Is climate change controversy good for science? IPCC and contrarian reports in the light of bibliometrics View Full Text


Ontology type: schema:ScholarlyArticle     


Article Info

DATE

2017-06-22

AUTHORS

Ferenc Jankó, Judit Papp Vancsó, Norbert Móricz

ABSTRACT

Debate and controversy concerning the issue of climate change generally results in the hindering and obstruction of social and governmental action on this issue. This paper analyses the scientific background, i.e. the reference list of the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report “The Physical Science Basis” and an alternative climate change report of a US think tank institute “Climate Change Reconsidered II. Physical Science”. We compared these two reports to the antecedent reports from 2007 (IPCC AR4 WGI) and 2009 (Climate Change Reconsidered). For the purposes of the study, we developed a database containing all the references collected from the four reports. The bibliometric analysis focused on the distribution of references among peer reviewed scientific journals and the most frequently cited lead authors that created the basis for the evaluation of their different scientific emphasis. Our findings underline that there is still no convergence between the scientific literature of the IPCC and the contrarian reports; however, the remarkable quantitative development on both sides and the qualitative progress of the IPCC report allows us to draw somewhat surprising conclusions in the context of climate change science. Contrary to expectations, controversy is beneficial to the science of climate change as it fosters the review process on both sides of the debate. More... »

PAGES

1745-1759

Identifiers

URI

http://scigraph.springernature.com/pub.10.1007/s11192-017-2440-9

DOI

http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2440-9

DIMENSIONS

https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1086126990


Indexing Status Check whether this publication has been indexed by Scopus and Web Of Science using the SN Indexing Status Tool
Incoming Citations Browse incoming citations for this publication using opencitations.net

JSON-LD is the canonical representation for SciGraph data.

TIP: You can open this SciGraph record using an external JSON-LD service: JSON-LD Playground Google SDTT

[
  {
    "@context": "https://springernature.github.io/scigraph/jsonld/sgcontext.json", 
    "about": [
      {
        "id": "http://purl.org/au-research/vocabulary/anzsrc-for/2008/08", 
        "inDefinedTermSet": "http://purl.org/au-research/vocabulary/anzsrc-for/2008/", 
        "name": "Information and Computing Sciences", 
        "type": "DefinedTerm"
      }, 
      {
        "id": "http://purl.org/au-research/vocabulary/anzsrc-for/2008/16", 
        "inDefinedTermSet": "http://purl.org/au-research/vocabulary/anzsrc-for/2008/", 
        "name": "Studies in Human Society", 
        "type": "DefinedTerm"
      }, 
      {
        "id": "http://purl.org/au-research/vocabulary/anzsrc-for/2008/0807", 
        "inDefinedTermSet": "http://purl.org/au-research/vocabulary/anzsrc-for/2008/", 
        "name": "Library and Information Studies", 
        "type": "DefinedTerm"
      }, 
      {
        "id": "http://purl.org/au-research/vocabulary/anzsrc-for/2008/1605", 
        "inDefinedTermSet": "http://purl.org/au-research/vocabulary/anzsrc-for/2008/", 
        "name": "Policy and Administration", 
        "type": "DefinedTerm"
      }
    ], 
    "author": [
      {
        "affiliation": {
          "alternateName": "Alexandre Lamfalussy Faculty of Economics, University of Sopron, Erzs\u00e9bet St. 9, 9400, Sopron, Hungary", 
          "id": "http://www.grid.ac/institutes/grid.410548.c", 
          "name": [
            "Alexandre Lamfalussy Faculty of Economics, University of Sopron, Erzs\u00e9bet St. 9, 9400, Sopron, Hungary"
          ], 
          "type": "Organization"
        }, 
        "familyName": "Jank\u00f3", 
        "givenName": "Ferenc", 
        "id": "sg:person.016400514133.87", 
        "sameAs": [
          "https://app.dimensions.ai/discover/publication?and_facet_researcher=ur.016400514133.87"
        ], 
        "type": "Person"
      }, 
      {
        "affiliation": {
          "alternateName": "Gyula Roth Technical School of Forestry and Wood Industry, Szent Gy\u00f6rgy St. 9, 9400, Sopron, Hungary", 
          "id": "http://www.grid.ac/institutes/None", 
          "name": [
            "Gyula Roth Technical School of Forestry and Wood Industry, Szent Gy\u00f6rgy St. 9, 9400, Sopron, Hungary"
          ], 
          "type": "Organization"
        }, 
        "familyName": "Papp Vancs\u00f3", 
        "givenName": "Judit", 
        "id": "sg:person.014037417036.37", 
        "sameAs": [
          "https://app.dimensions.ai/discover/publication?and_facet_researcher=ur.014037417036.37"
        ], 
        "type": "Person"
      }, 
      {
        "affiliation": {
          "alternateName": "National Agricultural Research and Innovation Centre, Forest Research Institute, V\u00e1rker\u00fclet 30/A, 9600, S\u00e1rv\u00e1r, Hungary", 
          "id": "http://www.grid.ac/institutes/grid.481832.4", 
          "name": [
            "National Agricultural Research and Innovation Centre, Forest Research Institute, V\u00e1rker\u00fclet 30/A, 9600, S\u00e1rv\u00e1r, Hungary"
          ], 
          "type": "Organization"
        }, 
        "familyName": "M\u00f3ricz", 
        "givenName": "Norbert", 
        "id": "sg:person.07607474667.12", 
        "sameAs": [
          "https://app.dimensions.ai/discover/publication?and_facet_researcher=ur.07607474667.12"
        ], 
        "type": "Person"
      }
    ], 
    "citation": [
      {
        "id": "sg:pub.10.1007/s11192-016-2177-x", 
        "sameAs": [
          "https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1010682424", 
          "https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-2177-x"
        ], 
        "type": "CreativeWork"
      }, 
      {
        "id": "sg:pub.10.1007/s10584-015-1475-2", 
        "sameAs": [
          "https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1013204696", 
          "https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-015-1475-2"
        ], 
        "type": "CreativeWork"
      }, 
      {
        "id": "sg:pub.10.1007/s11192-011-0356-3", 
        "sameAs": [
          "https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1014679676", 
          "https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-011-0356-3"
        ], 
        "type": "CreativeWork"
      }, 
      {
        "id": "sg:pub.10.1007/s00704-015-1597-5", 
        "sameAs": [
          "https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1053279347", 
          "https://doi.org/10.1007/s00704-015-1597-5"
        ], 
        "type": "CreativeWork"
      }, 
      {
        "id": "sg:pub.10.1007/s10584-011-0018-8", 
        "sameAs": [
          "https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1045971930", 
          "https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-011-0018-8"
        ], 
        "type": "CreativeWork"
      }
    ], 
    "datePublished": "2017-06-22", 
    "datePublishedReg": "2017-06-22", 
    "description": "Debate and controversy concerning the issue of climate change generally results in the hindering and obstruction of social and governmental action on this issue. This paper analyses the scientific background, i.e. the reference list of the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report \u201cThe Physical Science Basis\u201d and an alternative climate change report of a US think tank institute \u201cClimate Change Reconsidered II. Physical Science\u201d. We compared these two reports to the antecedent reports from 2007 (IPCC AR4 WGI) and 2009 (Climate Change Reconsidered). For the purposes of the study, we developed a database containing all the references collected from the four reports. The bibliometric analysis focused on the distribution of references among peer reviewed scientific journals and the most frequently cited lead authors that created the basis for the evaluation of their different scientific emphasis. Our findings underline that there is still no convergence between the scientific literature of the IPCC and the contrarian reports; however, the remarkable quantitative development on both sides and the qualitative progress of the IPCC report allows us to draw somewhat surprising conclusions in the context of climate change science. Contrary to expectations, controversy is beneficial to the science of climate change as it fosters the review process on both sides of the debate.", 
    "genre": "article", 
    "id": "sg:pub.10.1007/s11192-017-2440-9", 
    "inLanguage": "en", 
    "isAccessibleForFree": false, 
    "isPartOf": [
      {
        "id": "sg:journal.1089056", 
        "issn": [
          "0138-9130", 
          "1588-2861"
        ], 
        "name": "Scientometrics", 
        "publisher": "Springer Nature", 
        "type": "Periodical"
      }, 
      {
        "issueNumber": "3", 
        "type": "PublicationIssue"
      }, 
      {
        "type": "PublicationVolume", 
        "volumeNumber": "112"
      }
    ], 
    "keywords": [
      "debate", 
      "science basis", 
      "physical sciences", 
      "science", 
      "scientific emphasis", 
      "surprising conclusion", 
      "climate change science", 
      "controversy", 
      "issues", 
      "governmental action", 
      "scientific background", 
      "scientific journals", 
      "change science", 
      "review process", 
      "action", 
      "background", 
      "basis", 
      "reference", 
      "journals", 
      "lead author", 
      "authors", 
      "emphasis", 
      "scientific literature", 
      "quantitative development", 
      "IPCC report", 
      "context", 
      "light", 
      "climate change", 
      "paper", 
      "list", 
      "Institute", 
      "purpose", 
      "bibliometric analysis", 
      "literature", 
      "development", 
      "side", 
      "progress", 
      "conclusion", 
      "expectations", 
      "bibliometrics", 
      "changes", 
      "report", 
      "study", 
      "analysis", 
      "peers", 
      "findings", 
      "convergence", 
      "IPCC", 
      "process", 
      "hindering", 
      "reference lists", 
      "Assessment Report", 
      "physical science basis", 
      "Climate Change (IPCC) report", 
      "Change report", 
      "database", 
      "evaluation", 
      "qualitative progress", 
      "climate change controversy", 
      "obstruction", 
      "IPCC Fifth Assessment Report", 
      "Fifth Assessment Report", 
      "alternative climate change report", 
      "US think tank institute", 
      "think tank institute", 
      "tank institute", 
      "Climate Change Reconsidered II", 
      "Change Reconsidered II", 
      "Reconsidered II", 
      "antecedent reports", 
      "distribution of references", 
      "distribution", 
      "different scientific emphasis", 
      "contrarian reports", 
      "remarkable quantitative development", 
      "change controversy", 
      "light of bibliometrics"
    ], 
    "name": "Is climate change controversy good for science? IPCC and contrarian reports in the light of bibliometrics", 
    "pagination": "1745-1759", 
    "productId": [
      {
        "name": "dimensions_id", 
        "type": "PropertyValue", 
        "value": [
          "pub.1086126990"
        ]
      }, 
      {
        "name": "doi", 
        "type": "PropertyValue", 
        "value": [
          "10.1007/s11192-017-2440-9"
        ]
      }
    ], 
    "sameAs": [
      "https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2440-9", 
      "https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1086126990"
    ], 
    "sdDataset": "articles", 
    "sdDatePublished": "2021-12-01T19:39", 
    "sdLicense": "https://scigraph.springernature.com/explorer/license/", 
    "sdPublisher": {
      "name": "Springer Nature - SN SciGraph project", 
      "type": "Organization"
    }, 
    "sdSource": "s3://com-springernature-scigraph/baseset/20211201/entities/gbq_results/article/article_749.jsonl", 
    "type": "ScholarlyArticle", 
    "url": "https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2440-9"
  }
]
 

Download the RDF metadata as:  json-ld nt turtle xml License info

HOW TO GET THIS DATA PROGRAMMATICALLY:

JSON-LD is a popular format for linked data which is fully compatible with JSON.

curl -H 'Accept: application/ld+json' 'https://scigraph.springernature.com/pub.10.1007/s11192-017-2440-9'

N-Triples is a line-based linked data format ideal for batch operations.

curl -H 'Accept: application/n-triples' 'https://scigraph.springernature.com/pub.10.1007/s11192-017-2440-9'

Turtle is a human-readable linked data format.

curl -H 'Accept: text/turtle' 'https://scigraph.springernature.com/pub.10.1007/s11192-017-2440-9'

RDF/XML is a standard XML format for linked data.

curl -H 'Accept: application/rdf+xml' 'https://scigraph.springernature.com/pub.10.1007/s11192-017-2440-9'


 

This table displays all metadata directly associated to this object as RDF triples.

183 TRIPLES      22 PREDICATES      109 URIs      94 LITERALS      6 BLANK NODES

Subject Predicate Object
1 sg:pub.10.1007/s11192-017-2440-9 schema:about anzsrc-for:08
2 anzsrc-for:0807
3 anzsrc-for:16
4 anzsrc-for:1605
5 schema:author N32f95744a33b40739830e8d118ef2f04
6 schema:citation sg:pub.10.1007/s00704-015-1597-5
7 sg:pub.10.1007/s10584-011-0018-8
8 sg:pub.10.1007/s10584-015-1475-2
9 sg:pub.10.1007/s11192-011-0356-3
10 sg:pub.10.1007/s11192-016-2177-x
11 schema:datePublished 2017-06-22
12 schema:datePublishedReg 2017-06-22
13 schema:description Debate and controversy concerning the issue of climate change generally results in the hindering and obstruction of social and governmental action on this issue. This paper analyses the scientific background, i.e. the reference list of the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report “The Physical Science Basis” and an alternative climate change report of a US think tank institute “Climate Change Reconsidered II. Physical Science”. We compared these two reports to the antecedent reports from 2007 (IPCC AR4 WGI) and 2009 (Climate Change Reconsidered). For the purposes of the study, we developed a database containing all the references collected from the four reports. The bibliometric analysis focused on the distribution of references among peer reviewed scientific journals and the most frequently cited lead authors that created the basis for the evaluation of their different scientific emphasis. Our findings underline that there is still no convergence between the scientific literature of the IPCC and the contrarian reports; however, the remarkable quantitative development on both sides and the qualitative progress of the IPCC report allows us to draw somewhat surprising conclusions in the context of climate change science. Contrary to expectations, controversy is beneficial to the science of climate change as it fosters the review process on both sides of the debate.
14 schema:genre article
15 schema:inLanguage en
16 schema:isAccessibleForFree false
17 schema:isPartOf N3ee8f3e1198543a3a166740e4f472e82
18 N5cbe3f352ec74339878ac20c154c6131
19 sg:journal.1089056
20 schema:keywords Assessment Report
21 Change Reconsidered II
22 Change report
23 Climate Change (IPCC) report
24 Climate Change Reconsidered II
25 Fifth Assessment Report
26 IPCC
27 IPCC Fifth Assessment Report
28 IPCC report
29 Institute
30 Reconsidered II
31 US think tank institute
32 action
33 alternative climate change report
34 analysis
35 antecedent reports
36 authors
37 background
38 basis
39 bibliometric analysis
40 bibliometrics
41 change controversy
42 change science
43 changes
44 climate change
45 climate change controversy
46 climate change science
47 conclusion
48 context
49 contrarian reports
50 controversy
51 convergence
52 database
53 debate
54 development
55 different scientific emphasis
56 distribution
57 distribution of references
58 emphasis
59 evaluation
60 expectations
61 findings
62 governmental action
63 hindering
64 issues
65 journals
66 lead author
67 light
68 light of bibliometrics
69 list
70 literature
71 obstruction
72 paper
73 peers
74 physical science basis
75 physical sciences
76 process
77 progress
78 purpose
79 qualitative progress
80 quantitative development
81 reference
82 reference lists
83 remarkable quantitative development
84 report
85 review process
86 science
87 science basis
88 scientific background
89 scientific emphasis
90 scientific journals
91 scientific literature
92 side
93 study
94 surprising conclusion
95 tank institute
96 think tank institute
97 schema:name Is climate change controversy good for science? IPCC and contrarian reports in the light of bibliometrics
98 schema:pagination 1745-1759
99 schema:productId N3074f7b72c424e06908883ffc5518c40
100 N625bc59ba9e34062b47ff428ddd67128
101 schema:sameAs https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1086126990
102 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2440-9
103 schema:sdDatePublished 2021-12-01T19:39
104 schema:sdLicense https://scigraph.springernature.com/explorer/license/
105 schema:sdPublisher N94dd30a79c704a5c9b620479c974e573
106 schema:url https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2440-9
107 sgo:license sg:explorer/license/
108 sgo:sdDataset articles
109 rdf:type schema:ScholarlyArticle
110 N3074f7b72c424e06908883ffc5518c40 schema:name doi
111 schema:value 10.1007/s11192-017-2440-9
112 rdf:type schema:PropertyValue
113 N32f95744a33b40739830e8d118ef2f04 rdf:first sg:person.016400514133.87
114 rdf:rest N51b34f0fef5a4dadb5d381492dcc75d4
115 N3ee8f3e1198543a3a166740e4f472e82 schema:volumeNumber 112
116 rdf:type schema:PublicationVolume
117 N4bff57e3d56a49bea2359345509ec5b6 rdf:first sg:person.07607474667.12
118 rdf:rest rdf:nil
119 N51b34f0fef5a4dadb5d381492dcc75d4 rdf:first sg:person.014037417036.37
120 rdf:rest N4bff57e3d56a49bea2359345509ec5b6
121 N5cbe3f352ec74339878ac20c154c6131 schema:issueNumber 3
122 rdf:type schema:PublicationIssue
123 N625bc59ba9e34062b47ff428ddd67128 schema:name dimensions_id
124 schema:value pub.1086126990
125 rdf:type schema:PropertyValue
126 N94dd30a79c704a5c9b620479c974e573 schema:name Springer Nature - SN SciGraph project
127 rdf:type schema:Organization
128 anzsrc-for:08 schema:inDefinedTermSet anzsrc-for:
129 schema:name Information and Computing Sciences
130 rdf:type schema:DefinedTerm
131 anzsrc-for:0807 schema:inDefinedTermSet anzsrc-for:
132 schema:name Library and Information Studies
133 rdf:type schema:DefinedTerm
134 anzsrc-for:16 schema:inDefinedTermSet anzsrc-for:
135 schema:name Studies in Human Society
136 rdf:type schema:DefinedTerm
137 anzsrc-for:1605 schema:inDefinedTermSet anzsrc-for:
138 schema:name Policy and Administration
139 rdf:type schema:DefinedTerm
140 sg:journal.1089056 schema:issn 0138-9130
141 1588-2861
142 schema:name Scientometrics
143 schema:publisher Springer Nature
144 rdf:type schema:Periodical
145 sg:person.014037417036.37 schema:affiliation grid-institutes:None
146 schema:familyName Papp Vancsó
147 schema:givenName Judit
148 schema:sameAs https://app.dimensions.ai/discover/publication?and_facet_researcher=ur.014037417036.37
149 rdf:type schema:Person
150 sg:person.016400514133.87 schema:affiliation grid-institutes:grid.410548.c
151 schema:familyName Jankó
152 schema:givenName Ferenc
153 schema:sameAs https://app.dimensions.ai/discover/publication?and_facet_researcher=ur.016400514133.87
154 rdf:type schema:Person
155 sg:person.07607474667.12 schema:affiliation grid-institutes:grid.481832.4
156 schema:familyName Móricz
157 schema:givenName Norbert
158 schema:sameAs https://app.dimensions.ai/discover/publication?and_facet_researcher=ur.07607474667.12
159 rdf:type schema:Person
160 sg:pub.10.1007/s00704-015-1597-5 schema:sameAs https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1053279347
161 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00704-015-1597-5
162 rdf:type schema:CreativeWork
163 sg:pub.10.1007/s10584-011-0018-8 schema:sameAs https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1045971930
164 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-011-0018-8
165 rdf:type schema:CreativeWork
166 sg:pub.10.1007/s10584-015-1475-2 schema:sameAs https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1013204696
167 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-015-1475-2
168 rdf:type schema:CreativeWork
169 sg:pub.10.1007/s11192-011-0356-3 schema:sameAs https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1014679676
170 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-011-0356-3
171 rdf:type schema:CreativeWork
172 sg:pub.10.1007/s11192-016-2177-x schema:sameAs https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1010682424
173 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-2177-x
174 rdf:type schema:CreativeWork
175 grid-institutes:None schema:alternateName Gyula Roth Technical School of Forestry and Wood Industry, Szent György St. 9, 9400, Sopron, Hungary
176 schema:name Gyula Roth Technical School of Forestry and Wood Industry, Szent György St. 9, 9400, Sopron, Hungary
177 rdf:type schema:Organization
178 grid-institutes:grid.410548.c schema:alternateName Alexandre Lamfalussy Faculty of Economics, University of Sopron, Erzsébet St. 9, 9400, Sopron, Hungary
179 schema:name Alexandre Lamfalussy Faculty of Economics, University of Sopron, Erzsébet St. 9, 9400, Sopron, Hungary
180 rdf:type schema:Organization
181 grid-institutes:grid.481832.4 schema:alternateName National Agricultural Research and Innovation Centre, Forest Research Institute, Várkerület 30/A, 9600, Sárvár, Hungary
182 schema:name National Agricultural Research and Innovation Centre, Forest Research Institute, Várkerület 30/A, 9600, Sárvár, Hungary
183 rdf:type schema:Organization
 




Preview window. Press ESC to close (or click here)


...