Literature/1955/Garfield

< Literature < 1955
Authors

A B C D E F G H I J K L M N
O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z &


Garfield, Eugene (1955). "Citation Indexes for Science: A New Dimension in Documentation through Association of Ideas." Science, 122(3159): 108-111.

Excerpts

Aftermath

Memo 5/9/59
http://profiles.nlm.nih.gov/ps/retrieve/ResourceMetadata/BBAIXL
From: Joshua Lederberg
To: Eugene Garfield
Since you first published your scheme for a "citation index" in Science about 4 years ago I have been thinking very seriously about it, and must admit I am completely sold. In the nature of my work I have to spend a fair amount of effort in reading the literature of collateral fields and it is infuriating how often I have been stumped in trying to update a topic, where your scheme would have been just the solution! I am sure your critics have simply not grasped the idea, and especially the point that the author must learn to cooperate by his own choice of citations and then he does the critical work.
Have you tried to set this out in an adequate experiment? Would you look for support from the NSF? Of course you have to count on opposition from the established outfits, which have already succeeded in blocking any progressive centralization of the Augean tasks.

Wikimedia

Chronology

Comments

    Notes

    1. P. Thomasson and J.C. Stanley, Science 121, 610 (1955). Thomasson and Stanley were commenting on C. Zirkle's discussion of the use of fraudulent data [Science 120, 189 (1954)].
    1900s ^
    '00 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09
    '10 '11 '12 '13 '14 '15 '16 '17 '18 '19
    '20 '21 '22 '23 '24 '25 '26 '27 '28 '29
    '30 '31 '32 '33 '34 '35 '36 '37 '38 '39
    '40 '41 '42 '43 '44 '45 '46 '47 '48 '49
    '50 '51 '52 '53 '54 '55 '56 '57 '58 '59
    '60 '61 '62 '63 '64 '65 '66 '67 '68 '69
    '70 '71 '72 '73 '74 '75 '76 '77 '78 '79
    '80 '81 '82 '83 '84 '85 '86 '87 '88 '89
    '90 '91 '92 '93 '94 '95 '96 '97 '98 '99
    2000s
    '00 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09
    '10 '11 '12 '13 '14 '15 '16 '17 '18 '19
    1900s category ^
    '00 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09
    '10 '11 '12 '13 '14 '15 '16 '17 '18 '19
    '20 '21 '22 '23 '24 '25 '26 '27 '28 '29
    '30 '31 '32 '33 '34 '35 '36 '37 '38 '39
    '40 '41 '42 '43 '44 '45 '46 '47 '48 '49
    '50 '51 '52 '53 '54 '55 '56 '57 '58 '59
    '60 '61 '62 '63 '64 '65 '66 '67 '68 '69
    '70 '71 '72 '73 '74 '75 '76 '77 '78 '79
    '80 '81 '82 '83 '84 '85 '86 '87 '88 '89
    '90 '91 '92 '93 '94 '95 '96 '97 '98 '99
    2000s category
    '00 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09
    '10 '11 '12 '13 '14 '15 '16 '17 '18 '19
    1900s works ad hoc
    '00 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09
    '10 '11 '12 '13 '14 '15 '16 '17 '18 '19
    '20 '21 '22 '23 '24 '25 '26 '27 '28 '29
    '30 '31 '32 '33 '34 '35 '36 '37 '38 '39
    '40 '41 '42 '43 '44 '45 '46 '47 '48 '49
    '50 '51 '52 '53 '54 '55 '56 '57 '58 '59
    '60 '61 '62 '63 '64 '65 '66 '67 '68 '69
    '70 '71 '72 '73 '74 '75 '76 '77 '78 '79
    '80 '81 '82 '83 '84 '85 '86 '87 '88 '89
    '90 '91 '92 '93 '94 '95 '96 '97 '98 '99
    2000s works
    '00 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09
    '10 '11 '12 '13 '14 '15 '16 '17 '18 '19
    1900s books cat. ^
    '00 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09
    '10 '11 '12 '13 '14 '15 '16 '17 '18 '19
    '20 '21 '22 '23 '24 '25 '26 '27 '28 '29
    '30 '31 '32 '33 '34 '35 '36 '37 '38 '39
    '40 '41 '42 '43 '44 '45 '46 '47 '48 '49
    '50 '51 '52 '53 '54 '55 '56 '57 '58 '59
    '60 '61 '62 '63 '64 '65 '66 '67 '68 '69
    '70 '71 '72 '73 '74 '75 '76 '77 '78 '79
    '80 '81 '82 '83 '84 '85 '86 '87 '88 '89
    '90 '91 '92 '93 '94 '95 '96 '97 '98 '99
    2000s books category
    '00 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09
    '10 '11 '12 '13 '14 '15 '16 '17 '18 '19
    http://books.google.com/advanced_book_search
    The shade of the bar looks invariant in isolation but variant in context, in (favor of) sharp contrast with the color gradient background, hence an innate illusion we have to reasonably interpret and overcome as well as the mirage. Such variance appearing seasonably from context to context may not only be the case with our vision but worldview in general in practice indeed, whether a priori or a posteriori. Perhaps no worldview from nowhere, without any point of view or prejudice at all!

    Ogden & Richards (1923) said, "All experience ... is either enjoyed or interpreted ... or both, and very little of it escapes some degree of interpretation."

    H. G. Wells (1938) said, "The human individual is born now to live in a society for which his fundamental instincts are altogether inadequate."

    This article is issued from Wikiversity - version of the Tuesday, September 30, 2014. The text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share Alike but additional terms may apply for the media files.