نوع مقاله : علمی- پژوهشی
نویسنده
عضو هیئت علمی گروه کتابداری واطلاع رسانی دانشگاه شهید چمران اهواز،اهواز،ایران
چکیده
هرچند در دستنامه انجمن زبانهای مدرن و دستنامه‌های سایر سبکها توضیحات دقیق بسیاری در مورد "چگونگی"استناد کردن وجود دارد، اما دستورالعمل روشنی برای اینکه"چه موقع" به متنی استناد کنیم دیده نمی‌شود. اکثر نشریات دستورالعملهای لازم را برای مؤلفین تهیه کرده‌اند،اما در مورد زمان استناد کردن توضیحی نداده‌اند. علی‌رغم مطالعات بی‌شماری که در مورد رفتارهای استنادی به عمل آمده است، و به رغم اینکه ویراستاران و سردبیران مجلاّت به طور گسترده برلزوم ابراز دَین فکری صحه گذاشته‌اند، لازم است نکاتی در مورد زمان مناسب برای دادن ارجاعات رسمی و قدردانی از نویسندگان دیگر، به نویسندگان و داوران یادآور شود. چون استناد امری است ذهنی و فرهنگی، می‌توان گفت که هیچ دستورالعمل قاطعی مبنی بر زمان استناد وجود ندارد. از این رو، دور از انتظار است که آمایش متون اساساً بتواند آنچه را که لازمه ربط[1] ، گزینشی‌بودن[2] و جامعیت[3] است، برآورده سازد. آنچه که در یک زمینه بدیهی است، در زمینه دیگر ممکن است تازگی داشته و یا مطلب منحصر به فردی باشد. آزمون سه ساله‌ای که دانشجویان کارشناسی ارشد به بالا نیز در آن شرکت داشته‌اند، نشان داد که در مورد لزوم استناد به لغات و اصطلاحات، ایده ها، روشها، و غیره برداشتهای متفاوتی وجود دارد. در این مقاله برای ویراستاران و سردبیران نشریات دستورالعمل موقتی پیشنهاد شده است که باید در عمل با زمینه های مختلف وفق داده شود.
عنوان مقاله [English]
When to Cite?
نویسنده [English]
- A.H. Farajpahlou
Faculty member of the Department of Library and Information Science, Shahid Chamran University, Ahvaz, Ahvaz, Iran
چکیده [English]
Although the Modern Language Association and other style manuals describe in exquisite detail “how” to cite the literature, explicit tutorials on when” to cite are nonexistent. Most journals provide instructions to authors but also fail to give explicit guidance on when to cite. In spite of numerous studies of citation behavior and the wide recognition by editors of the need acknowledge intellectual debts, authors and referees need explicit reminders as to when formal references or acknowledgments are appropriate. Since referencing is both subjective and culturally based, there can be no absolutes about when to cite. Hence, it is unlikely that algorithmic documentation of texts can ever meet the competing requirements for relevance, selectivity, and comprehensiveness. What is common wisdom in one domain may be new or unique in another. A three-year experiment involving graduate students demonstrated the varying perceptions of the need for documentation of terminology, ideas, methods, and so forth. A tentajive tutorial is suggested for journal editors that should be modified in each scholarly context.
Bonitz, M., Bruckner, E. & Scharnhorst, A. (1995). The Matthew Effect of the two worlds in science: Consequences from World Science structure research. Extended Abstracts of the Fourth Science and Technology Indicators Conference, October 5-7, Antwerp, Belgium. pp. 1 63-67. Leiden, Netherlands:
Centre for Science and Technology Studies, University of Leiden.
Chernin, E. (1988). The Harvard system: A mystery dispelled. British Med wal Journal; 297: 1062-63.
The Chicago Style Manual. (1982). 13th ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Cronin, B. (1984). The citation process: The role and significance of citations in scientific communication. London: Taylor Graham.
Cronin, B. (1994). The scholars courtesy - a survey of acknowledgement behavior. Journal of Documentation, 50: 165-96.
Fairchild, R. (1981). The implications of pageless documentation. Chronicle of Higher Education, 3: 24.
Garfield, E. (1961). Information theory and other quantitative factors in code design for document card systems. Journal of Chemical Documetation, 1:
70-75.
Garfield, E. (1970). Can criticism and documentation of research papers be automated? Current Contents, 11: 4. (Reprinted in Gaffield, E. (1977). Essays of an information scientist, 12: 183-90. Philadelphia: 151 Press.)
Garfield, E. (1977). Can citation analysis be automated? Statistical association
methods for mechanized documentation: Symposium proceedings, National
Bureau of Standards (NBS), Miscellaneous publication 269, edited by Mary
Elizabeth Stevens, Vincent E. Giuliano, and Laurence B. Heilprin, pp.
189-92. Washington, D.C.: NBS, 1965. (Reprinted in Garfield, E. (1977).
Essays of an information scientist, 12: 184-90. Philadelphia: ISI Press.)
Garfield, E. (1977). Information theory and all that Jaz: a lost reference list leads to a pragmatic assignment to students. Current Contents. 44: 5-8. (Reprinted in Garfield, E. (1980). Essays of an information scientist, 3:271-85. Philadelphia: ISI Press.)
Garfield, E. (1981). From citation annesia to bibliographic plagiarism. Current Contents, 23: 5-9. (Reprinted in: Garfield, E. (1981). Essays of an information scientist, 4: 503-7. Philadelphia: ISI Press.)
Garfield, E. (1982). More on the ethics of scientific publication: Abuses of authorship attribution and citation annesia undermine the reward system of science. Current Contents, 30: 5-10. (Reprinted in: Garfield, E. (1983). Essays of an information scientist, 5: 621-26. Philadelphia: IS! Press.)
Garfield, E. (1985). Pageless documentation, or, what a difference a page makes. Current Contents, 17: 3-6. (Reprinted in Garfield, E. (1986). Essays of an information scientist, 8: 160-63. Philadelphia: 1ST Press.)
Garfield, E. (1989). Citation behavior — An aid or a hinderance to information retrieval? Current Contents,(18): 3-8. (Reprinted in: Garfield, E. (1989). Essays of an information scientist. Philadelphia: IS! Press.)
Garfield, E. (1989). Manfred Kochen: in memory of an information scientist
pioneer. Qua World Brain ist. Current Contents, 25(June 19, 1989): 3-14.
(Reprinted in: Garfield, E. (1989). Essays of an information scientist, 12:
166-77. Philadelphia: 1ST Press.)
Garfield, E. (1990). The most cited papers of all time, SCI 1945-1988: Part 1A:
The Sd Top 100 - Will the Lowry method ever be obliterated? Current Contents, 7: 3-14. (Reprinted in Garfield, E. (1991). Essays of an information scientist, 13: 45-88. Philadelphia: ISI Press.)
Gibaldi, J. ed. (1995). Modern Language Association Handbook of Research Papers. 4th ed. New York: Modern Language Association.
Halbwachs, M. (1925). Les cadre sociaux de Ia memoire. reprint, New York:
Arno, 1975.
Hauptmann, R., ed. (1994). Special issue: Plagiarism. Journal of Information Ethics, 3(pts. 1 and 2).
The Humanities program at Eart ham College. (1993). Eartham College, Richmond, md.
Kaplan, N. (1965). The norms of citation behavior: Prolegomena to the footnote. American Documentation, 16: 170-84.
Kling, R. (1994). ASIS Internet Bulletin Board, October 1, 1994.
Kochen, M. (1987). How well do we acknowledge intellectual debts? Journal of Documentation, 43: 54-64.
Laggett, G., Mead, C., & Kramer, M. eds. (1985). Prentice-Hall Handbook for Writers. 9th ed. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prenctice Hall.
Langham, T. (1995). Consistency in referencing. Journal of Documentation. 51(:
360-69.
Lowry, 0., Rosebrough, J., Farr, A. & Randall, R. (1951). Protein measurement with the Folin Phenol Reagent. Journal of Biological Chemistiy, 193: 265.
Merton, R. (1968). Social theory and social structure. New York: Free Press. Merton, R. (1968). The Matthew Effect in scince. Science, 159: 56-63.
Merton, R. (1993). On the shoulders of giants: a shandean postscript. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.
Reiss, P. (1984). Towards a theory of the footnote. New York: de Gruyter.
Smith, L. (1981). Citation analysis. Library Trends, 30(1981): 83-106.
Swanson, P. (1986). Undiscovered public knowledge. Library Quarterly, 56:
103-18.
Swanson, P. (1987). Two medical literatures that are logically but not bibliographically connected. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 38: 228-33.
Webster’s Third New International Dictionary. (1976). Springfield, Mass.: 0. &
C. Merriam.
Zuckerman, ,H. (1987). Citation analysis and the complex problem of intellectual influence. Sociometrics, 12: 329-38. F.!
)