Invisible Colleagues: The Informal Organization of Knowledge Production in Criminology and Criminal Justice

References

• Ben-Ari, E. (1987). On acknowledgements in ethnographies. Journal of Anthropological Research, 43, 63–84.
   Google Scholar
• Binz-Scharf, M. C., Kalish, Y., & Paik, L. (2014). Making science: New generations of collaborative knowledge production. American Behavioral Scientist, 58, 1–17.
   Google Scholar
• Braga, A. A., Welsh, B. C., Papachristos, A. V., Schnell, C., & Grossman, L. (2014). The growth of randomized experiments in policing: The vital few and the salience of mentoring. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 10(1), 1–28.10.1007/s11292-013-9183-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chubin, D. E. (1975). Trusted assessorship in science: A relation in need of data. Social Studies of Science, 5, 362–367.10.1177/030631277500500307
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cohn, E. G., Farrington, D. P., & Iratzoqui, A. (2014). Most-cited scholars in criminology and criminal justice, 1986–2010. New York, NY: Springer.10.1007/978-3-319-01222-3
   Google Scholar
• Cole, J. R., & Zuckerman, H. (1984). The productivity puzzle: Persistence and change in patterns of publication of men and women scientists. In M. W. Steinkempt & M. L. Maehr (Eds.), Advances in motivation and achievement (2nd ed., Vol. 2, pp. 217–258). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cole, S., & Cole, J. R. (1968). Visibility and the structural bases of awareness of scientific research. American Sociological Review, 33, 397–413.10.2307/2091914
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crane, D. (1969). Social structure in a group of scientists: A test of the “invisible college” hypothesis. American Sociological Review, 34, 335–352.10.2307/2092499
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cronin, B. (1991). Let the credits roll: A preliminary examination of the role played by mentors and trusted assessors in disciplinary formation. Journal of Documentation, 47, 227–239.10.1108/eb026878
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cronin, B. (1992). The hidden influencers: An examination of the role played by mentors and trusted assessors in the evolution of information science. In P. Vakkari & B. Cronin (Eds.), Conceptions of library and information science: Historical, empirical, and theoretical perspectives (pp. 126–134). London: Taylor Graham.
   Google Scholar
• Cronin, B. (2001). Acknowledgement trends in the research literature of information science. Journal of Documentation, 57, 427–433.10.1108/EUM0000000007089
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cronin, B., McKenzie, G., Rubio, L., & Weaver-Wozniak, S. (1993). Accounting for influence: Acknowledgments in contemporary sociology. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 44, 406–412.10.1002/(ISSN)1097-4571
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cronin, B., Mckenzie, G., & Stiffler, M. (1992). Patterns of acknowledgement. Journal of Documentation, 48, 107–122.10.1108/eb026893
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cronin, B., & Overfelt, K. (1994). The scholar’s courtesy: A survey of acknowledgement behaviour. Journal of Documentation, 50, 165–196.10.1108/eb026929
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cullen, F. T. (2005). The twelve people who saved rehabilitation: How the science of criminology made a difference. Criminology, 43(1), 1–42.10.1111/crim.2005.43.issue-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• de Solla Price, D. J. (1961). Science since Babylon. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• de Solla Price, D. J., & Beaver, D. (1966). Collaboration in an invisible college. American Psychologist, 21, 1011–1018.10.1037/h0024051
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Edge, D. (1979). Quantitative measures of communication in science: A critical review. History of Science, 17, 102–134.10.1177/007327537901700202
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Feld, S. L. (1981). The focused organization of social ties. American Journal of Sociology, 86, 1015–1035.10.1086/ajs.1981.86.issue-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fox, M. F. (2005). Gender, family characteristics, and publication productivity among scientists. Social Studies of Science, 35, 131–150.10.1177/0306312705046630
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gaston, J. (1970). Communication and the reward system of science: A study of a national “invisible college”. The Sociological Review, 18, 25–41.10.1111/sore.1970.18.issue-S1
   Google Scholar
• Giannoni, D. S. (2002). Worlds of gratitude: A contrastive study of acknowledgement texts in English and Italian research articles. Applied Linguistics, 23(1), 1–31.10.1093/applin/23.1.1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gmür, M. (2003). Co-citation analysis and the search for invisible colleges: A methodological evaluation. Scientometrics, 57, 27–57.10.1023/A:1023619503005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• González-Alcaide, G., Melero-Fuentes, D., Aleixandre-Benavent, R., & Valderrama-Zurián, J.-C. (2013). Productivity and collaboration in scientific publications on criminology. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 24, 15–37.10.1080/10511253.2012.664153
