Array
(
    [responseDate] => 2025-12-11T14:55:59Z
    [request] => https://revistas.ucm.es/index.php/RGID/oai
    [GetRecord] => SimpleXMLElement Object
        (
            [record] => SimpleXMLElement Object
                (
                    [header] => SimpleXMLElement Object
                        (
                            [identifier] => oai:ojs.revistas.ucm.es:article/64550
                            [datestamp] => 2019-09-20T09:34:14Z
                            [setSpec] => RGID:ART
                        )

                    [metadata] => SimpleXMLElement Object
                        (
                            [dc] => SimpleXMLElement Object
                                (
                                    [title] => Array
                                        (
                                            [0] => Bibliographic reviews as an element of similarity between journals. Analysis of the category Communication in Web of Science
                                            [1] => Reseñas bibliográficas como elemento de similitud entre revistas. Análisis de la categoría Comunicación en Web of Science
                                        )

                                    [creator] => Array
                                        (
                                            [0] => Repiso, Rafael
                                            [1] => de Aguilera, Miguel
                                            [2] => Castillo Esparcia, Antonio
                                        )

                                    [subject] => Array
                                        (
                                            [0] => Bibliographic Reviews
                                            [1] => journals
                                            [2] => Communication Journals
                                            [3] => Maps of Journals
                                            [4] => Journals
                                            [5] => Cluster of Journals
                                            [6] => Reseñas Bibliográficas
                                            [7] => Revistas
                                            [8] => Revistas de Comunicación
                                            [9] => Mapas de Revistas
                                            [10] => Clúster de Revistas
                                        )

                                    [description] => Array
                                        (
                                            [0] => This paper analyses the Book Reviews published in Communication journals indexed in thecategory Social Science Citation Index (WoS) in the period 2013-2017. Through the co-presence ofthe same works reviewed in different journals, the aim is to study the relationship of similaritybetween journals in the area. The results show how 25 journals do not publish reviews, analyzing 63journals, which allows to study the individual similarity of journals and at the same time generate areamaps. The methodological proposal is valid but limited. The results in the area of Communication arelogical, grouping the journals by defined topics. Using bibliographic reviews as an element ofsimilarity between journals should in any case be complementary to other methods and will beespecially significant in areas of Humanities, where books are the object of study.
                                            [1] => El presente trabajo analiza las reseñas bibliográficas publicadas en revistas deComunicación indexadas en la categoría Communication de Social Science Citation Index de Web ofScience® (WoS) en el periodo 2013-2017. A través de la copresencia de las mismas obras reseñadasen distintas revistas se pretende estudiar la relación de similitud entre revistas en el área. De las 86revistas se descartan 25 que no publican reseñas, analizándose pues 61, lo que permite examinar lasimilitud individual de revistas y a la vez generar mapas de área. La propuesta metodológica quebuscamos contrastar se muestra válida, pero limitada. Los resultados en el área de Comunicación sonlógicos, agrupándose las revistas por temáticas definidas. Utilizar las reseñas bibliográficas comoelemento de similitud entre revistas en todo caso debe ser complementario a otros métodos y seráespecialmente significativo en áreas de Humanidades, donde los propios libros son objeto de estudio.
                                        )

                                    [publisher] => Ediciones Complutense
                                    [date] => 2019-05-30
                                    [type] => Array
                                        (
                                            [0] => info:eu-repo/semantics/article
                                            [1] => info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
                                            [2] => Artículo revisado por pares
                                        )

                                    [format] => application/pdf
                                    [identifier] => Array
                                        (
                                            [0] => https://revistas.ucm.es/index.php/RGID/article/view/64550
                                            [1] => 10.5209/rgid.64550
                                        )

                                    [source] => Array
                                        (
                                            [0] => Revista General de Información y Documentación; Vol. 29 No. 1 (2019); 191-208
                                            [1] => Revista General de Información y Documentación; Vol. 29 Núm. 1 (2019); 191-208
                                            [2] => 1988-2858
                                            [3] => 1132-1873
                                        )

                                    [language] => spa
                                    [relation] => Array
                                        (
                                            [0] => https://revistas.ucm.es/index.php/RGID/article/view/64550/4564456551450
                                            [1] => /*ref*/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 
                                        )

                                    [rights] => Derechos de autor 2019 Revista General de Información y Documentación
                                )

                        )

                )

        )

)