Cargando…

The emergence of a field: a network analysis of research on peer review

This article provides a quantitative analysis of peer review as an emerging field of research by revealing patterns and connections between authors, fields and journals from 1950 to 2016. By collecting all available sources from Web of Science, we built a dataset that included approximately 23,000 i...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Batagelj, Vladimir, Ferligoj, Anuška, Squazzoni, Flaminio
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Netherlands 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5629241/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29056788
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2522-8
_version_ 1783269019214675968
author Batagelj, Vladimir
Ferligoj, Anuška
Squazzoni, Flaminio
author_facet Batagelj, Vladimir
Ferligoj, Anuška
Squazzoni, Flaminio
author_sort Batagelj, Vladimir
collection PubMed
description This article provides a quantitative analysis of peer review as an emerging field of research by revealing patterns and connections between authors, fields and journals from 1950 to 2016. By collecting all available sources from Web of Science, we built a dataset that included approximately 23,000 indexed records and reconstructed collaboration and citation networks over time. This allowed us to trace the emergence and evolution of this field of research by identifying relevant authors, publications and journals and revealing important development stages. Results showed that while the term “peer review” itself was relatively unknown before 1970 (“referee” was more frequently used), publications on peer review significantly grew especially after 1990. We found that the field was marked by three development stages: (1) before 1982, in which most influential studies were made by social scientists; (2) from 1983 to 2002, in which research was dominated by biomedical journals, and (3) from 2003 to 2016, in which specialised journals on science studies, such as Scientometrics, gained momentum frequently publishing research on peer review and so becoming the most influential outlets. The evolution of citation networks revealed a body of 47 publications that form the main path of the field, i.e., cited sources in all the most influential publications. They could be viewed as the main corpus of knowledge for any newcomer in the field.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5629241
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Springer Netherlands
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-56292412017-10-19 The emergence of a field: a network analysis of research on peer review Batagelj, Vladimir Ferligoj, Anuška Squazzoni, Flaminio Scientometrics Article This article provides a quantitative analysis of peer review as an emerging field of research by revealing patterns and connections between authors, fields and journals from 1950 to 2016. By collecting all available sources from Web of Science, we built a dataset that included approximately 23,000 indexed records and reconstructed collaboration and citation networks over time. This allowed us to trace the emergence and evolution of this field of research by identifying relevant authors, publications and journals and revealing important development stages. Results showed that while the term “peer review” itself was relatively unknown before 1970 (“referee” was more frequently used), publications on peer review significantly grew especially after 1990. We found that the field was marked by three development stages: (1) before 1982, in which most influential studies were made by social scientists; (2) from 1983 to 2002, in which research was dominated by biomedical journals, and (3) from 2003 to 2016, in which specialised journals on science studies, such as Scientometrics, gained momentum frequently publishing research on peer review and so becoming the most influential outlets. The evolution of citation networks revealed a body of 47 publications that form the main path of the field, i.e., cited sources in all the most influential publications. They could be viewed as the main corpus of knowledge for any newcomer in the field. Springer Netherlands 2017-10-03 2017 /pmc/articles/PMC5629241/ /pubmed/29056788 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2522-8 Text en © The Author(s) 2017 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
spellingShingle Article
Batagelj, Vladimir
Ferligoj, Anuška
Squazzoni, Flaminio
The emergence of a field: a network analysis of research on peer review
title The emergence of a field: a network analysis of research on peer review
title_full The emergence of a field: a network analysis of research on peer review
title_fullStr The emergence of a field: a network analysis of research on peer review
title_full_unstemmed The emergence of a field: a network analysis of research on peer review
title_short The emergence of a field: a network analysis of research on peer review
title_sort emergence of a field: a network analysis of research on peer review
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5629241/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29056788
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2522-8
work_keys_str_mv AT batageljvladimir theemergenceofafieldanetworkanalysisofresearchonpeerreview
AT ferligojanuska theemergenceofafieldanetworkanalysisofresearchonpeerreview
AT squazzoniflaminio theemergenceofafieldanetworkanalysisofresearchonpeerreview
AT batageljvladimir emergenceofafieldanetworkanalysisofresearchonpeerreview
AT ferligojanuska emergenceofafieldanetworkanalysisofresearchonpeerreview
AT squazzoniflaminio emergenceofafieldanetworkanalysisofresearchonpeerreview