|
Article Excerpt
ABSTRACT
A SCIENTOMETRIC MODEL (ISI-S model) is introduced for describing the institutionalization process of scientific information. The central concept of ISI-S is that the scientific information published may develop with time through permanent evaluation and modification processes toward a cognitive consensus of distinguished authors of the respective scientific field or discipline. ISI-S describes the information and knowledge systems of science as a global network of interdependent information and knowledge clusters that are dynamically changing by their content and size. ISI-S assumes sets of information with short- or long-term impact and information integrated into the basic scientific knowledge or common knowledge. The type of the information sources (e.g., lecture,journal paper, review, monograph, book, textbook, lexicon) and the length of the impact are related to the grade of institutionalization. References are considered as proofs of manifested impact. The relative and absolute development of scientific knowledge seems to be slower than the increase of the number of publications.
MODELS OF THE GROWTH OF SCIENCE
According to the information model of science suggested by Nalimov & Mulchenko (1969) one can assume that scientific research is an organized information generating system and that science is a system of organized knowledge. Scientific research is fed with information as input for generating information as output that is new (original) or restructured knowledge compared to the input.
The growth of science is preferably described in the literature by models based on the cumulative growth of publications. In each model the cumulative number of publications in a given year depends on the number of publications in the starting year, the rate of growth, and the length of the time period elapsed (Gilbert, 1978; Wolfram, Chu, & Lu, 1990).
The linear model calculates with constant increases during equal time periods. Rescher (1978) suggested, for example, a linear growth function for the first-rate publications. The exponential model predicts an exponential increase of publications without limits to growth (e.g., Price, 1963; Egghe, 2000; Gupta & Karisiddappa, 2000). The logistic growth takes into account that scientific research is not a closed system and physical, economic, intellectual, etc. limitations occur that may bring about an upper limit to the growth (e.g., Price, 1963; Egghe & Rao, 1992; Gupta, Praveen, & Karisiddappa, 1997).
The application of cumulative numbers of publications for describing the development of science is, however, inappropriate, since the method does not take into account the aging of information. The concept, "cumulative number of papers," would indicate that all information previously published was relevant (regarding currency or recency) in the year of the study. This cannot be valid, considering, for example, the decreasing percentage shares of references with years referenced in Science Citation Index or Journal Citation Reports (SCI or JCR) for any journal.
Several authors (e.g., Egghe & Rao, 1992; Egghe, 2000) try to describe the development of science with the assumption of exponential increase of publications and exponential decrease of the relevant information. Theoretically, the model may be correct but practically, the synchrony between the opposing trends cannot be justified for any period.
Rescher (1978) tackled the "Rousseau law," suggesting "that the historical situation has been one of a constant progress of science as a cognitive discipline notwithstanding its exponential growth as a productive enterprise" (p. 111).
The calculation of the annual increase and subsequent aging of publications may give only an approximation to the growth of scientific knowledge in different fields of the natural sciences. Science works with great redundancy; there are numerous parallel papers, and several results already published are republished as original works (Price, 1963; Merton, 1968).
Menard (1971) investigated the publication development of chemistry, geology, and physics. The number of papers in physics increased linearly up to 1914 and then showed an exponential growth. The number of publications on chemistry was found to increase exponentially from the beginning of this century. Menard found very fast development in some hot fields, such as particle physics, where the annual rate was 15 percent in the 1950s and 60s. Menard distinguished three types of subfields: Stable fields, which increase linearly or exponentially at very slow rates; fast, exponentially growing fields; and cyclic fields, with stable and fast growth periods alternating. In support of Menard's results, Vinkler (2000) found that the mean publication growth (i.e., mean annual number of publications) of different scientific fields strongly depends on the time period selected. For example, for Chemical Abstracts, a 6 percent mean annual increase was calculated between 1962-1979, and only one percent from 1980-1992, whereas 4 percent was observed between 1993-1999. Consequently, one may conclude that there is no general law "governing" the publication growth of disciplines for longer periods. The (cumulative) increase (or decrease) in the annual number of publications depends on several factors within and without science. The time/number of publications functions may be valid only for the period studied and have no predictive power.
Several attempts have been made to describe the development of science with nonscientometric models (Kuhn, 1962; Goffman & Warren, 1980; Crane, 1972; Mulkay, Gilbert, & Woolgar, 1975; Mullins, 1973). Gupta & Karisiddappa (2000) distinguished four developmental phases where cognitive content, methodology, type of publications, social structure, and institutionalization of the scientific research is characteristically different. According to this model, the information in the first phase is published primarily in "innovative" documents and reprints, in the second phase in papers, in the third phase in specific journals and textbooks, and in the fourth phase in journal bibliographies. The main institutional frameworks of emerging disciplines are as follows: Informal (nonorganized) stage, small symposia, congresses and formal meetings, university departments.
GROWTH OF THE LITERATURE CHARACTERIZED BY THE RELATIVE PUBLICATION GROWTH INDEX
For describing the publication growth of science, one may borrow an...
|
.%20%20&position=1)