Dervin意義建構論起源文獻之研究影響力探討

Tracking the Scholarly Influence of Dervin's First Paper on Sense-Making Methodology

張郁蔚(Yu-Wei Chang) ； 李宜珍(I-Jen Li)

《教育資料與圖書館學》 57卷2期 (2020/07) Pp. 187-214

https://doi.org/10.6120/JoEMLS.202007_57(2).0013.RS.AM

摘要

Brenda Dervin於1983年發表的“An Overview of Sense-Making Research: Concepts, Methods and Results to Date＂一文，正式提出「意義建構論」（Sense-Making Methodology，簡稱SMM），並介紹其核心概念、研究方法與實際應用結果等。經分析引用SMM起源文獻的283篇引文的學科來源和研究主題，顯示SMM起源文獻有長期的研究影響力，越來越多學科與不同主題的研究受到其影響，尤其圖書資訊學的資訊行為研究。而本研究價值在具體指出，SMM起源文獻對後續研究產生影響的主因是該文介紹的部分SMM概念，構成SMM的「缺口」、「情境」、「使用」三大核心概念並非都是最具影響力的概念，依據引文的463個引用情境分析結果，確認構成SMM的眾多概念中，「缺口」的研究能見度最高（17.5%），其次是「意義建構或未建構」（17.3%），但「SMM方法論」影響最多學科的研究。

關鍵字

意義建構論 ； 引用情境 ； 書目計量 ； 研究影響力

並列摘要

Brenda Dervin presented a paper in 1983 titled ＂An Overview of Sense-Making Research: Concepts, Methods and Results to Date＂ at a conference. She presented the ＂Sense-Making Methodology (SMM)＂ in the 1983 paper with the introduction of its core concepts, methods, and applications. SMM is a user-centered theory for methodology and has been widely applied to a wide range of fields. The findings of this study show that the 1983 paper has a long-term influence on other research articles and its influence has expanded into more disciplines and topics over time. Most of 283 articles citing the 1983 paper were information behavior articles published in journals of library and information science. This study contributes to confirm that the primary influence of this 1983 paper was established by a few concepts related to SMM. Not all three basic concepts constructing the SMM, ＂gaps＂, ＂situations＂, and ＂uses＂, were the most influential concepts in terms of number of citation contexts. ＂Gaps＂ was the most frequently cited concept related to SMM (17.5%), closely followed by ＂sense-making/nonsense-making (17.3%)＂. However, ＂SMM＂ was the most influential concept in terms of number of research topics of citing articles.

並列關鍵字

Sense-Making Methodology ； Citation context ； Bibliometrics ； Research influence

參考文獻

Ahmed, T., Johnson, B., Oppenheim, C., & Peck, C. (2004). Highly cited old papers and the reasons why they continue to be cited. Part II., The 1953 Watson and Crick article on the structure of DNA. Scientometrics, 61(2), 147-156. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:SCIE.0000041645.60907.57

Anderson, M. H. (2006). How can we know what we think until we see what we said?: A citation and citation context analysis of Karl Weick’s The Social Psychology of Organizing. Organization Studies, 27(11), 1675-1692. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840606068346

Anderson, M. H., & Sun, P. Y. (2010). What have scholars retrieved from Walsh and Ungson (1991)? A citation context study. Management Learning, 41(2), 131-145. https://doi.org/10.1177/1350507609341091

Anderson, M. H., & Lemken, R. K. (2019). An empirical assessment of the influence of March and Simon’s Organizations: The realized contribution of unfulfilled promise of a masterpiece. Journal of Management Studies, 56(8), 1537-1569. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12527

Bertin, M., Atanassova, I., Sugimoto, C. R., & Lariviere, V. (2016). The linguistic patterns and rhetorical structure of citation context: An approach using n-grams. Scientometrics, 109(3), 1417-1434. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-2134-8