The development of frames of references

1. Sources for such variance have been sought in the social and intellectual organization of the sciences as well as in the organization of the external relations of scientists. An attempt to systematize the former perspective can be found in: R. D. WHITLEY,The Intellectual and Social Organization of the Sciences, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1984. For the latter perspective, see: K. KNORR-CETINA,The Manufacture of Knowledge. An Essay on the Constructivist and Contextual Nature of Science, Pergamon Press, Oxford/New York, 1981. See for a recent review: H. M. COLLINS, The Sociology of Scientific Knowledge: Studies of Contemporary Science,Annual Review of Sociology, 9 (1983) 265.

   Google Scholar 

2. “Whatever one's final assessment ofKuhn's view may be, it is clear that his diagnosis succeeds in a way thatMerton's does not, because it embraces the specific activities, theories and concepts of the scientist.” (S. B. BARNES, R. G. A. DOLBY, A deviant viewpoint,Archives Europeennes de Sociologie, 9 (1970) 3.)

   Google Scholar 

3. This point has been most vigorously made by the representatives of the so-called ‘strong programme’, but is at the background in other sociology of science programmes as well. For ‘the strong programme’ see: D. BLOOR,Knowledge and Social Imagery, Routledge and Kegan Paul, London/Boston, 1976, pp. 1–19.

   Google Scholar 

4. In 1970 a research programme on science studies was launched at the Starnberg Max-Planck-Institut. The two programmatic articles of the groups were: G. GÖHME, W. v. d. DAELE, W. KROHN, Alternativen in der Wissenschaft,Zeitschrift für Soziologie, 1 (1972) 302; G. BÖHME, W. v. d. DAELE, W. KROHN, Finalisierung der Wissenschaft,Zeitschrift für Soziologie, 2 (1973) 128.

   Google Scholar 

5. G. BÖHME, W. v. d. DAELE, R. HOHLFELD, W. KROHN, W. SCHÄFER, T. SPENGLER,Die gesellschaftliche Orientierung des wissenschaftlichen Fortschritts, Suhrkamp, Frankfurt/M, 1978.

   Google Scholar 

6. W. v. d. DAELE, W. KROHN, P. WEINGART, (Hrsg.)Geplante Forschung, Suhrkamp, Frankfurt/M, 1979. See also: W. v. d. DAELE, P. WEINGART, Resistenz und Rezeptivität der Wissenschaft — Zu den Entstehungsbedingungen neuer Disziplinen durch wissenschaftspolitischen Steuerung,Zeitschrift für Soziologie, 4 (1975) 146.

   Google Scholar 

7. G. KÜPPERS, P. LUNDGREEN, P. WEINGART, Umweltprogramm und Umweltforschung, in:Op. cit., note 6,, pp. 239–286.

   Google Scholar 

8. Cf. I. SPIEGEL-RÖSING,Wissenschaftsentwicklung und Wissenschaftssteuerung, Athenäum Verlag, Frankfurt a. M., 1973, pp. 106–131.

   Google Scholar 

9. W. v. d. DAELE, et al.,Mission Orientation in Science, Science Dynamics, Amsterdam, 1982, p. 10.

   Google Scholar 

10. Op. cit., note 6.

    Google Scholar 

11. Y. DRORR,Design for Policy Studies, Elsevier, New York/Amsterdam, 1972.

    Google Scholar 

12. Cf. KNORR-CETINA, 1981.Op. cit., note 1.

    Google Scholar 

13. See also: K. E. STUDER, D. E. CHUBIN,The Cancer Mission. Social Contexts of Biomedical Research, Sage, Beverly Hills/London, 1980, pp. 269 f.

    Google Scholar 

14. D. de SOLLA PRICE, Networks of Scientific Papers,Science, 149 (1965) 510.

    Google Scholar 

15. Other indicators, such as impact and immediacy factors of journals, can easily be computed from these data. See: E. GARFIELD, Citation Analysis as a Tool in Journal Evaluation,Science, 178 (1972) 471.

    Google Scholar 

16. F. NARIN, M. CARPENTER, N. C. BERLT, Interrelationships of Scientific Journals,Journal of the American Society of Information Science, 23 (1972) 323. See also: M. P. CARPENTER, F. NARIN, Clustering of Scientific Journals,Journal of the American Society of Information Science, 24 (1973) 425.

    Google Scholar 

17. There is some evidence that particularistic criteria may be influential even at this level, particularly in the social sciences. See also: W. C. YOELS, The Structure of Scientific Fields and the Allocation of Editorships on Scientific Journals: Some Observations on the Politics of Knowledge,The Sociological Quarterly, 15 (1974) 264.

    Google Scholar 

18. E. GARFIELD, Citation Analysis of Scientific Journals,Citation Indexing, Wiley & Sons, New York, etc., 1979, pp. 148–239.

    Google Scholar 

19. G. HIRST, Discipline Impact Factors: A Method for determining Core Journal Lists,Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 29 (1978) 171.

    Google Scholar 

20. F. NARIN et al. 1972 (op. cit., note 16 ). used a two-step model instead of this three-step model.

    Google Scholar 

21. E. E. ROSKAM, J. C. LINGOES,Nonmetric Multidimensional Scaling GKLR MINISSA-1. Standard Version, June 11, 1974.

22. Cf. A. J. ASHTON,The use of cluster analysis techniques on biotechnology journal citation data, MSc Thesis, Technology Policy Unit, University of Aston, Birmingham, 1980.

    Google Scholar 

23. A factor, like a cluster in cluster analysis, has to be labelled with hindsight. A variable's loading on a factor is analogous to the distance of that variable from the centre of a cluster in cluster analysis. (The higher the factor loading, the closer to the centre of the cluster.) Unlike cluster analysis, a journal can appear in more than one factor, and hence participate in more than one subject area. Moreover, with factor analysis we get a measure of the proportion of the common and unique variance of each variable. Cf. E. NADEL, Commitment and Co-Citation: An Indicator of Incommensurability in Patterns of Formal Communication,Social Studies of Science, 13 (1983) 255, notes 22 and 23.

    Google Scholar 

24. J. CRAMER, R. HAGENDIJK, Aquatic Ecology in the Netherlands: What is being done by whom?Hydrobiological Bulletin, 17 (1) (1983) 77.

    Google Scholar 

25. Bundesministerium für Forschung und Technologie (Hrsg.),Ein Programm und seine Wirkungen, Analyse von Zielen und Aspekten zur Forschung “Humanisierung des Arbeitslebens” Campus, Frankfurt/New York, 1982.

26. Op. cit., note 14..

    Google Scholar 

27. For the political backgrounds of this field, see also: L. LEYDESDORFF, P. v. d. BESSELAAR, Squeezed between Capital and Technology. On the Participation of Labour in the Knowledge Society,Acta Sociologica (forthcoming).

28. Op. cit., note 7. ; see also: J. CRAMER, W. v. d. DAELE, Is Ecology an ‘Alternative’ Natural Science?,Synthese (forthcoming).

    Google Scholar 

29. Of course, this is also the case for ‘citation’, which is used here as a measure of the proximity of journals to one another. In citation analysis, for example ‘citations’ can be a measure of indebtedness.

30. Op. cit., note 14..

    Google Scholar 

31. Op. cit., note 13..

    Google Scholar 

Download references