In this article, the relationship of bibliometric techniques (especially citation analysis) to communication theory and research is examined, using the invisible college as the principal example. The invisible college is used because it is the best-known model of scientific communication, and because it is based in bibliometric studies of science. As such, the invisible college is typical of constructs that describe processes yet are founded on the study of structures; the ambiguity surrounding the use of the term is symptomatic of the confounding of structure and process in the study of scholarly communication. A revised definition of the invisible college is proposed that reemphasizes its fundamentally communicative nature, and issues for future theory building in scientific communication are suggested.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Broadus, R. N.
(1987). Toward a definition of “bibliometrics.”Scientometrics, 12(5-6), 373-379.
2.
Chubin, D. E.
(1976). The conceptualization of scientific specialties. Sociological Quarterly, 17, 448-476.
3.
Chubin, D. E.
(1983). Sociology of sciences: An annotated bibliography on invisible colleges, 1972-1981. New York: Garland.
4.
Chubin, D. E.
(1985). Beyond invisible colleges: Inspirations and aspirations of post-1972 social studies of science. Scientometrics, 7(3-6), 221-254.
5.
Chubin, D. E.
(1987). Research evaluation and the generation of big science policy. Knowledge: Creation, Diffusion, Utilization, 9(2), 254-277.
6.
Crane, D.
(1970). The nature of scientific communication and influence. International Social Science Journal, 22, 28-41.
7.
Crane, D.
(1972). Invisible colleges: Diffusion of knowledge in scientific communities. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
8.
Crane, D. (in press). Citation Classics commentary on Invisible Colleges. Current Contents.
9.
Crawford, S.
(1971). Informal communication among scientists in sleep research. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 22, 301-310.
10.
Edge, D. O.
(1968). Quantitative measures of communication in science: A critical review. History of Science, 17, 102-134.
11.
Edge, D. O.
(1977). Why I am not a co-citationist. Society for the Social Studies of Science Newsletter, 2, 13-19.
12.
Garfield, E.
, Malin, M. V., & Small, H. G. (1978). Citation data as science indicators. In Y. Elkana, J. Lederberg, R. K. Merton, A. Thackray, & H. Zuckerman (Eds.), Toward a metric of science: The advent of science indicators (pp. 179-207). New York: John Wiley.
13.
Garvey, W. D.
(1979). Communication: The essence of science. Facilitating information exchange among librarians, scientists, engineers, and students. New York: Pergamon Press.
14.
Griffith, B. C. (1987, October). Studies of information and communication and the revolution in understanding science. New Jersey chapter, American Society for Information Science Distinguished Lectureship, School of Communication, Information and Library Studies, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ.
15.
Griffith, B. C.
, Small, H. G., Stonehill, J. A., & Dey, S. L. (1974). The structure of scientific literatures. II: Toward a macro- and microstructure for science. Science Studies, 4, 339-365.
16.
Hagstrom, W. O.
(1968). The scientific community. New York: Basic Books.
17.
Hagstrom, W. O.
(1973). Review of Crane's Invisible Colleges. Contemporary Sociology, 2, 381-383.
18.
Hicks, D.
(1987). Limitations of co-citation analysis as a tool for science policy. Social Studies of Science, 17, 295-316.
19.
Kadushin, C.
(1966). The friends and supporters of psychotherapy: On social circles in urban life. American Sociological Review, 31, 786-802.
20.
Knorr-Cetina, K. D.
(1981). The manufacture of knowledge: An essay in the constructivist and contextual nature of science. New York: Pergamon Press.
21.
Knorr-Cetina, K. D.
(1988, December). Thinking through talk: An ethnographic study of a molecular biology laboratory. Paper presented at the Symposium of Science Communication, sponsored by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the Annenberg School of Communications, University of Southern California, Los Angeles.
22.
Latour, B.
, & Woolgar, S. (1979). Laboratory life: The social construction of scientific facts. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
23.
Lievrouw, L. A.
