Journals as constituents of scientific discourse: economic heterodoxy

Purpose: to provide a view and analysis of the immediate field of journals which surround a number of key heterodox economics journals. Design/methodology/approach: Using citation data from the Science and Social Science Citation Index, the individual and collective networks of a number of journals in this field are analyzed. Findings: The size and shape of the citation networks of journals can differ substantially, even if in a broadly similar category. Heterodox economics cannot (yet) be considered as an integrated specialty: authors in several journals in heterodox economics cite more from mainstream economics than from other heterodox journals. There are also strong links with other disciplinary fields such as geography, development studies, women studies, etc. Research limitations/implications: The analysis is limited by its reliance on citation data in the Science and Social Science Citation Indexes provided by the Thomson-Scientific. Practical implications: The analysis shows not only where journals draw their strengths from, but also how knowledge between journals and neighbouring sub-fields is diffused. This can be important for editors, authors, and others. Originality/value: A network analysis focusing not just on a single journal as a focal point, but combining several journals in a single analysis enables us to visualize structural properties of the field of heterodox economics which otherwise remain latent. This study provides a structural approach to citation analysis as a tool for the study of scientific specialties.