Chinese Interpreting Studies: a data-driven analysis of a dynamic field of enquiry

Over the five decades since its beginnings, Chinese Interpreting Studies (CIS) has evolved into a dynamic field of academic enquiry with more than 3,500 scholars and 4,200 publications. Using quantitative and qualitative analysis, this scientometric study delves deep into CIS citation data to examin...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Ziyun Xu, Leonid Pekelis
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: PeerJ Inc. 2015-09-01
Series:PeerJ
Subjects:
Online Access:https://peerj.com/articles/1249.pdf
id doaj-b363d8b1ce954d3a855dabef99b5cac9
record_format Article
spelling doaj-b363d8b1ce954d3a855dabef99b5cac92020-11-24T22:53:20ZengPeerJ Inc.PeerJ2167-83592015-09-013e124910.7717/peerj.1249Chinese Interpreting Studies: a data-driven analysis of a dynamic field of enquiryZiyun Xu0Leonid Pekelis1Intercultural Studies Group, Universitat Rovira i Virgili, SpainDepartment of Statistics, Stanford University, USAOver the five decades since its beginnings, Chinese Interpreting Studies (CIS) has evolved into a dynamic field of academic enquiry with more than 3,500 scholars and 4,200 publications. Using quantitative and qualitative analysis, this scientometric study delves deep into CIS citation data to examine some of the noteworthy trends and patterns of behavior in the field: how can the field’s progress be quantified by means of citation analysis? Do its authors tend repeatedly to cite ‘classic’ papers or are they more drawn to their colleagues’ latest research? What different effects does the choice of empirical vs. theoretical research have on the use of citations in the various research brackets? The findings show that the field is steadily moving forward with new papers continuously being cited, although a number of influential papers stand out, having received a stream of citations in all the years examined. CIS scholars also have a tendency to cite much older English than Chinese publications across all document types, and empirical research has the greatest influence on the citation behavior of doctoral scholars, while theoretical studies have the largest impact on that of article authors. The goal of this study is to demonstrate the merits of blending quantitative and qualitative analyses to uncover hidden trends.https://peerj.com/articles/1249.pdfScientometricsChinese interpreting studiesCitation analysisStatistical modeling
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Ziyun Xu
Leonid Pekelis
spellingShingle Ziyun Xu
Leonid Pekelis
Chinese Interpreting Studies: a data-driven analysis of a dynamic field of enquiry
PeerJ
Scientometrics
Chinese interpreting studies
Citation analysis
Statistical modeling
author_facet Ziyun Xu
Leonid Pekelis
author_sort Ziyun Xu
title Chinese Interpreting Studies: a data-driven analysis of a dynamic field of enquiry
title_short Chinese Interpreting Studies: a data-driven analysis of a dynamic field of enquiry
title_full Chinese Interpreting Studies: a data-driven analysis of a dynamic field of enquiry
title_fullStr Chinese Interpreting Studies: a data-driven analysis of a dynamic field of enquiry
title_full_unstemmed Chinese Interpreting Studies: a data-driven analysis of a dynamic field of enquiry
title_sort chinese interpreting studies: a data-driven analysis of a dynamic field of enquiry
publisher PeerJ Inc.
series PeerJ
issn 2167-8359
publishDate 2015-09-01
description Over the five decades since its beginnings, Chinese Interpreting Studies (CIS) has evolved into a dynamic field of academic enquiry with more than 3,500 scholars and 4,200 publications. Using quantitative and qualitative analysis, this scientometric study delves deep into CIS citation data to examine some of the noteworthy trends and patterns of behavior in the field: how can the field’s progress be quantified by means of citation analysis? Do its authors tend repeatedly to cite ‘classic’ papers or are they more drawn to their colleagues’ latest research? What different effects does the choice of empirical vs. theoretical research have on the use of citations in the various research brackets? The findings show that the field is steadily moving forward with new papers continuously being cited, although a number of influential papers stand out, having received a stream of citations in all the years examined. CIS scholars also have a tendency to cite much older English than Chinese publications across all document types, and empirical research has the greatest influence on the citation behavior of doctoral scholars, while theoretical studies have the largest impact on that of article authors. The goal of this study is to demonstrate the merits of blending quantitative and qualitative analyses to uncover hidden trends.
topic Scientometrics
Chinese interpreting studies
Citation analysis
Statistical modeling
url https://peerj.com/articles/1249.pdf
work_keys_str_mv AT ziyunxu chineseinterpretingstudiesadatadrivenanalysisofadynamicfieldofenquiry
AT leonidpekelis chineseinterpretingstudiesadatadrivenanalysisofadynamicfieldofenquiry
_version_ 1725663751827357696