Tesis doctoral: La investigación en Televisión, Cine, Radio y Fotografía en España. Análisis bibliométrico y de Redes Sociales de la estructura científica a través de las tesis doctorales

5
LA INVESTIGACIÓN EN TELEVISIÓN, CINE,
RADIO Y FOTOGRAFÍA EN ESPAÑA
ANÁLISIS BIBLIOMÉTRICO Y DE REDES
SOCIALES DE LA ESTRUCTURA CIENTÍFICA
ESPAÑOLAA TRAVÉS DE SUS TESIS
DOCTORALES
RAFAEL REPISO CABALLERO
DIRECTORES
EMILIO DELGADO LÓPEZ-CÓZAR
RAFAEL RUIZ PÉREZ

PORTADA:
Imposición del birrete a un doctor.
Antonio Martínez Anaya. Siglo XX
Óleo / lienzo, 1,10 x 2,00 m
Sociometric Geography of a Community
Jacob L. Moreno, Otoño1932.

DEDICADO A MIS PADRES,
MECENAS DE TODO LO QUE HAGO CON PROVECHO

UNIVERSIDAD DE GRANADA
DEPARTAMENTO DE INFORMACIÓN Y COMUNICACIÓN
LA INVESTIGACIÓN EN TELEVISIÓN, CINE, RADIO Y FOTOGRAFÍA EN ESPAÑA
ANÁLISIS BIBLIOMÉTRICO Y DE REDES SOCIALES DE LA ESTRUCTURA CIENTÍFICA
TESIS DOCTORAL
Autor:
Rafael Repiso Caballero
Directores:
Emilio Delgado López-Cózar
Rafael Ruiz Pérez

1
ÍNDICE GENERAL
ÍNDICE GENERAL ....................................................................................................................................1
ÍNDICE DE TABLAS ..................................................................................................................................7
ÍNDICE DE FIGURAS ................................................................................................................................9
ACRÓNIMOS DE UNIVERSIDADES.........................................................................................................11
I. ABSTRACT.................................................................................................................................13
Introduction.................................................................................................................................................................15
OBJECTIVES....................................................................................................................................................... 15
JUSTIFICATION.................................................................................................................................................. 15
ORIGIN AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE TOPIC........................................................................................... 16
STRUCTURE OF THE THESIS......................................................................................................................... 16
Theoretical framework............................................................................................................................................17
THE DOCTORATE AND THE DOCTORAL THESIS .................................................................................... 17
SOCIAL NETWORKS ANALYSIS ................................................................................................................... 19
AUDIOVISUAL COMMUNICATION .............................................................................................................. 21
METHODOLOGY..........................................................................................................................................................22
Results ............................................................................................................................................................................25
RADIO 26
CINEMA 26
TELEVISION........................................................................................................................................................ 26
PHOTOGRAPHY................................................................................................................................................. 27
DISCUSSION & CONCLUSIONS..............................................................................................................29
DISCUSSION...................................................................................................................................................................29
METHODOLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS ................................................................................................... 29
AUDIOVISUAL COMMUNICATION.............................................................................................................. 31
RADIO 38
CINEMA 39
TELEVISION........................................................................................................................................................ 40
PHOTOGRAPHY................................................................................................................................................. 41
CONCLUSIONS..............................................................................................................................................................42
FUTURE LINES OF INVESTIGATION......................................................................................................................44
1. INTRODUCCIÓN ........................................................................................................................45
1.1. OBJETIVOS......................................................................................................................................................47
1.2. JUSTIFICACIÓN .............................................................................................................................................48
1.3. ORIGEN Y DESARROLLO DEL TEMA......................................................................................................49
1.4. ESTRUCTURA DE LA TESIS .......................................................................................................................51

