Acknowledgements are not just thank you notes: A qualitative analysis of acknowledgements content in scientific articles and reviews published in 2015


Autoři: Adèle Paul-Hus aff001;  Nadine Desrochers aff001
Působiště autorů: École de bibliothéconomie et des sciences de l'information, Université de Montréal, Downtown Station, Montreal, Quebec, Canada aff001
Vyšlo v časopise: PLoS ONE 14(12)
Kategorie: Research Article
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0226727

Souhrn

Acknowledgements in scientific articles can be described as miscellaneous, their content ranging from pre-formulated financial disclosure statements to personal testimonies of gratitude. To improve understanding of the context and various uses of expressions found in acknowledgements, this study analyses their content qualitatively. The most frequent noun phrases from a Web of Science acknowledgements corpus were analysed to generate 13 categories. When 3,754 acknowledgement sentences were manually coded into the categories, three distinct axes emerged: the contributions, the disclaimers, and the authorial voice. Acknowledgements constitute a space where authors can detail the division of labour within collaborators of a research project. Results also show the importance of disclaimers as part of the current scholarly communication apparatus, an aspect which was not highlighted by previous analyses and typologies of acknowledgements. Alongside formal disclaimers and acknowledgements of various contributions, there seems to remain a need for a more personal space where the authors can speak for themselves, in their own name, on matters they judge worth mentioning.

Klíčová slova:

Clinical medicine – Finance – Government funding of science – Gratitude – Psychology – Research grants – Semantics – Social sciences


Zdroje

1. Cronin B. Let the credits roll: A preliminary examination of the role played by mentors and trusted assessors in disciplinary formation. J Doc. 1991; 47(3):227–39.

2. Cronin B, Weaver S. The praxis of acknowledgement: from bibliometrics to influmetrics. Rev Esp Doc Científica. 1995; 18(2):172–7.

3. Costas R, van Leeuwen TN. Approaching the “reward triangle”: General analysis of the presence of funding acknowledgments and “peer interactive communication” in scientific publications. J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol. 2012; 63(8):1647–61.

4. Díaz-Faes AA, Bordons M. Acknowledgments in scientific publications: Presence in Spanish science and text patterns across disciplines. J Assoc Inf Sci Technol. 2014; 65(9):1834–49.

5. McCain KW. Beyond Garfield’s Citation Index: an assessment of some issues in building a personal name Acknowledgments Index. Scientometrics. 2018; 114(2):605–31.

6. Cronin B. The scholar’s courtesy: the role of acknowledgement in the primary communication process. London: Taylor Graham; 1995.

7. Desrochers N, Paul‐Hus A, Pecoskie J. Five decades of gratitude: A meta-synthesis of acknowledgments research. J Assoc Inf Sci Technol. 2017; 68(12):2821–33.

8. Gausia K, Thompson SC, Lindeman MA, Brown LJ, Perkins D. Contribution of university departments of rural health to rural health research: An analysis of outputs. Aust J Rural Health. 2015; 23(2):101–6. doi: 10.1111/ajr.12142 25692850

9. Harter SP, Hooten PA. Information science and scientists: JASIS, 1972–1990. J Am Soc Inf Sci. 1992; 43(9):583–93.

10. Lewison G, Grant J, Jansen P. International gastroenterology research: Subject areas, impact, and funding. Gut. 2001; 49(2):295–302. doi: 10.1136/gut.49.2.295 11454809

11. Shah K, Sussex J, Hernandez-Villafuerte K, Garau M, Rotolo D, Hopkins MM, et al. Exploring the Interdependencies of Research Funders in the UK | OHE. Cancer Research UK; 2014. Available from: https://www.ohe.org/publications/exploring-interdependencies-research-funders-uk

12. Hollander P. Acknowledgments: An academic ritual. Acad Quest. 2001; 15(1):63–76.

13. Forzetting SA. Personal, Peer, Patron: Scholarly Interactions with Librarians and Archivists in the Acknowledgements of Women’s History Book. 2010. [Master’s thesis] University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Retrieved from https://cdr.lib.unc.edu/

14. McCain KW. Communication, Competition, and Secrecy: The Production and Dissemination of Research-Related Information in Genetics. Sci Technol Hum Values. 1991; 16(4):491–516.

