1 図書館情報大学助手Assistant, University of Library and Information Science ◇ 〒305‒8550 茨城県つくば市春日1番2号 ◇ Kasuga 1‒2, Tsukuba-shi, Ibaraki 305‒8550, Japan
2 慶應義塾大学大学院文学研究科図書館・情報学専攻博士課程Graduate School of Library and Information Science, Keio University ◇ 〒108-8345 東京都港区三田二丁目15番45号 ◇ Mita 2-15-45, Minato-ku, Tokyo 108-8345, Japan
In Yasunori Saito’s paper which appeared in this journal last year, he stated that if the co-citation relationships among articles were recognized then there was a paradigm and the formation of a specialty was then identified. In this paper, Saito’s proposition was examined in terms of the use of “concept” and the use of “method”, i.e. the concept being the “paradigm” and the method being the “co-citation analysis”. The conclusion is: 1. the concept of the paradigm he used is so ambiguous that it can’t be used as an effective device; 2. the highly co-cited articles do not necessarily hold a paradigm in common; 3. co-citation analysis is not the only method to identify a specialty.
© 1985 三田図書館・情報学会© 1985 Mita Society for Library and Information Science
This page was created on 2021-01-27T14:22:43.127+09:00
This page was last modified on
このサイトは（株）国際文献社によって運用されています。