栅栏或堆栈:关于专利中引用的理论考虑

IF 0.7 4区 管理学 Q3 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE
Björn Hammarfelt
{"title":"栅栏或堆栈:关于专利中引用的理论考虑","authors":"Björn Hammarfelt","doi":"10.47989/ircolis2203","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Patent citations are an important indicator for studying science and technology interaction. Yet, empirical and conceptual studies of referencing practices in patents are largely lacking, which has resulted in an under-theorised understanding of patent citations. This study analyses previous research on patent citations and discusses these in relation to citation theories developed within science studies and bibliometrics. The ambition is, however, to advance beyond a comparative approach by adding an additional layer of analysis in which the overarching rhetorical function of references in patents and papers is considered. The analysis shows how referencing in patents have distinguishing characteristics in terms of who cites, the temporality of referencing, national and international context, quantity of references, and incentives for citing. These characteristics are discussed using the concept of fencing and stacking. Fencing illustrates how references in patents are used to demarcate claims, while the stacking of references in scientific papers is an act of cumulative persuasion. Substantial rhetorical and epistemological differences exist in how references are used in patents and papers, and these differences have implications for how citations patterns can be interpreted. The conceptualisation of referencing as fencing and stacking is suggested as a possible framework for interpreting empirical studies of patent citations. Overall, it is argued that a further theoretical, and empirical, understanding of referencing practices in patents are need in order to contextualise and problematise patent citations, and their current use in research and policy.","PeriodicalId":47431,"journal":{"name":"Information Research-An International Electronic Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Fences or stacks: theoretical considerations regarding references in patents\",\"authors\":\"Björn Hammarfelt\",\"doi\":\"10.47989/ircolis2203\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Patent citations are an important indicator for studying science and technology interaction. Yet, empirical and conceptual studies of referencing practices in patents are largely lacking, which has resulted in an under-theorised understanding of patent citations. This study analyses previous research on patent citations and discusses these in relation to citation theories developed within science studies and bibliometrics. The ambition is, however, to advance beyond a comparative approach by adding an additional layer of analysis in which the overarching rhetorical function of references in patents and papers is considered. The analysis shows how referencing in patents have distinguishing characteristics in terms of who cites, the temporality of referencing, national and international context, quantity of references, and incentives for citing. These characteristics are discussed using the concept of fencing and stacking. Fencing illustrates how references in patents are used to demarcate claims, while the stacking of references in scientific papers is an act of cumulative persuasion. Substantial rhetorical and epistemological differences exist in how references are used in patents and papers, and these differences have implications for how citations patterns can be interpreted. The conceptualisation of referencing as fencing and stacking is suggested as a possible framework for interpreting empirical studies of patent citations. Overall, it is argued that a further theoretical, and empirical, understanding of referencing practices in patents are need in order to contextualise and problematise patent citations, and their current use in research and policy.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47431,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Information Research-An International Electronic Journal\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-10-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Information Research-An International Electronic Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.47989/ircolis2203\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Information Research-An International Electronic Journal","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.47989/ircolis2203","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

专利引文是研究科技互动的重要指标。然而,在很大程度上缺乏对专利引用实践的实证和概念研究,这导致对专利引用的理论理解不足。本研究分析了前人关于专利引文的研究,并将其与科学研究和文献计量学中发展起来的引文理论进行了讨论。然而,我们的目标是通过增加一层分析来超越比较方法,其中考虑了专利和论文中参考文献的总体修辞功能。分析表明,专利引用在引文对象、引用时效性、国内外背景、引用数量和引用动机等方面具有显著的特点。使用围栏和堆叠的概念来讨论这些特征。围栏说明了专利中的参考文献是如何被用来划定权利要求的,而科学论文中参考文献的堆叠是一种累积说服的行为。在专利和论文中如何使用参考文献存在实质性的修辞和认识论差异,这些差异对如何解释引用模式具有影响。建议将引用概念化为围栏和堆叠作为解释专利引用实证研究的可能框架。总体而言,本文认为需要对专利中的引用实践进行进一步的理论和实证理解,以便将专利引用及其目前在研究和政策中的使用置于背景下并提出问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Fences or stacks: theoretical considerations regarding references in patents
Patent citations are an important indicator for studying science and technology interaction. Yet, empirical and conceptual studies of referencing practices in patents are largely lacking, which has resulted in an under-theorised understanding of patent citations. This study analyses previous research on patent citations and discusses these in relation to citation theories developed within science studies and bibliometrics. The ambition is, however, to advance beyond a comparative approach by adding an additional layer of analysis in which the overarching rhetorical function of references in patents and papers is considered. The analysis shows how referencing in patents have distinguishing characteristics in terms of who cites, the temporality of referencing, national and international context, quantity of references, and incentives for citing. These characteristics are discussed using the concept of fencing and stacking. Fencing illustrates how references in patents are used to demarcate claims, while the stacking of references in scientific papers is an act of cumulative persuasion. Substantial rhetorical and epistemological differences exist in how references are used in patents and papers, and these differences have implications for how citations patterns can be interpreted. The conceptualisation of referencing as fencing and stacking is suggested as a possible framework for interpreting empirical studies of patent citations. Overall, it is argued that a further theoretical, and empirical, understanding of referencing practices in patents are need in order to contextualise and problematise patent citations, and their current use in research and policy.
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
Information Research-An International Electronic Journal
Information Research-An International Electronic Journal INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE-
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
12.50%
发文量
62
审稿时长
45 weeks
期刊介绍: Information Research, is an open access, international, peer-reviewed, scholarly journal, dedicated to making accessible the results of research across a wide range of information-related disciplines. It is published by the University of Borås, Sweden, with the financial support of an NOP-HS Scientific Journal Grant. It is edited by Professor T.D. Wilson, and is hosted, and given technical support, by Lund University Libraries, Sweden.
×
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