Citation concept analysis (CCA): a new form of citation analysis revealing the usefulness of concepts for other researchers illustrated by exemplary case studies including classic books by Thomas S. Kuhn and Karl R. Popper

Author:

Bornmann LutzORCID,Wray K. BradORCID,Haunschild RobinORCID

Abstract

AbstractIn recent years, the full text of papers are increasingly available electronically which opens up the possibility of quantitatively investigating citation contexts in more detail. In this study, we introduce a new form of citation analysis, which we call citation concept analysis (CCA). CCA is intended to reveal the cognitive impact certain concepts—published in a highly-cited landmark publication—have on the citing authors. It counts the number of times the concepts are mentioned (cited) in the citation context of citing publications. We demonstrate the method using three classical highly cited books: (1) The structure of scientific revolutions by Thomas S. Kuhn, (2) The logic of scientific discoveryLogik der Forschung: Zur Erkenntnistheorie der modernen Naturwissenschaft in German—, and (3) Conjectures and refutations: the growth of scientific knowledge by Karl R. Popper. It is not surprising—as our results show—that Kuhn’s “paradigm” concept seems to have had a significant impact. What is surprising is that our results indicate a much larger impact of the concept “paradigm” than Kuhn’s other concepts, e.g., “scientific revolution”. The paradigm concept accounts for about 40% of the concept-related citations to Kuhn’s work, and its impact is resilient across all disciplines and over time. With respect to Popper, “falsification” is the most used concept derived from his books. Falsification is the cornerstone of Popper’s critical rationalism.

Funder

Aarhus Universitets Forskningsfond

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Subject

Library and Information Sciences,Computer Science Applications,General Social Sciences

Reference50 articles.

1. Abbott, A. (2016). Structure as cited, structure as read. In R. J. Richards & L. Daston (Eds.), Kuhn’s structure of scientific revolutions at fifty: Reflections on a science classic (pp. 167–181). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

2. Atanassova, I., Rey, F., & Bertin, M. (2018). Studying Uncertainty in Science: a distributional analysis through the IMRaD structure. Paper presented at the 7th international workshop on mining scientific publications, Miyazaki, Japan. https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01940294/document.

3. Benjamin, W. (1968). Illuminations. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan.

4. Bertin, M., Atanassova, I., Sugimoto, C. R., & Lariviere, V. (2016). The linguistic patterns and rhetorical structure of citation context: an approach using n-grams. Scientometrics,109(3), 1417–1434. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-2134-8.

5. Bornmann, L., & Daniel, H.-D. (2008a). Functional use of frequently and infrequently cited articles in citing publications. A content analysis of citations to articles with low and high citation counts. European Science Editing,34(2), 35–38.

Cited by 41 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3