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
In 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 inten...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Scientometrics 2020-02, Vol.122 (2), p.1051-1074 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 1074 |
---|---|
container_issue | 2 |
container_start_page | 1051 |
container_title | Scientometrics |
container_volume | 122 |
creator | Bornmann, Lutz Wray, K. Brad Haunschild, Robin |
description | In 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 discovery
—
Logik 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. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s11192-019-03326-2 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2343581276</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2343581276</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c411t-5c89395214670660b5738f5cfb7ca53d230c6d7323bbd2d81fe17e139b4c3f093</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kctu1DAUhi0EEsPAC7A6EhtYZPBlkjjsqqhQ1EqtoKwjxznppHji4OMA87J9lnoaKDtWPpK_7_flZ-y14BvBefmehBCVzLioMq6ULDL5hK1ErnUmdSGeshUXSmeVUPw5e0F0y5OkuF6xu3qIJg5-BOtHi1MEMxp3oIHgbV2fvPsABkb8Bb0Pe_A92L_4IxbwJxo3jDcQdwgzYT-7EYke6CWTjjr4tB8STmiCTSPB4NxMMZiIHbQHwN-4n5wJB7CGECjO3YCJGq1LUzrAOkM0WGi9_05H43rn94bg6wbO593xTh2cm-Dgywau_DRheMme9cYRvvqzrtm3j6fX9Vl2cfnpc31ykdmtEDHLra5UlUuxLUpeFLzNS6X73PZtaU2uOqm4LbpSSdW2ney06FGUKFTVbq3qeaXW7M2SOwX_Y0aKza2fQ_oiaqTaqlwLWRaJkgtlgycK2DdTGPbpwY3gzbHHZumxST02Dz0me83UIlGCxxsM_6L_Y90DAn-kEg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2343581276</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>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</title><source>Springer Journals</source><creator>Bornmann, Lutz ; Wray, K. Brad ; Haunschild, Robin</creator><creatorcontrib>Bornmann, Lutz ; Wray, K. Brad ; Haunschild, Robin</creatorcontrib><description>In 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 discovery
—
Logik 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.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0138-9130</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1588-2861</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s11192-019-03326-2</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Cham: Springer International Publishing</publisher><subject>Bibliometrics ; Citation analysis ; Cognitive ability ; Computer Science ; Information Storage and Retrieval ; Library Science</subject><ispartof>Scientometrics, 2020-02, Vol.122 (2), p.1051-1074</ispartof><rights>The Author(s) 2019</rights><rights>The Author(s) 2019. This work is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c411t-5c89395214670660b5738f5cfb7ca53d230c6d7323bbd2d81fe17e139b4c3f093</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c411t-5c89395214670660b5738f5cfb7ca53d230c6d7323bbd2d81fe17e139b4c3f093</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-0810-7091 ; 0000-0001-7025-7256 ; 0000-0001-8688-3390</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s11192-019-03326-2$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-019-03326-2$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902,41464,42533,51294</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Bornmann, Lutz</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wray, K. Brad</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Haunschild, Robin</creatorcontrib><title>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</title><title>Scientometrics</title><addtitle>Scientometrics</addtitle><description>In 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 discovery
—
Logik 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.</description><subject>Bibliometrics</subject><subject>Citation analysis</subject><subject>Cognitive ability</subject><subject>Computer Science</subject><subject>Information Storage and Retrieval</subject><subject>Library Science</subject><issn>0138-9130</issn><issn>1588-2861</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>C6C</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kctu1DAUhi0EEsPAC7A6EhtYZPBlkjjsqqhQ1EqtoKwjxznppHji4OMA87J9lnoaKDtWPpK_7_flZ-y14BvBefmehBCVzLioMq6ULDL5hK1ErnUmdSGeshUXSmeVUPw5e0F0y5OkuF6xu3qIJg5-BOtHi1MEMxp3oIHgbV2fvPsABkb8Bb0Pe_A92L_4IxbwJxo3jDcQdwgzYT-7EYke6CWTjjr4tB8STmiCTSPB4NxMMZiIHbQHwN-4n5wJB7CGECjO3YCJGq1LUzrAOkM0WGi9_05H43rn94bg6wbO593xTh2cm-Dgywau_DRheMme9cYRvvqzrtm3j6fX9Vl2cfnpc31ykdmtEDHLra5UlUuxLUpeFLzNS6X73PZtaU2uOqm4LbpSSdW2ney06FGUKFTVbq3qeaXW7M2SOwX_Y0aKza2fQ_oiaqTaqlwLWRaJkgtlgycK2DdTGPbpwY3gzbHHZumxST02Dz0me83UIlGCxxsM_6L_Y90DAn-kEg</recordid><startdate>20200201</startdate><enddate>20200201</enddate><creator>Bornmann, Lutz</creator><creator>Wray, K. Brad</creator><creator>Haunschild, Robin</creator><general>Springer International Publishing</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>C6C</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>E3H</scope><scope>F2A</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0810-7091</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7025-7256</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8688-3390</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20200201</creationdate><title>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</title><author>Bornmann, Lutz ; Wray, K. Brad ; Haunschild, Robin</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c411t-5c89395214670660b5738f5cfb7ca53d230c6d7323bbd2d81fe17e139b4c3f093</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>Bibliometrics</topic><topic>Citation analysis</topic><topic>Cognitive ability</topic><topic>Computer Science</topic><topic>Information Storage and Retrieval</topic><topic>Library Science</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Bornmann, Lutz</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wray, K. Brad</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Haunschild, Robin</creatorcontrib><collection>SpringerOpen</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Library & Information Sciences Abstracts (LISA)</collection><collection>Library & Information Science Abstracts (LISA)</collection><jtitle>Scientometrics</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Bornmann, Lutz</au><au>Wray, K. Brad</au><au>Haunschild, Robin</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>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</atitle><jtitle>Scientometrics</jtitle><stitle>Scientometrics</stitle><date>2020-02-01</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>122</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>1051</spage><epage>1074</epage><pages>1051-1074</pages><issn>0138-9130</issn><eissn>1588-2861</eissn><abstract>In 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 discovery
—
Logik 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.</abstract><cop>Cham</cop><pub>Springer International Publishing</pub><doi>10.1007/s11192-019-03326-2</doi><tpages>24</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0810-7091</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7025-7256</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8688-3390</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0138-9130 |
ispartof | Scientometrics, 2020-02, Vol.122 (2), p.1051-1074 |
issn | 0138-9130 1588-2861 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2343581276 |
source | Springer Journals |
subjects | Bibliometrics Citation analysis Cognitive ability Computer Science Information Storage and Retrieval Library Science |
title | 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 |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-14T18%3A09%3A01IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Citation%20concept%20analysis%20(CCA):%20a%20new%20form%20of%20citation%20analysis%20revealing%20the%20usefulness%20of%20concepts%20for%20other%20researchers%20illustrated%20by%20exemplary%20case%20studies%20including%20classic%20books%20by%20Thomas%20S.%20Kuhn%20and%20Karl%20R.%20Popper&rft.jtitle=Scientometrics&rft.au=Bornmann,%20Lutz&rft.date=2020-02-01&rft.volume=122&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=1051&rft.epage=1074&rft.pages=1051-1074&rft.issn=0138-9130&rft.eissn=1588-2861&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s11192-019-03326-2&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2343581276%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2343581276&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |