These files are maintained strictly for historical reference, research, and recordkeeping purposes,
and the content has not been altered or updated since archiving.
Content on this site may not meet current digital accessibility standards.
If you require an alternative, accessible format of any information found on this site,
please contact Bruce Jones, bjones@ucsd.edu to request an accommodation.
These files are maintained strictly for historical reference, research, and recordkeeping purposes,
and the content has not been altered or updated since archiving.
Content on this site may not meet current digital accessibility standards.
If you require an alternative, accessible format of any information found on this site,
please contact Bruce Jones, bjones@ucsd.edu to request an accommodation.
On Thursday 14 August 2003 1:34 am, Eugene Matusov promulgated:
> As the graph below shows, Mark was right only in 1999. 1999 was a good year
> for Vygotsky for some reason..
> What do you think?
>
Nifty. :-)
Take a (re)look at David Dirlam's work on meme population dynamics. From the
work he has done, it might be intersting to see the change over time of the
citations of the concepts -- zoped, mediation, assimilation, accomodation,
etc, linking to the uptake and use of their ideas, giving some indication to
how much of a mediational role they play.
Units of analysis, my constant bugbear companion, makes a diffenrce too. Does
it make more sense to count by journal article, or by author. In the case of
multiple authors, the ideas could be more widespread than indicated by
counting papers.
I take it that % means % of all articles for the year. Did you notice the
declining trend for both? Should we be worried?
It would be helpful if the actual numbers were presented because the decline
in %'s could be understood by a growth in publications, e.g. new journals.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Sep 01 2003 - 01:00:07 PDT