Abstract
AbstractSince the borders of disciplines change over time and vary across communities and geographies, they can be expressed at different levels of granularity, making it challenging to find a broad consensus about the measurement of interdisciplinarity. This study contributes to this debate by proposing a journal specialization index based on the level of repetitiveness of keywords appearing in their articles. Keywords represent one of the most essential items for filtering the vast amount of research available. If chosen correctly, they can help to identify the central concept of the paper and, consequently, to couple it with manuscripts related to the same field or subfield of research. Based on these universally recognized features of article keywords, the study proposes measuring the specialization of a journal by counting the number of times that a keyword is Queryrepeated in a journal on average (Sj). The basic assumption underlying the proposal of a journal specialization index is that the keywords may approximate the article’s topic and that the higher the number of papers in a journal based on a topic, the higher the level of specialization of that journal. The proposed specialization metric is not invulnerable to a set of limitations, among which the most relevant seems to be the lack of a standard practice regarding the number and consistency of keywords appearing in each article.
Funder
Università Parthenope di Napoli
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Library and Information Sciences,Computer Science Applications,General Social Sciences
Reference40 articles.
1. Abramo, G., D’Angelo, C. A., & Zhang, L. (2018). A comparison of two approaches for measuring interdisciplinary research output: The disciplinary diversity of authors vs the disciplinary diversity of the reference list. Journal of Informetrics, 12(4), 1182–1193.
2. Aria, M., & Cuccurullo, C. (2017). Bibliometrix: An R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis. Journal of Informetrics, 11(4), 959–975.
3. Augsburg, T. (2016). Becoming Interdisciplinary: An Introduction to Interdisciplinary Studies. Kendall Hunt.
4. Bensman, S. J. (2001). Bradford’s law and fuzzy sets: Statistical implications for library analyses. IFLA Journal, 27, 238–246.
5. Boyack, K. W., & Klavans, R. (2011). Multiple dimensions of journal specificity: Why journals can’t be assigned to disciplines. Paper Presented at the 13th Conference of the International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics, Durban
Cited by
3 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