(1988). Four programs of research in scientific communication. Knowledge in Society, 1(2), 6-22.
24.
Lievrouw, L. A.
, Rogers, E. M., Lowe, C. U., & Nadel, E. (1987). Triangulation as a research strategy for identifying invisible colleges among biomedical scientists. Social Networks, 9, 217-238.
25.
Lingwood, D. A. (1969). Interpersonal communication, research productivity, and invisible colleges. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Stanford University, Stanford, CA.
26.
MacRoberts, M. H.
, & MacRoberts, B. R. (1987). Another test of the normative theory of citing. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 38, 305-306.
27.
Menzel, H.
(1968). Informal communication in science: Advantages and analogues. In E. B. Montgomery (Ed.), The foundations of access to knowledge: A symposium. Syracuse, NY: School of Library Sciences, Syracuse University.
28.
Mulkay, M.
(1974). Methodology in the sociology of science: Some reflections on the study of radio astronomy. Social Science Information, 13, 109-119.
29.
Mullins, N. C.
(1968). The distribution of social and cultural properties in informal communication networks among biological scientists. American Sociological Review, 33, 786-797.
30.
Mullins, N. C.
, Hargens, L. L., Hecht, P. K., & Kick, E. L. (1977). The group structure of co-citation clusters: A comparative study. American Sociological Review, 42, 552-562.
31.
Paisley, W. J.
(1965). The flow of (behavioral) science information: A review of the research literature. Stanford, CA: Stanford University, Institute for Communication Research.
32.
Paisley, W. J.
(1972). The role of invisible colleges in scientific information transfer. Educational Researcher, 1(4), 5-19.
33.
Paisley, W. J.
(1984). Communication in the communication sciences. In B. Dervin & M. Voight (Eds.), Progress in communication sciences (Vol. 5, pp. 1-43). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
34.
Parker, E. B.
, Paisley, W. J., & Garrett, R. (1967). Bibliographic citations as unobtrusive measures of scientific communication. Stanford, CA: Stanford University, Institute for Communication Research.
35.
Price, D. J. deS.
(1961). Science since Babylon. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
36.
Price, D. J. deS.
(1963). Little science, big science. New York: Columbia University Press.
37.
Pritchard, A.
(1969). Statistical bibliography or bibliometrics?Journal of Documentation, 25, 358-359.
38.
Restivo, S.
(1983). Supporting laboratory life: Funds and funding sources as contingencies in the social production of science. (Report to the National Science Foundation, Division of Policy Research and Analysis). Troy, NY: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Department of Science and Technology Studies.
39.
Rice, R. E., Hart, P. J., Borgman, C. L., & Bednarski, D. (in press). Validity and reliability in journal-to-journal citation data. Scientometrics.
40.
Rogers, E. M.
(1987). The interpretive approach in communication research on organizational culture. Los Angeles: University of Southern California, Annenberg School of Communications.
41.
Small, H. G.
(1973). Co-citation in the scientific literature: A new measure of the relationship between two documents. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 24, 265-269.
42.
Small, H. G.
, & Garfield, E. (1985). The geography of science: Disciplinary and national mappings. Journal of Information Science, 11, 147-159.
43.
Thackray, A.
(1978). Measurement in the historiography of science. In Y. Elkana, J. Lederberg, R. K. Merton, A. Thackray, & H. Zuckerman (Eds.), Toward a metric of science: The advent of science indicators (pp. 11-30). New York: John Wiley.
44.
Van Maanen, J.
(1983). Reclaiming qualitative methods for organizational research: A preface. In J. Van Maanen (Ed.), Qualitative methodology (pp. 9-18). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
45.
White, H. D.
, & Griffith, B. C. (1981). Author co-citation: A literature measure of intellectual structure. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 32, 163-171.
46.
Whitley, R. D.
(1969). Communication nets in science: Status and citation patterns in animal physiology. Sociological Review, 17, 219-233.
