The three dimensions of informetrics: a conceptual view

Purpose – The aim of this paper is to propose a conceptual model of the field of informetrics. Specifically, the paper argues that informetrics comprises the study of entities in three dimensions: the social, documentary and epistemic dimensions containing respectively agents, documents, and concepts or cognitions.Design/methodology/approach – The paper outlines a conceptual model, drawing on earlier work by Kochen, Leydesdorff, Borgman and others. Subsequently, each dimension and interdimensional relation is analyzed and discussed.Findings – It is shown that not every study necessarily involves each of the three dimensions, but that the field as a whole cannot be reduced to one or two of them. Moreover, the dimensions should be kept separate but they are not completely independent. The paper discusses what kinds of relations exist between the dimensions. Special attention is given to the nature of the citation relation within this framework. The paper also considers the place of concepts like mapping, pr...

[1]  R. Boschma.  Proximity and Innovation: A Critical Assessment , 2005 .

[2]  Gobinda G. Chowdhury,et al.  Bibliometric cartography of information retrieval research by using co-word analysis , 2001, Inf. Process. Manag..

[3]  Birger Hjørland,et al.  Toward a New Horizon in Information Science: Domain-Analysis , 1995, J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci..

[4]  Vincent Larivière,et al.  The impact factor's Matthew Effect: A natural experiment in bibliometrics , 2009, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[5]  Peter Wiemer-Hastings,et al.  Latent semantic analysis , 2004, Annu. Rev. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[6]  Blaise Cronin,et al.  The citation process: The role and significance of citations in scientific communication , 1984 .

[7]  Kevin W. Boyack,et al.  Toward a consensus map of science , 2009, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[8]  Michael K. Buckland,et al.  Information as thing , 1991, J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci..

[9]  Johan Bollen,et al.  Usage bibliometrics , 2011, Annu. Rev. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[10]  Michael H. MacRoberts,et al.  Problems of citation analysis , 1992, Scientometrics.

[11]  Tove Faber Frandsen,et al.  A lucrative seat at the table: Are editorial board members generally over-cited in their own journals? , 2010, ASIST.

[12]  Cassidy R. Sugimoto,et al.  P-Rank: An indicator measuring prestige in heterogeneous scholarly networks , 2011, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[13]  Suzanne Briet,et al.  Qu'est-ce que la documentation? , 1951 .

[14]  Terrence A. Brooks,et al.  Evidence of complex citer motivations , 1986, J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci..

[15]  Leo Egghe,et al.  Co-citation, bibliographic coupling and a characterization of lattice citation networks , 2002, Scientometrics.

[16]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  The relations between qualitative theory and scientometric methods in science and technology studies , 1989, Scientometrics.

[17]  Henry Small,et al.  Cited Documents as Concept Symbols , 1978 .

[18]  Blaise Cronin,et al.  The sociological turn in information science , 2008, J. Inf. Sci..

[19]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  The Challenge of Scientometrics: The Development, Measurement, and Self-Organization of Scientific Communications , 2001 .

[20]  Johan Bollen,et al.  Journal status , 2006, Scientometrics.

[21]  Peter Ingwersen,et al.  Toward a basic framework for webometrics , 2004, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[22]  C. Renzetti.  The need for gendered discussions of policy reform. Editor's introduction. , 2014, Violence against women.

[24]  Philip M. Davis.  Reward or persuasion? The battle to define the meaning of a citation , 2009, Learn. Publ..

[25]  Joseph T. Tennis.  Subject Ontogeny: Subject Access Through Time and the Dimensionality of Classification , 2002 .

[26]  G. Williams.  WHAT IS A DOCUMENT , 1948 .

[27]  Wolfgang G. Stock.  Concepts and semantic relations in information science , 2010, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[28]  Gary G. Yen,et al.  Construction of bipartite and unipartite weighted networks from collections of journal papers , 2005 .

[29]  Grace Thornton,et al.  Everything is Miscellaneous: The Power of the New Digital Disorder , 2009, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[30]  Jarno Hoekman,et al.  Spatial scientometrics: Towards a cumulative research program , 2009, J. Informetrics.

[31]  Laurian M. Chirica,et al.  The entity-relationship model: toward a unified view of data , 1975, SIGF.

[32]  Richard A. Harshman,et al.  Indexing by Latent Semantic Analysis , 1990, J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci..

[33]  William E. McGrath.  The unit of analysis (objects of study) in bibliometrics and scientometrics , 1996, Scientometrics.

[34]  Manfred Kochen,et al.  Principles of information retrieval , 1974 .

[35]  Ronald Rousseau,et al.  Social network analysis: a powerful strategy, also for the information sciences , 2002, J. Inf. Sci..

[36]  Andrea Scharnhorst,et al.  Tracing scientific influence , 2010, ArXiv.

[37]  Daniel E. Geer,et al.  Power. Law , 2012, IEEE Secur. Priv..

[38]  Jean Tague-Sutcliffe,et al.  An Introduction to Informetrics , 1992, Inf. Process. Manag..

[39]  Howard D. White,et al.  Reward, persuasion, and the Sokal Hoax: A study in citation identities , 2004, Scientometrics.

[40]  Howard D. White,et al.  Authors as citers over time , 2001, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[41]  Yong Fang,et al.  Lattices in citation networks: An investigation into the structure of citation graphs , 2001, Scientometrics.