15. Jeschin D, Lewison G, Anderson J. A bibliometric database for tracking acknowledgements of research funding. In: Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference of the International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics. 1995. p. 235–44.

16. Rigby J. Systematic grant and funding body acknowledgement data for publications: new dimensions and new controversies for research policy and evaluation. Res Eval. 2011; 20(5):365–75.

17. Bing J, Ruhl C. It’s all my fault! The pragmatics of responsibility statements. J Pragmat. 2008; 40(3):537–58.

18. Gesuato S. Acknowledgments in PhD dissertations: The complexity of thanking. In: Taylor Torsello C, Grazia Bùsa M, Gesuato S, editors. Lingua inglese e mediazione linguistica Ricerca e didattica con supporto telematico. Padova: Unipress; 2004. p. 273–318.

19. Giannoni DS. Evidence of generic tension in academic book acknowledgements. In: Bhatia VK, Gotti M, editors. Explorations in Specialized Genres. Peter Lang. 2006. p. 21–42.

20. Mackintosh SH. Acknowledgment patterns in sociology [Doctoral dissertation]. 1972. Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations Publishing. (7228159)

21. Desrochers N, Paul-Hus A, Larivière V. The angle sum theory: Exploring the literature on acknowledgments in scholarly communication. In: Sugimoto CR, editor. Theories of Informetrics and Scholarly Communication. De Gruyter Mouton; 2016. p. 225–47.

22. Cronin B, McKenzie G, Stiffler M. Patterns of acknowledgement. J Doc. 1992; 48(2):107–22.

23. Cronin B, McKenzie G, Rubio L, Weaver-Wozniak S. Accounting for influence: Acknowledgments in contemporary sociology. J Am Soc Inf Sci. 1993; 44(7):406–12.

24. Cronin B, McKenzie G, Rubio L. The norms of acknowledgement in four social sciences disciplines. J Doc. 199; 49(1):29–43.

25. Innes J. Scholarly communication and knowledge management in American zoos [Doctoral dissertation]. [Ann Arbor]: Nova Southeastern University; 2006. Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses. (3234986)

26. Rattan GKM. Acknowledgement Patterns in Annals of Library and Information Studies 1999–2012. Libr Philos Pract. 2013; e-journal (Paper 989). Available from: http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/libphilprac/989/

27. Salager-Meyer F, Alcaraz-Ariza MÁ, Berbesí MP, Zambrano N. Paying one’s intellectual debt: acknowledgments in conventional vs. complementary/alternative medical research. In: Gotti M, Salager-Meyer F, editors. Advances in Medical Discourse Analysis: Oral and Written Contexts. Bern: Peter Lang; 2006. p. 407–30.

28. Salager-Meyer F, Alcaraz Ariza MA, Berbesi M. “Backstage Solidarity” in Spanish- and English-written medical research papers: Publication context and the acknowledgment paratext. J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol. 2009; 60(2):307–17.

29. Tiew WS, Sen BK. Acknowledgement Patterns in Research Articles: a Bibliometric Study based on Journal of Natural Rubber Research 1986–1997. Malays J Libr Inf Sci. 2002; 7(1):43–56.

30. Weber N, Thomer A. Paratexts and documentary practices: Text mining authorship and acknowledgment from a bioinformatics corpus. In: Desrochers N, Apollon D, editors. Examining paratextual theory and its applications in digital culture. Hershey, PA: IGI Global; 2014.

31. Giles CL, Councill IG, Gray JN. Who Gets Acknowledged: Measuring Scientific Contributions through Automatic Acknowledgment Indexing. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2004; 101(51):17599–604. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0407743101 15601767

32. Crawford ET, Biderman AD. Paper money: Trends of research sponsorship in American sociology journals. Soc Sci Inf. 1970; 9(1):50–77.

33. Dawson G, Lucocq B, Cottrell R, Lewinson G. Mapping the landscape: National biomedical research outputs 1988–95. London, England: The Wellcome Trust; 1998: Policy Report number 9.

