bascule Posted June 21, 2008 Share Posted June 21, 2008 http://www.eigenfactor.org/map/maps.htm Calculated by randomly traversing a citation graph Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Skeptic Posted June 21, 2008 Share Posted June 21, 2008 Cool graph. I'm kind of surprised that physics appears to be third place though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CDarwin Posted June 21, 2008 Share Posted June 21, 2008 How does anthropology hook up with molecular and cell biology so closely? And "geosciences" really should have been split up. Just because there aren't a lot of researchers in the earth sciences doesn't mean they don't do a big variety of things. It's everything from paleontology to cartography. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D H Posted June 21, 2008 Share Posted June 21, 2008 Cool graph. I'm kind of surprised that physics appears to be third place though. That might be real, or it might not. An argument that it is real: Medicine is more directly connected to humanity than any other science, and thus gets a lot more research money than any other branch of science. There are definitely defects in the graph. Engineering is represented to a very limited extent. No computer or software engineering, which obviously have extensive ties to computer science. No aerospace or mechanical engineering, which obviously have extensive ties to physics and less obviously to computer science. They selected 6128 journals. That's a lot for a statistically significant sample, so it must have been intended to be a complete list. Is it complete? In any case, this is a very interesting graph. Thanks, bascule. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pangloss Posted June 21, 2008 Share Posted June 21, 2008 Bear in mind that it's showing citations, not actual correlations in research. Note how isolated the science of "Probability & Statistics" is on the chart. Statistics are an integral part of virtually all research conducted today, so you'd think it would be connected with every single dot on that page. It's not because the statistics used in those papers are commonly accepted and therefore don't require citation. Perhaps it's the same way with basic principles of physics. Also some of what we're seeing here (which I think is really interesting, btw -- a very cool chart) is the difference in how each area of science views the importance and relevance of citations. Perhaps it's more important in medicine, for example, and less important in other areas. Or maybe that's a stretch of a conclusion, I don't know. It might be interesting to find out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ecoli Posted June 22, 2008 Share Posted June 22, 2008 How does anthropology hook up with molecular and cell biology so closely? . the only thing I can think of is epidemiology. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CDarwin Posted June 22, 2008 Share Posted June 22, 2008 the only thing I can think of is epidemiology. Well, biological anthropologists cite molecular studies a lot (there's a field called molecular anthropology), but I still don't see how that would outweigh citations to, say, sociological journals by all the cultural anthropologists. They're most of the field. I get the connections to medicine and ecology and evolutionary biology, though. And how to do crop scientists not cite agricultural journals more than that? There's something weird in the way these connections are laid out. Maybe some fields are supposed to connect through other fields? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sisyphus Posted June 22, 2008 Share Posted June 22, 2008 What I find amusing are all the things which apparently aren't considered "medicine." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CDarwin Posted June 22, 2008 Share Posted June 22, 2008 What I find amusing are all the things which apparently aren't considered "medicine." I know, all the splitting seems to be fairly arbitrary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Skeptic Posted June 22, 2008 Share Posted June 22, 2008 I'm guessing they split medicine because it is already such a big node in the graph. The method of linking citations does hint at relationships between the sciences, but it leaves out "common knowledge" from other fields. Still, it would be useful information for someone planning on going into a field of research. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ecoli Posted June 22, 2008 Share Posted June 22, 2008 The method of linking citations does hint at relationships between the sciences, but it leaves out "common knowledge" from other fields. Still, it would be useful information for someone planning on going into a field of research. yeah, like where the funding is! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ydoaPs Posted June 22, 2008 Share Posted June 22, 2008 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bascule Posted June 22, 2008 Author Share Posted June 22, 2008 [comic] As mathematics is a symbolic language, I think this guy belongs on top: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sisyphus Posted June 22, 2008 Share Posted June 22, 2008 Mathematics is applied metaphysics... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D H Posted June 22, 2008 Share Posted June 22, 2008 Mathematics is applied metaphysics... I can't find the official divorce decree, but I believe it happened around the same time that astronomy stopped being applied astrology and chemistry stopped being applied alchemy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Skeptic Posted June 22, 2008 Share Posted June 22, 2008 yeah, like where the funding is! Not quite what I was thinking, but that does seem like it would be one very good use for that graph. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sisyphus Posted June 23, 2008 Share Posted June 23, 2008 I can't find the official divorce decree, but I believe it happened around the same time that astronomy stopped being applied astrology and chemistry stopped being applied alchemy. Well you believe incorrectly, then. They're closer than ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now