Print

Print


Dear socnetters:
 
I posted a message regarding references on social network analysis of bibliography.
 
I appreciate all the emails and postings. Mr. Lang's dissertation chapter was particularly helpful.
 
I finished the first draft of a paper on citation analysis of organizational studies within Korean sociology during 1964-2002. I also confined the scope of cited works to those written in Korean
 
I learned two types of methods exist for network analysis of bibliographies: bibliographic coupling (whom do you cite in common) and cociation analysis(who cites you in common)--I want to thank Mr. Lang for his excellent explanation. Most works in this area uses cociation analysis, but I used bibliographic coupling focusing on citer-by-citer network. I selected 41 articles in organizational studies within Korean sociology, which cited 280 various works that range from sociology to business administration. In this type of study, the scope of citer and cited work is crucial. A cociation analysis may not be useful when the area under study is in an early stage of emergence and, thus, the range of cited works is too wide. If a cocitation analysis is applied to this type of data, the cociaton network matrix will have too many empty cells, which makes it hard to detect a meanful pattern. If you also want to examine how scholars consciously locate their works by citing others' works, bibliographic coupling is more appropriate.
 
Here is the list of references that socnetters sent me and that I have compiled.
 
 

Mark Mizruchi and Lisa Fein. 1999. The Social Construction of Organizational Knowledge: A Study of the Uses of Coercive, Mimetic, and Normative Isomorphism. ASQ44:653-683.

 

Behlül Üsdiken and Yorgo Pasadeos. 1995. Organizational Analysis in North America and Europe: A Comparison of Co-ciation Networks. Organization Studies 16:503-526.

 

Nicholas Mullins, Lowell Hargens, Pamela Hecht, and Edward Kick. 1977. The Group Structure of Cocitation Clusters: A Comparative Study. American Sociological Review 42:552-562.

 

Vanessa Hill & Kathleen M. Carley, 1999,  An Approach to Identifying Consensus in a Subfield:  The Case of Organizational Culture.  Poetics, 27: 1-30.

Kathleen Carley, 1990,
Structural Constraints on Communication:  The Diffusion of the Homomorphic Signal Analysis Technique through Scientific Fields.   Journal of Mathematical Sociology , 15(3-4): 207-246.

 

Borgman, C. & Rice, R.E.  (1992). The convergence of information science and communication: A bibliometric analysis. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 43(6),397-411. 

Funkhouser, E. (1996). The evaluative use of citation analysis for communication journals.  Human Communication Research, 22(4), 563 ff.

Garfield, E. (1972).  Citation analysis as a tool in journal evaluation.  Science, 178, 471-479.

Hakanen, E. & Wolfram, D. (1995).  Citation relationships among international mass communication journals.  Journal of Information Science, 21(3), 209-215.

Kaufman, P., Dykers, C., & Caldwell, C. (1993).  Why going online for content analysis can reduce research reliability. Journalism Quarterly, 70(4), 824-32.

Kreps. G. (1982).  Analysis of the interdisciplinary credibility of communication as a social science.  ACA Bulletin, 42, 40-43.

LaRose, A. (1989). Inclusiveness of indexes and abstracts of interest to students of communication. RQ, 29(1), 29-35.

 

Paisley, W.J.  (1984).  Communication in the communication sciences. In: B. Dervin & M. Voigt (Eds.), Progress in the communication sciences (5, pp. 1-43).  Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

Reeves, B. & Borgman, C. (1983).  A bibliographic evaluation of core journals in communication research. Human Communication Research, 10, 119-136.

Rice, R.E. (1990).  Hierarchies and clusters in communication and library and information science journals, 1978-1987.  In C. Borgman (Ed.), Scholarly communication and bibliometrics.  (pp 138-153.) Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Rice, R.E., Borgman, C.L., Bednarski, D, & Hart, P.J. (1989). Journal-to-journal citation data: Issues of validity and reliability.  Scientometrics, 15(3-4), 257-282.
Rice, R.E., Borgman, C.L., & Reeves, B. (1988). Citation networks of communication journals, 1977-1985: Cliques and positions, citations made and citations received.
  Human Communication Research, 15, 256-283.

Rice, R.E. & Crawford, G. (1992).  Context and content of citations between communication and library & information science articles.  In J. Schement and B. Ruben (eds.) Information and behavior, vol. 4.  (pp. 189-217.)  New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Press.

So, C.Y. (1988). Citation patterns of core communication journals.  Human Communication Research, 15, 236-255.


Wispe, L. & Osborn, C. (1982).
  Citation patterns in communication: A study of interdisciplinary influences.  ACA Bulletin, 42, 32-39.

Rice, R.E., Chapin, J., Pressman, R., Park, S., & Funkhouser, E. (1996). What's in a name?  Bibliometric analysis of 40 years of the Journal of Broadcasting (and Electronic
Media).
  Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 40, 511-539.

Thanks again.
All the best,
 
Chan-ung Park, Ph.D.
Department of Sociology
Dongguk University,
Seoul, Korea
[log in to unmask]