![]() ![]() ![]() Both the citing and the cited papers were identified within the field-specific journal sets covered by the Scopus database. We gained these insights into four major fields of science: physical sciences, life sciences, health sciences, and social sciences. This provides some insights into whether giants in research like to build on the research of other giants. In this study, we address this question from a bibliometric perspective using capabilities in literature databases that became recently available : Unlike the (Social) Science Citation Index of Thomson Reuters, the Scopus database of Elsevier-launched in 2004-enables us to determine whether highly-cited papers themselves cite highly-cited papers to a significant extent. From this perspective, one can discuss whether research funding should be focused on elite scientists or rather aim at generating scientific capacities in the broad range of scientists. ![]() The issue, discussed by many eminent scientists and philosophers, is highly relevant for today's research funding policies. ![]() A third possibility offered by Turner and Chubin is the so-called Ecclesiastes hypothesis: these authors argue that scientific advancements can be considered as the result of chance processes or fortune using an evolutionary model of science. In contrast to Newton's, well-known aphorism that he had been able “to see further only by standing on the shoulders of giants,” one attributes to the Spanish philosopher Ortega y Gasset the hypothesis saying that top-level research cannot be successful without a mass of medium researchers on which the top rests comparable to an iceberg. “La ciencia experimental ha progresado en buena parte merced al trabajo de hombres fabulosamente mediocres, y aun menos que mediocres” Ortega y Gasset ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |