全部 标题 作者
关键词 摘要

OALib Journal期刊
ISSN: 2333-9721
费用:99美元

查看量下载量

相关文章

更多...
PLOS ONE  2012 

Characterizing Interdisciplinarity of Researchers and Research Topics Using Web Search Engines

DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0038747

Full-Text   Cite this paper   Add to My Lib

Abstract:

Researchers' networks have been subject to active modeling and analysis. Earlier literature mostly focused on citation or co-authorship networks reconstructed from annotated scientific publication databases, which have several limitations. Recently, general-purpose web search engines have also been utilized to collect information about social networks. Here we reconstructed, using web search engines, a network representing the relatedness of researchers to their peers as well as to various research topics. Relatedness between researchers and research topics was characterized by visibility boost—increase of a researcher's visibility by focusing on a particular topic. It was observed that researchers who had high visibility boosts by the same research topic tended to be close to each other in their network. We calculated correlations between visibility boosts by research topics and researchers' interdisciplinarity at the individual level (diversity of topics related to the researcher) and at the social level (his/her centrality in the researchers' network). We found that visibility boosts by certain research topics were positively correlated with researchers' individual-level interdisciplinarity despite their negative correlations with the general popularity of researchers. It was also found that visibility boosts by network-related topics had positive correlations with researchers' social-level interdisciplinarity. Research topics' correlations with researchers' individual- and social-level interdisciplinarities were found to be nearly independent from each other. These findings suggest that the notion of “interdisciplinarity" of a researcher should be understood as a multi-dimensional concept that should be evaluated using multiple assessment means.

References

[1]  de Solla Price DJ (1965) Networks of scientific papers. Science 149: 510–515.
[2]  Friedkin NE (1978) University social structure and social networks among scientists. Amer J Sociol 83: 1444–1465.
[3]  Braam RR, Moed HF, Van Raan AFJ (1991) Mapping of science by combined cocitation and word analysis I. Structural aspects. J Amer Soc Info Sci 42: 233–251.
[4]  Newman MEJ (2001) The structure of scientific collaboration networks. PNAS 98: 404–409.
[5]  Newman MEJ (2001) Clustering and preferential attachment in growing networks. Phys Rev E 64: 025102.
[6]  Eaton JP, Ward JC, Kumar A, Reingen PH (1999) Structural analysis of co-author relationships and author productivity in selected outlets for consumer behavior research. J Consumer Psych 8: 39–59.
[7]  Shiffrin RM, B?rner K, editors. (2004) Special issue on mapping knowledge domains. PNAS 101: Suppl 1
[8]  Newman MEJ (2004) Coauthorship networks and patterns of scientific collaboration. PNAS 101: Suppl 15200–5205.
[9]  B?rner K, Maru JT, Goldstone RL (2004) The simultaneous evolution of author and paper networks. PNAS 101: Suppl 15266–5273.
[10]  Asada Y, Matsuo Y, Ishizuka M (2005) Increasing scalability of researcher network extraction from the web. Trans Japan Soc Artif Intell 20: 370–378.
[11]  ?str?m F (2007) Changes in the LIS research front: Time-sliced cocitation analyses of LIS journal articles, 1990–2004. J Amer Soc Info Sci Tech 58: 947–957.
[12]  Janssens F, Gl?nzel W, De Moor B (2008) A hybrid mapping of information science. Scientometrics 75: 607–631.
[13]  Liu X, Yu S, Janssens F, Gl?nzel W, Moreau Y, et al. (2010) Weighted hybrid clustering by combining text mining and bibliometrics on a large-scale journal database. J Amer Soc Info Sci Tech 61: 1105–1119.
[14]  Lee SH, Kim PJ, Ahn YY, Jeong H (2010) Googling social interactions: Web search engine based social network construction. PLoS ONE e11233.
[15]  Klavans R, Boyack KW (2011) Using global mapping to create more accurate document-level maps of research fields. J Amer Soc Info Sci Tech 62: 1–18.
[16]  Barabási AL, Albert R (1999) Emergence of scaling in random networks. Science 286: 509–512.
[17]  Barabási AL (2003) Linked. New York: Plume. 304 p.
[18]  Newman M, Barabási AL, Watts DJ, editors. (2006) (2006) The Structure and Dynamics of Networks. Princeton: Princeton University Press. 624 p.
[19]  Porter AL, Cohen AS, Roessner JD, Perreault M (2007) Measuring researcher interdisciplinarity. Scientometrics 72: 117–147.
[20]  Leydesdorff L (2007) Betweenness centrality as an indicator of the interdisciplinarity of scientific journals. J Amer Soc Info Sci Tech 58: 1303–1319.
[21]  Rafols I, Meyer M (2010) Diversity and network coherence as indicators of interdisciplinarity: Case studies in bionanoscience. Scientometrics 82: 263–287.
[22]  Wagner CS, Roessner JD, Bobb K, Klein JT, Boyack KW, et al. (2011) Approaches to understanding and measuring interdisciplinarity scientific research (IDR): A review of the literature. J Informetrics 5: 14–26.
[23]  Levy P (1997) Collective Intelligence: Mankind's Emerging World in Cyberspace. New York: Basic Books. 277 p.
[24]  Malone TW, Laubacher R, Dellarocas C (2009) Harnessing crowds: Mapping the genome of collective intelligence. MIT Sloan Research Paper No. 4732-09.
[25]  Google Inc (2011) Google Web Search API website. http://code.google.com/apis/websearch/do?cs/. Accessed 4 November 2011. Now deprecated and replaced by Google APIs Console.
[26]  Kautz H, Selman B, Shah M (1997) The hidden web. AI Magazine 18(2): 27.
[27]  Mika P (2004) Bootstrapping the FOAF-web: An experiment in social network mining. Proc 1st Workshop on Friend of a Friend, Social Networking and the Semantic Web. Available: http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/Europe/events/?foaf-galway/papers/fp/bootstrapping_the_?foaf_web/. Accessed 16 May 2012.
[28]  Mori J, Matsuo Y, Ishizuka M, Faltings B (2004) Keyword extraction from the web for person metadata annotation. pp. 51–60. ISWC Workshop Notes VIII (W8) - 4th Intl Workshop on Knowledge Markup and Semantic Annotation.
[29]  Matsuo Y, Mori J, Hamasaki M, Nishimura T, Takeda H, et al. (2007) POLYPHONET: An advanced social network extraction system from the Web. Web Semantics 5: 262–278.
[30]  Wasserman S, Faust K (1994) Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 857 p.
[31]  Hagberg AA, Schult DA, Swart PJ (2008) Exploring network structure, dynamics, and function using NetworkX. pp. 11–15. Also see the NetworkX website http://networkx.lanl.gov/.
[32]  Sullivan D (2011) Why Google can't count results properly. A blog post on SearchEngineLand.com. October 21, 2010. http://searchengineland.com/why-google-c?ant-count-results-properly-53559 Accessed 13 December 2011.
[33]  Akaishi J, Sayama H, Dionne SD, Chen X, Gupta A, et al. (2010) Reconstructing history of social network evolution using web search engines. Proc. BIONETICS 2010, #10617. Available: http://bingweb.binghamton.edu/~sayama/pa?pers/BIONETICS2010-akaishi.pdf. Accessed 16 May 2012.
[34]  Dionne SD, Akaishi J, Chen X, Gupta A, Sayama H, et al. (2012) Retrospective relatedness reconstruction: Applications to adaptive social networks and social sentiment. Organizational Research Methods. DOI:10.1177/1094428112442572. In press.

Full-Text

Contact Us

service@oalib.com

QQ:3279437679

WhatsApp +8615387084133