Söderqvist T, Silverstein A M
Soc Stud Sci. 1994 Aug;24(3):513-48. doi: 10.1177/030631279402400303.
To handle the enormous amount of sources in modern and contemporary science, the historian can use different quantitative methods, particularly varieties of citation analysis. So far, all these methods have been based on publication data. Taking as its point of departure the fact that meetings constitute a pervasive, yet neglected, aspect of science, this paper introduces analysis of participation in scientific meetings. The strength of this new prosopographical method is illustrated by an analysis of international immunological meetings in the period 1951-72. Frequency of participation in meetings seems to be correlated to professional standing in immunology. By means of cluster analysis of participation data, the subdisciplinary structure and dynamics of immunology can be reconstructed.
为了处理现代和当代科学中大量的资料来源，历史学家可以采用不同的定量方法，尤其是各种引文分析方法。到目前为止，所有这些方法都是基于出版数据的。本文以会议是科学中一个普遍存在但却被忽视的方面这一事实为出发点，引入了对科学会议参与情况的分析。对1951年至1972年期间国际免疫学会议的分析说明了这种新的人物传记方法的优势。会议参与频率似乎与免疫学领域的专业地位相关。通过对参与数据的聚类分析，可以重建免疫学的子学科结构和动态。
