What can bibliometrics tell us about changes in the mode of knowledge production?
What can bibliometrics tell us about changes in the mode of knowledge production?
复制标题
关于知识生产方式的变化，文献计量学能告诉我们什么？
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2011
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
B. Martin
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
B. Martin
在过去20年中，对科学政策研究和科学技术研究领域最具影响力的贡献之一是吉本斯等人的《知识的新生产》（吉本斯，M.，利摩日，C.，诺沃特尼，H.，施瓦茨曼，S.，斯科特，P.和特罗，M.（1994）《知识的新生产：当代社会科学与研究的动态》，伦敦Sage）。作者认为，近几十年来出现了一种不同形式的知识生产，他们称之为“模式2”。在这种情况下，知识是在应用的背景下产生的，通常是在跨学科研究努力的基础上，由各种各样的机构行动者产生，与传统的“模式1”知识生产相比，他们承担着更广泛的社会责任和更多样化的质量控制形式。尽管有很多人试图从经验上检验《知识的新生产》的主张，但证据充其量是相当模糊的。本文报道的研究分析了文献计量学研究领域中高被引出版物，以确定这些出版物的主题，更具体地说，这些主题在过去20年中的变化，是否提供了模式2知识生产日益增加的证据。本文的结论是，有一些证据表明，文献计量学作为一个研究领域，在过去二十年中表现出向模式二知识生产的转变。此外，它似乎在更广泛的科学领域的类似转变中发挥了作用，提供了与政策相关的工具和分析，帮助科学研究应对日益增长的问责要求，并促进了研究质量评估方法的变化。与此同时，也许是无意中，它可能促成了出版和引用实践的变化，因为越来越多的作者寻求在一个或多个文献计量指标上最大化他们的“得分”。
One of the most influential contributions to the fields of science policy research and science and technology studies during the last 20 years was The New Production of Knowledge by Gibbons et al. (Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H., Schwartzman, S., Scott, P. and Trow, M. (1994) The New Production of Knowledge: The Dynamics of Science and Research in Contemporary Societies, Sage, London). The authors argued that over recent decades a different form of knowledge production has emerged, one which they termed ‘Mode 2’. In this, knowledge is produced in the context of application, generally on the basis of transdisciplinary research efforts, by a heterogeneous range of institutional actors, who are subject to wider social accountability and more diverse forms of quality control than in the traditional ‘Mode 1’ knowledge production. Although there have been a number of attempts to examine the claims of The New Production of Knowledge empirically, the evidence is, at best, rather ambiguous. The study reported here analyses highly cited publications in the field of bibliometric research to establish whether the themes of those publications and, more specifically, the changes in these themes over the last 20 years, provide any evidence of a growing incidence of Mode 2 knowledge production. The paper concludes that there is some evidence that bibliometrics, as a field of research, has exhibited a shift towards Mode 2 knowledge production over the last two decades. In addition, it would seem to have played a part in a similar shift across science more generally, offering policy-relevant tools and analyses, helping scientific research to respond to increased demands for accountability, and contributing to changes in the approach to the quality assessment of research. At the same time, and perhaps inadvertently, it may have contributed to bringing about changes in publication and citation practices as more and more authors seek to maximise their ‘score’ on one or more bibliometric indicators.