Abstract After 30 years of research, co-citation analysis has become the dominant method for the empirical study of the structures of scientific communication. There is a considerable variety of methods and, at the same time, a lack of methodological evaluation. This paper summarizes the present state of co-citation analysis and presents several methods of clustering references. The database used is a selection of 2,114 documents in the field of organization studies from 1986-2000. The evaluative study shows that the choice of methods has a strong impact on the results created. It also shows that the methods of cluster and factor analysis hitherto used have only a limited value in differentiating clearly between schools of scientific research - the 'invisible colleges'.
%0 Journal Article
%1 gm�r_co-citation_2003
%A Gmür, Markus
%D 2003
%J Scientometrics
%K imported
%P 27-57
%T Co-citation analysis and the search for invisible colleges: A methodological evaluation
%U http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1023619503005
%V 57
%X Abstract After 30 years of research, co-citation analysis has become the dominant method for the empirical study of the structures of scientific communication. There is a considerable variety of methods and, at the same time, a lack of methodological evaluation. This paper summarizes the present state of co-citation analysis and presents several methods of clustering references. The database used is a selection of 2,114 documents in the field of organization studies from 1986-2000. The evaluative study shows that the choice of methods has a strong impact on the results created. It also shows that the methods of cluster and factor analysis hitherto used have only a limited value in differentiating clearly between schools of scientific research - the 'invisible colleges'.
@article{gm�r_co-citation_2003,
abstract = {Abstract\ \ After 30 years of research, co-citation analysis has become the dominant method for the empirical study of the structures of scientific communication. There is a considerable variety of methods and, at the same time, a lack of methodological evaluation. This paper summarizes the present state of co-citation analysis and presents several methods of clustering references. The database used is a selection of 2,114 documents in the field of organization studies from 1986-2000. The evaluative study shows that the choice of methods has a strong impact on the results created. It also shows that the methods of cluster and factor analysis hitherto used have only a limited value in differentiating clearly between schools of scientific research - the 'invisible colleges'.},
added-at = {2007-12-03T17:48:07.000+0100},
author = {Gm{\"u}r, Markus},
biburl = {https://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/20911b02c0584b7c8923441a628efe212/sercarfe},
interhash = {2a00065a349f50cb316d80c4df45d4b4},
intrahash = {0911b02c0584b7c8923441a628efe212},
journal = {Scientometrics},
keywords = {imported},
pages = {27-57},
timestamp = {2007-12-03T17:48:11.000+0100},
title = {Co-citation analysis and the search for invisible colleges: A methodological evaluation},
url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1023619503005 },
volume = 57,
year = 2003
}