34. Lewison G. Gastroenterology research in the United Kingdom: Funding sources and impact. Gut. 1998; 43(2):288–93. doi: 10.1136/gut.43.2.288 10189860

35. Lewison G, Devey ME. Bibliometric methods for the evaluation of arthritis research. Rheumatology. 1999; 38(1):13–20. doi: 10.1093/rheumatology/38.1.13 10334677

36. Al-Ali MN. Generic patterns and socio-cultural resources in acknowledgements accompanying arabic Ph.D. dissertations. Pragmatics. 2010; 20(1):1–26.

37. Cheng SW. A Contrastive Study of Master Thesis Acknowledgements by Taiwanese and North American Students. Open J Mod Linguist. 2012; 02(01):8–17.

38. Hyland K. Dissertation Acknowledgements: The Anatomy of a Cinderella Genre. Writ Commun. 2003; 20(3):242–68.

39. Hyland K. Graduates’ gratitude: the generic structure of dissertation acknowledgements. Engl Specif Purp. 2004; 23(3):303–24.

40. Hyland K, Tse P. “I would like to thank my supervisor”. Acknowledgements in graduate dissertations. Int J Appl Linguist. 2004; 14(2):259–75.

41. Giannoni DS. Book acknowledgements across disciplines and texts. In: Hyland K, Bondi M, editors. Academic Discourse Across Disciplines. New York, NY: Peter Lang; 2006. p. 151–76.

42. Giannoni DS. Worlds of Gratitude: A Contrastive Study of Acknowledgement Texts in English and Italian Research Articles. Appl Linguist. 2002; 23(1):1–31.

43. Giannoni DS. The genre of journal acknowledgments: Findings of a cross-disciplinary investigation. Linguist E Filol. 1998; 6:61–84.

44. Paul-Hus A, Díaz-Faes AA, Sainte-Marie M, Desrochers N, Costas R, Larivière V. Beyond funding: Acknowledgement patterns in biomedical, natural and social sciences. PLOS ONE. 2017; 12(10):e0185578. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0185578 28976996

45. Paul-Hus A, Desrochers N, Costas R. Characterization, description, and considerations for the use of funding acknowledgement data in Web of Science. Scientometrics. 2016; 108(1):167–82.

46. Campbell JL, Quincy C, Osserman J, Pederson OK. Coding In-depth Semistructured Interviews: Problems of Unitization and Intercoder Reliability and Agreement. Sociol Methods Res. 2013; 42(3):294–320.

47. Hruschka DJ, Schwartz D, St.John DC, Picone-Decaro E, Jenkins RA, Carey JW. Reliability in coding open-ended data: Lessons learned from HIV behavioral research. Field Methods. 2004; 16(3):307–31.

48. Schreier M. Qualitative content analysis in practice. Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publications; 2012.

49. Patton MQ. Qualitative research & evaluation methods. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage Publications; 2002. 598 p.

50. Miles MB, Huberman AM. Drawing Valid Meaning from Qualitative Data: Toward a Shared Craft. Educ Res. 1984; 13(5):20–30.

51. Krippendorff K. Reliability in Content Analysis. Hum Commun Res. 2004; 30(3):411–33.

52. Cronin B, Shaw D, LaBarre K. Visible, less visible, and invisible work: Patterns of collaboration in 20th century chemistry. J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol. 2004; 55(2):160–8.

53. Desrochers N, Paul-Hus A, Haustein S, Costas R, Mongeon P, Quan-Haase A, et al. Authorship, citations, acknowledgments and visibility in social media: Symbolic capital in the multifaceted reward system of science. Soc Sci Inf. 2018; 57(2):223–48.

54. Clarivate Analytics. LibGuides: Web of Science Core Collection: Who’s funding MY research? 2019. Available from: http://clarivate.libguides.com/woscc/funding

55. Scopus. Funding Acknowledgement Information Available for 9 Million Articles. Elsevier Scopus Blog. 2019. Available from: https://blog.scopus.com/posts/funding-acknowledgement-information-available-for-9-million-articles

56. Brown CM, Henderson DM. A New Horned Dinosaur Reveals Convergent Evolution in Cranial Ornamentation in Ceratopsidae. Current Biology. 15 juin 2015;25(12):1641‑8. doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2015.04.041 26051892


Článek vyšel v časopise

PLOS One


2019 Číslo 12