Reseñas bibliográficas como elemento de similitud entre revistasAnálisis de la categoría Comunicación en Web of Science

Referencias bibliográficas

• Barnett, G. A., Huh, C., Kim, Y. oungju, & Park, H. W. (2011). Citations among communication journals and other disciplines: a network analysis. Scientometrics, 88(2), 449–469. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-011-0381-2
• Barnett, G. a., Huh, C., Kim, Y., & Park, H. W. (2011). Citations among communication journals and other disciplines: a network analysis. Scientometrics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-011-0381-2
• Batagelj, V., & Mrvar, A. (2002). Pajek—analysis and visualization of large networks. In Graph Drawing (pp. 8–11). Springer. Retrieved from http://www.springerlink.com/index/JFJPG0AN9MM0G81D.pdf
• Blondel, V. D., Guillaume, J. L., Lambiotte, R., & Lefebvre, E. (2008). Fast unfolding of communities in large networks. Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment, 10008–10020. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-5468/2008/10/P10008
• Bogart, S. (2017). SankeyMatic. Steve Bogart. Retrieved from http://sankeymatic.com/
• Carpenter, M. P., & Narin, F. (1973). Clustering of scientific journals. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 24(6), 425–436. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.4630240604
• Chi, P. (2014). Which role do non-source items play in the social sciences ? A case study in political science in Germany, Scientometrics (101), 1195–1213. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-014-1433-1
• Craig, R. T. (1999). Communication Theory as a Field. Communication Theory, 9(2), 119–161. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.1999.tb00166.x
• Delgado López-Cózar, E., & Cano, A. F. (2002). El estudio de casos en las bases de datos del Science Citation Index, Social Science Citation Index y Arts and Humanities Citation Index (1992-2000). Arbor, 171(675), 609–629. https://doi.org/10.3989/arbor.2002.i675.1049
• Deuze, M. (2012). Media Life. Cambridge: Polity Press.
• East, J. W. (2011). The Scholarly Book Review in the Humanities. Journal of Scholarly Publishing, 43(1), 52–67. https://doi.org/10.3138/jsp.43.1.52
• Edge, D. (1979). Quantitative Measures of Communication in Science: A Critical Review. History of Science, 17, 102–134.
• Felber, L. (2002). The Book Review: Scholarly and Editorial Responsability. Journal of Scholarly Publishing, 33(3), 166–172.
• Gastwirth, J. L. (1972). The Estimation of the Lorenz Curve and Gini Index. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 54(3), 306–316.
• Glänzel, W., & Schubert, A. (2003). A new classification scheme of science fields and subfields designed for scientometric evaluation purposes. Scientometrics, 56(3), 357–367.
• Gorraiz, J., Gumpenberger, C., & Purnell, P. J. (2014). The power of book reviews: A simple and transparent enhancement approach for book citation indexes. Scientometrics, 98(2), 841–852. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-013-1176-4
• Hartley, J. (2006). Reading and Writing Book Reviews Across the Disciplines. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 57(9), 1194–1207.
• Hartley, J. (2017). Some observations on the current state of book reviewing in the social sciences. Learned Publishing, (July), 1–3. https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1115
• Hoge, J. O., & West III, J. L. W. (1979). Academic Book Reviewing: Some Problems and Suggestion. Scholarly Publishing, 11(1), 35–41.
• Kamada, T., & Kawai, S. (1988). A simple method for computing general position in displaying three-dimensional objects. Computer Vision, Graphics, and Image Processing, 41(1), 43–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/0734-189X(88)90116-8
• Kousha, K., & Thelwall, M. (2015). Web Indicators for research evaluation. Part 3. Books and non-standar outputs. El Profesional de La Información, 24(6), 724–736. https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2015.nov.04
• Leydesdorff, L., & Probst, C. (2009). The delineation of an interdisciplinary specialty in terms of a journal set: the case of communication studies. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60(8), 1709–1718. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.21052
• Lindholm-Romantschuck, Y. (1998). Scholarly Book Reviewing in the Social Science and Humanities. London: Greenwood Press.
• Marín, M. (2015). Escribir textos científicos y académicos. Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires: Fondo de Cultura Económica.
• McCain, K. W. (1991). Mappin Economics through the Journal Literature: An Experiment in Journal Cocitation Analysis. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 42(4), 290–296.
• Morton, H. C., & Jamieson Price, A. (1986). The ACLS Survey of Scholars: views on publications, computers, libraries. Scholarly Communication, (5), 1–16.
• Narin, F., Carpenter, M., & Berlt, N. C. (1972). Interrelationships of scientific journals. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 23(5), 323–331. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.4630230508
• Nicolaisen, J. (2002). The scholarliness of published peer reviews: a bibliometric study of book reviews in selected social science fields. Research Evaluation, 11(3), 129–140.
• Park, H. W., & Leydesdorff, L. (2009). Knowledge linkage structures in communication studies using citation analysis among communication journals. Scientometrics, 81(1), 157–175. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-2119-y
• Pudovkin, A. I., & Garfield, E. (2002). Algorithmic procedure for finding semantically related journals. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 53(13), 1113–1119. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.10153
• Rafols, I., & Leydesdorff, L. (2009). Content-Based and Algorithmic Classifications of Journals: Perspectives on the Dynamics of Scientific Communication and Indexer Effects. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60(9), 1823–1835. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.21086
• Repiso, R., Torres-Salinas, D., & Delgado López-Cózar, E. (2016). Análisis de la relación entre disciplinas a través del uso de tesis doctorales. El caso de Televisión, Radio, Cine y Fotografía en España. Revista Latina de Comunicación Soicial, 71, 874–890. https://doi.org/10.4185/RLCS-2016-1125
• Serebnick, J. (1992). Selection and Holdings of Small Publishers’ Books in OCLC Libraries: A Study of the Influence of Reviews, Publishers, and Vendors. The Library Quarterly: Information, Community, Policy, 62(3), 259–294.
• Torres-Salinas, D., Jiménez-Contreras, E., & Robinson-García, N. (2014). Tendencias en Mapas de la Ciencia: Co-uso de información científica como reflejo de los investigadores. El Profesional de La Informacion, (23), 253–258. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.3145/epi.2014.may.05
• Van Raan, A. F. J. (1999). The Interdisciplinary Nature of Science: Theoritcal Framework and Bibliometric-Empirical Approach. In P. Weingart & N. Stehr (Eds.), Practising Interdisciplinarity. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. 66–78.
• Zuccala, A., & Leeuwen, T. Van. (2011). Book Reviews in Humanities Research Evaluations, Journal of American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62(10), 1979–1991.
• Zuccala, A., van Somere, M., & van Bellen, M. (2014). A Machine-Learning Approach to Coding Book Reviews as Quality Indicators: Toward a Theory of Megacitation. Journal of the ASsociation for Information Science and Technology, 65(11), 2248–2260. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23104