Luis de-Marcos, Manuel Goyanes, Adrián Domínguez-Díaz
{"title":"Mapping science through editorial board interlocking: connections and distance between fields of knowledge and institutional affiliations","authors":"Luis de-Marcos, Manuel Goyanes, Adrián Domínguez-Díaz","doi":"10.1007/s11192-024-05027-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Research is a global enterprise underpinned by the general belief that findings need to be true to be considered scientific. In the complex system of scientific validation, editorial boards (EBs) play a fundamental role in guiding journals’ review process, which has led many stakeholders of sciences to metaphorically picture them as the “gatekeepers of knowledge.” In an attempt to address the academic structure that governs sciences through editorial board interlocking (EBI, the cross-presence of EB members in different journals) and social network analysis, the aim of this study is threefold: first, to map the connection between fields of knowledge through EBI; second, to visualize and empirically test the distance between social and general sciences; and third, to uncover the institutional structure (i.e., universities) that governs these connections. Our findings, based on the dataset collected through the Open Editors initiative for the journals indexed in the JCR, revealed a substantial level of collaboration between all fields, as suggested by the connections between EBs. However, there is a statistically significant difference between the weight of the edges and the path lengths connecting the fields of natural sciences to the fields of social sciences (compared to the connections within), indicating the development of different research cultures and invisible colleges in these two research areas. The results also show that a central group of US institutions dominates most journal EBs, indirectly suggesting that US scientific norms and values still prevail in all fields of knowledge. Overall, our study suggests that scientific endeavor is highly networked through EBs.</p>","PeriodicalId":21755,"journal":{"name":"Scientometrics","volume":"28 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Scientometrics","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-024-05027-x","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Research is a global enterprise underpinned by the general belief that findings need to be true to be considered scientific. In the complex system of scientific validation, editorial boards (EBs) play a fundamental role in guiding journals’ review process, which has led many stakeholders of sciences to metaphorically picture them as the “gatekeepers of knowledge.” In an attempt to address the academic structure that governs sciences through editorial board interlocking (EBI, the cross-presence of EB members in different journals) and social network analysis, the aim of this study is threefold: first, to map the connection between fields of knowledge through EBI; second, to visualize and empirically test the distance between social and general sciences; and third, to uncover the institutional structure (i.e., universities) that governs these connections. Our findings, based on the dataset collected through the Open Editors initiative for the journals indexed in the JCR, revealed a substantial level of collaboration between all fields, as suggested by the connections between EBs. However, there is a statistically significant difference between the weight of the edges and the path lengths connecting the fields of natural sciences to the fields of social sciences (compared to the connections within), indicating the development of different research cultures and invisible colleges in these two research areas. The results also show that a central group of US institutions dominates most journal EBs, indirectly suggesting that US scientific norms and values still prevail in all fields of knowledge. Overall, our study suggests that scientific endeavor is highly networked through EBs.
期刊介绍:
Scientometrics aims at publishing original studies, short communications, preliminary reports, review papers, letters to the editor and book reviews on scientometrics. The topics covered are results of research concerned with the quantitative features and characteristics of science. Emphasis is placed on investigations in which the development and mechanism of science are studied by means of (statistical) mathematical methods.
The Journal also provides the reader with important up-to-date information about international meetings and events in scientometrics and related fields. Appropriate bibliographic compilations are published as a separate section. Due to its fully interdisciplinary character, Scientometrics is indispensable to research workers and research administrators throughout the world. It provides valuable assistance to librarians and documentalists in central scientific agencies, ministries, research institutes and laboratories.
Scientometrics includes the Journal of Research Communication Studies. Consequently its aims and scope cover that of the latter, namely, to bring the results of research investigations together in one place, in such a form that they will be of use not only to the investigators themselves but also to the entrepreneurs and research workers who form the object of these studies.