 article, Homophily in coauthorship networks of East European sociologists, were used. The data was based on Web of Science bibliometric records for three populations of academic sociologists, from Poland, Romania and Slovenia, and their co-authors. The purpose was to see if the publishing rhythm of an author (i.e., ego) is influenced by the publishing rhythm of her co-authors (i.e., alters) and by the structural characteristics of her ego-network. Rhythmicity was measured as the sum of standard deviations from the mean for the number of articles published between 2006 and 2016, resulting in a score which characterizes egos and alters as constant or irregular in their publishing activity. Results suggest that the structural features of the co-authorship networks can give us certain insights for the rhythmicity of publications. Mainly, structural features of network size, density and node betweenness explain more the variation of egos’ constancy or irregularity in (non)publication than the rhythmicity of their co-authors.","PeriodicalId":37251,"journal":{"name":"International Review of Social Research","volume":"8 1","pages":"143 - 155"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Network Effects on Rhythms of Scientific Publications\",\"authors\":\"Iulian Oană\",\"doi\":\"10.2478/irsr-2018-0016\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Studies based on bibliometric records have introduced the idea of ‘rhythmicity’ when it comes to the publication of research articles. However, the main approach of this particular topic was to analyze journal specific data on rates of manuscript and review submissions. This study takes another path, by analyzing aspects of publication rhythmicity based not on individual, attribute data, but taking into account the fact that publication of research results and the efforts leading to a certain manuscript are often collective endeavors. Thus, co-authorship ego networks are interpreted through the theoretical lenses of ‘social time’ (for temporality), and ‘homophily’ and ‘preferential attachment’ (for network characteristics). For this article, the same data analyzed by M.-G. Hâncean and M. Perc in their 2016 article, Homophily in coauthorship networks of East European sociologists, were used. The data was based on Web of Science bibliometric records for three populations of academic sociologists, from Poland, Romania and Slovenia, and their co-authors. The purpose was to see if the publishing rhythm of an author (i.e., ego) is influenced by the publishing rhythm of her co-authors (i.e., alters) and by the structural characteristics of her ego-network. Rhythmicity was measured as the sum of standard deviations from the mean for the number of articles published between 2006 and 2016, resulting in a score which characterizes egos and alters as constant or irregular in their publishing activity. Results suggest that the structural features of the co-authorship networks can give us certain insights for the rhythmicity of publications. Mainly, structural features of network size, density and node betweenness explain more the variation of egos’ constancy or irregularity in (non)publication than the rhythmicity of their co-authors.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37251,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Review of Social Research\",\"volume\":\"8 1\",\"pages\":\"143 - 155\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Review of Social Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2478/irsr-2018-0016\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Review of Social Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2478/irsr-2018-0016","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

基于文献计量学记录的研究在研究论文发表时引入了“节律性”的概念。然而,这个特定主题的主要方法是分析期刊特定的手稿和审稿提交率数据。本研究走的是另一条路径,不以个人、属性数据为依据,而是考虑到研究成果的发表和某篇论文的发表往往是集体努力的结果,对发表节奏性进行了分析。因此,共同作者自我网络是通过“社会时间”(时间性)、“同质性”和“优先依恋”(网络特征)的理论透镜来解释的。在本文中,m.g。h ncean和M. Perc在他们2016年的文章《东欧社会学家合著网络中的同质性》中使用了这种方法。这些数据是基于来自波兰、罗马尼亚和斯洛文尼亚的三个学术社会学家群体及其合著者的科学网文献计量记录。目的是观察作者(即自我)的出版节奏是否受到她的合著者(即改变者)的出版节奏和她的自我网络的结构特征的影响。节律性的衡量标准是2006年至2016年期间发表的文章数量与平均值的标准差之和,由此得出一个分数,该分数将其出版活动中的自我和变化描述为恒定或不规则。结果表明,共同作者网络的结构特征可以为我们提供一定的见解发表的节奏。主要是,网络大小、密度和节点间的结构特征更多地解释了自我在(非)发表时的恒常性或不规则性的变化,而不是合著者的节律性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Network Effects on Rhythms of Scientific Publications
Abstract Studies based on bibliometric records have introduced the idea of ‘rhythmicity’ when it comes to the publication of research articles. However, the main approach of this particular topic was to analyze journal specific data on rates of manuscript and review submissions. This study takes another path, by analyzing aspects of publication rhythmicity based not on individual, attribute data, but taking into account the fact that publication of research results and the efforts leading to a certain manuscript are often collective endeavors. Thus, co-authorship ego networks are interpreted through the theoretical lenses of ‘social time’ (for temporality), and ‘homophily’ and ‘preferential attachment’ (for network characteristics). For this article, the same data analyzed by M.-G. Hâncean and M. Perc in their 2016 article, Homophily in coauthorship networks of East European sociologists, were used. The data was based on Web of Science bibliometric records for three populations of academic sociologists, from Poland, Romania and Slovenia, and their co-authors. The purpose was to see if the publishing rhythm of an author (i.e., ego) is influenced by the publishing rhythm of her co-authors (i.e., alters) and by the structural characteristics of her ego-network. Rhythmicity was measured as the sum of standard deviations from the mean for the number of articles published between 2006 and 2016, resulting in a score which characterizes egos and alters as constant or irregular in their publishing activity. Results suggest that the structural features of the co-authorship networks can give us certain insights for the rhythmicity of publications. Mainly, structural features of network size, density and node betweenness explain more the variation of egos’ constancy or irregularity in (non)publication than the rhythmicity of their co-authors.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
International Review of Social Research
International Review of Social Research Social Sciences-Cultural Studies
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信