Cited by 91scientometrics and bibliometrics researchPublishing and Scholarly CommunicationAcademic Publishing and Open Access

Authorship, citations, acknowledgments and visibility in social media: Symbolic capital in the multifaceted reward system of science

Desrochers, Nadine, Paul-Hus, Adèle, Haustein, Stefanie, Costas, Rodrigo, Mongeon, Philippe, Quan-Haase, Anabel, Bowman, Timothy D., Pecoskie, Jen +2 more·2018·Social Science Information

Abstract

The reward system of science is undergoing significant changes, as traditional indicators compete with initiatives that offer novel means of disseminating and assessing scholarly impact. This article considers a number of aspects of this reward system, including authorship, citations, acknowledgements and the growing use of social media platforms by academics, with an eye towards identifying contemporary issues relating to scholarly communication practices, as understood through the perspectives of Bourdieu’s symbolic capital and Merton’s recognition framework. The article posits that, while scientific capital remains the foundation upon which the reward system of science is built, this system is revealing itself to be more and more multifaceted, extremely complex, and facing increasing tension between its traditional means of evaluation and the potential of new indicators in the digital era. The article presents an extended literature review, as well as recommendations for further consideration and empirical research. A better understanding of the perceptions of academics would be necessary to properly assess the effects of these new indicators on scholarly communication practices and the reward system of science.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0539018417752089

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 109 · Cited by 91

Authors
Desrochers, N., Paul-Hus, A., Haustein, S., Costas, R., Mongeon, P., Quan-Haase, A., Bowman, T. D., Pecoskie, J., Tsou, A., & Larivière, V.
Affiliations
  • Université de Montréal (CA)
  • École de bibliothéconomie et des sciences de l’information, Université de Montréal, Québec, Canada
  • Leiden University (NL)
  • Faculty of Information and Media Studies/Sociology, Western University, Canada
  • Wayne State University (US)
  • Independent Researcher, Ontario, Canada
  • Indiana University Bloomington (US)
Corresponding author
Desrochers, Nadine
Venue
Social Science Information
Published
2018-02
Volume
57
Issue
2
Pages
223-248
ISSN
  • 0539-0184 (ISSN-L)
  • 1461-7412
OpenAlex
W2790320647
Cited by
91
References
109
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 19 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 1
FWCI
7.05
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Social Science Information (publishedVersion)
  • Leiden Repository (Leiden University) (submittedVersion)
  • Papyrus : Institutional Repository (Université de Montréal) (submittedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (430-2014-0617, R3603A13)
  • Alfred P. Sloan Foundation (G-2014325)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › scientometrics and bibliometrics research
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Publishing and Scholarly Communication
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Academic Publishing and Open Access
Keywords
authorship, citation practices, acknowledgment, academic social media, symbolic capital, Pierre Bourdieu, scientific capital, research evaluation indicators, scholarly impact

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review