   Google Scholar
• Heffner, A. G. (1979). Authorship recognition of subordinates in collaborative research. Social Studies of Science, 9, 377–384.10.1177/030631277900900305
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hicks, D., & Potter, J. (1991). Sociology of scientific knowledge: A reflexive citation analysis or science disciplines and disciplining science. Social Studies of Science, 21, 459–501.10.1177/030631291021003003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hyland, K. (2003). Dissertation acknowledgements: The anatomy of a Cinderella genre. Written Communication, 20, 242–268.10.1177/0741088303257276
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuhn, T. S. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Laband, D. N., & Tollison, R. D. (2000). Intellectual collaboration. Journal of Political Economy, 108, 632–662.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Laudel, G. (2002). Collaboration and reward: What do we measure by co-authorships? Research Evaluation, 11, 3–15.10.3152/147154402781776961
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leahey, E. (2006). Gender differences in productivity: Research specialization as a missing link. Gender and Society, 20, 754–780.10.1177/0891243206293030
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leahey, E. (2007). Not by productivity alone: How visibility and specialization contribute to academic earnings. American Sociological Review, 72, 533–561.10.1177/000312240707200403
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Long, J. S. (1997). Regression models for categorical and limited dependent variables. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Mackintosh, K. H. (1972). Acknowledgement patterns in sociology ( Ph.D. dissertation). University of Oregon, Eugene, OR.
   Google Scholar
• MacRoberts, M. H., & MacRoberts, B. R. (1989). Problems of citation analysis: A critical review. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 40, 342–349.10.1002/(ISSN)1097-4571
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McCain, K. W. (1991). Communication, competition, and secrecy: The production and dissemination of research-related information in genetics. Science, Technology & Human Values, 16, 491–516.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rawlings, C. M., & McFarland, D. A. (2011). Influence flows in the academy: Using affiliation networks to assess peer effects among researchers. Social Science Research, 40, 1001–1017.10.1016/j.ssresearch.2010.10.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rice, S. K., Hickman, M. J., & Reynolds, P. (2011). A preliminary assessment of small world scholarship networks in criminology and criminal justice. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 22, 67–83.10.1080/10511253.2010.517651
   Google Scholar
• Roediger, H. L. (2006). The h index in science: A new measure of scholarly contribution. The Academic Observer, 19(4), 1–6.
   Google Scholar
• Salager-Meyer, F., Alcaraz-Ariza, M. Á., Luzardo Briceño, M., & Jabbour, G. (2010). Scholarly gratitude in five geographical contexts: A diachronic and cross-generic approach of the acknowledgment paratext in medical discourse (1950–2010). Scientometrics, 86, 763–784.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sorensen, J. R. (2009). An assessment of the relative impact of criminal justice and criminology journals. Journal of Criminal Justice, 37, 505–511.10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2009.07.012
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Symonds, M. R. E., Gemmell, N. J., Braisher, T. L., Gorringe, K. L., & Elgar, M. A. (2006). Gender differences in publication output: Towards an unbiased metric of research performance. PLoS One, 1(1), 1–5.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tiew, W. S., & Sen, B. K. (2002). Acknowledgement patterns in research articles: A bibliometric study based on journal of natural rubber research 1986–1997. Malaysian Journal of Library and Information Science, 7, 43–56.
   Google Scholar
• Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1994). Social network analysis: Methods and applications. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511815478
   Google Scholar
• White, H. D. (2011). Scientific and scholarly networks. In J. Scott & P. J. Carrington (Eds.), The Sage handbook of social network analysis (pp. 271–285). London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Xie, Y., & Shauman, K. A. (1998). Sex differences in research productivity: New evidence about an old puzzle. American Sociological Review, 63, 847–870.10.2307/2657505
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar