Information epidemics and the growth of physics

This study examined the prevalence of information epidemics in the physics literature. The primary interest was to find out whether outliers observed on time series charts of literatures are due to information epidemics, whether these epidemics are widespread occurrences in physics, whether literatures showing such rapid growth arise mainly due to the influence of an important work and, if so, what characterizes these literatures. Information epidemics were defined as spurts of growth in the literature of a field that reflect a sudden excitement and increase in activity. It was hypothesized that information epidemics are common occurrences in the growth of the physics literature and that outliers observed during the growth of a field are caused by influential works that attract new workers into it and cause them to publish extensively. Growth spurts where information epidemics lead to a permanent change and the emergence of a new subspecialty are termed knowledge epidemics.The monthly number of abstracts indexed by each chapter of Physics Abstracts between 1977 and 1987 was plotted on a time series chart and an envelope of +/-3 standard deviations was fitted around the regression line. All spikes that crossed the envelope were considered to be outliers and thus potential information epidemics. The abstracts contained in each outlier were identified in the Science Citation Index and analyzed for spread (corporate sources of authors) and impact (citations).Results show that information epidemics exist, but they are not widespread. Only four information epidemics were identified in the data. They are in chapters 2 (mathematical methods), 36 (clusters), 73 (heterostructures) and 74 (superconductivity). Only the growth in superconductivity can be considered to be a knowledge epidemic. All four arose due to new instrumentation and/or cheaper materials and are examples of puzzle-generating and enabling science. A second major result was that information epidemics are caused by as well as carried forward by groups of influential works. Third, increased activity in a given field is accompanied by an increase in conference papers. On the other hand, the journal literature of a given field is sufficient to represent the direction of literature, growth accurately.This work confirms and extends the epidemic model for the growth of literatures by demonstrating that not only does the contagion effect exist in physics but that there is also a catalyst effect present. It provides a statistical description for the growth and decline of fields of research