2
1.5. AGRADECIMIENTOS ....................................................................................................................................52
2. MARCO TEÓRICO.....................................................................................................................55
2.1. EL DOCTORADO Y LA TESIS DOCTORAL..............................................................................................57
2.1.1. Nacimiento y evolución del grado de doctor..................................................................... 57
2.1.2. El grado de doctor en España ................................................................................................. 59
2.1.2.1. Antiguo Régimen......................................................................................................................59
2.1.2.2. Siglo XIX .....................................................................................................................................60
2.1.2.3. Siglo XX.......................................................................................................................................62
2.1.2.4. Siglo XXI .....................................................................................................................................64
2.1.3. La tesis doctoral ............................................................................................................................ 66
2.1.3.1. Importancia y características .............................................................................................66
2.1.3.2. Director........................................................................................................................................67
2.1.3.2.1. Deberes y obligaciones de un director de tesis.........................................................68
2.1.3.2.2. Relación director-doctorando.........................................................................................69
2.1.3.3. Tribunal de tesis.......................................................................................................................70
2.1.4. Estudios empíricos sobre tesis doctorales........................................................................... 72
2.1.4.1. Investigación española sobre tesis.....................................................................................73
2.1.4.2. Estudios de tesis de Comunicación...................................................................................74
2.2. ANÁLISIS DE REDES SOCIALES...............................................................................................................88
2.2.1 Historia.............................................................................................................................................. 88
2.2.2 Análisis de Redes Sociales. Fundamentos conceptuales y metodológicos............. 90
2.2.3. Elementos y tipologías de redes.............................................................................................. 91
2.2.4. Población y muestreo en el Análisis de Redes Sociales................................................. 92
2.2.5. Sociogramas y matrices: Representación y visualización de redes sociales......... 93
2.2.6. Algoritmos para generar sociogramas................................................................................. 94
2.2.7. Relaciones, poder y centralidad. Cómo medir esta información.............................. 96
2.2.7.1. Perspectiva sociológica ..........................................................................................................96
2.2.7.2. Perspectiva conceptual ..........................................................................................................97
2.2.8. Colegios Invisibles y Capital Social....................................................................................... 98
2.2.8.1. Colegios Invisibles ...................................................................................................................98
2.2.8.2. Capital Social.............................................................................................................................99
2.2.9. El ARS aplicado al estudio de las tesis doctorales........................................................100
2.3. COMUNICACIÓN AUDIOVISUAL............................................................................................................102
2.3.1. Definición.......................................................................................................................................102
2.3.2. Estudios de Comunicación Audiovisual en España .....................................................103
2.3.3. La investigación sobre Comunicación Audiovisual en España...............................106
3. MATERIAL Y MÉTODOS.........................................................................................................111
3.1. DISEÑO ...........................................................................................................................................................113
3.2. MATERIAL ....................................................................................................................................................113

3
3.2.1. Fuente Principal. TESEO .......................................................................................................113
3.2.2. Fuente Secundaria. Libro de Daniel L. Jones et. al. Investigación sobre
Comunicación en España. Aproximación bibliométrica a las tesis doctorales (1926-1998)116
3.2.3. Estrategia de búsqueda............................................................................................................117
3.2.4. Tratamiento de datos................................................................................................................119
3.2.5. Marco cronológico estudiado.................................................................................................121
3.2.6. Variables e indicadores analizados .....................................................................................122
3.2.6.1. Producción................................................................................................................................122
3.2.6.2. Universidades de lectura.....................................................................................................122
3.2.6.3. Dirección de tesis....................................................................................................................122
3.2.6.4. Codirecciones...........................................................................................................................123
3.2.6.5. Presencia en tribunales........................................................................................................123
3.2.6.6. Presidencia de tribunales....................................................................................................124
3.2.6.7. Departamentos........................................................................................................................125
3.2.6.8. Temática ....................................................................................................................................125
3.2.6.9. Agrupación y similitud de especialidades (Radio, Televisión, Cine y
Fotografía). Escalamiento Multidimensional.....................................................................................126
3.2.6.9.1. Agrupación y similitud entre especialidades a través de los directores de
tesis 126
3.2.6.9.2. Agrupación y similitud a través de los evaluadores de tesis ............................127
3.2.6.9.3. Agrupación y similitud a través de los directores y evaluadores de tesis...127
3.2.7. Redes Sociales...............................................................................................................................127
3.2.7.2. Académicos con mayor grado de interrelación.........................................................128
3.2.7.3. Centralidad y “poder”.........................................................................................................129
3.2.7.4. Subredes de coparticipación en tribunales por periodos y red total................132
3.2.7.5. Redes de Selección de Tribunales ...................................................................................133
3.2.7.6. Redes Híbridas........................................................................................................................133
3.2.8. Software de Análisis de Redes Sociales.............................................................................134
4. RESULTADOS ..........................................................................................................................137
4.1. COMUNICACIÓN AUDIOVISUAL: RADIO, TELEVISIÓN, CINE Y FOTOGRAFÍA ...................138
4.1.1. Análisis Bibliométrico...............................................................................................................138
4.1.1.1. Producción de Tesis ..............................................................................................................138
4.1.1.3. Departamentos de Producción.........................................................................................141
4.1.1.4. Dirección de Tesis..................................................................................................................142
4.1.1.5. Codirecciones...........................................................................................................................145
4.1.1.6. Presencia en tribunales........................................................................................................145
4.1.1.7. Presidencia................................................................................................................................148
4.1.1.8. Género ........................................................................................................................................150

4
4.1.1.9. Agrupación y similitud de Especialidades en Comunicación Audiovisual....152
4.1.2. Red académica de Comunicación Audiovisual ..............................................................157
4.1.2.1. Descripción general de la Red ..........................................................................................157
4.1.2.2. Medidas de Centralidad. Red de Comunicación Audiovisual............................158
4.1.2.3. Redes por periodos................................................................................................................160
4.1.2.3.1. Red del Periodo 1976-2007.............................................................................................160
4.1.2.3.2. Red del periodo 1976-1987.............................................................................................162
4.1.2.3.3. Red del periodo 1988-1997.............................................................................................164
4.1.2.3.4. Red del Periodo 1998-2007.............................................................................................166
4.1.2.4. Red de Selección de Tribunales .......................................................................................168
4.1.3. Red de relación entre Universidades..................................................................................171
4.1.4. Redes Híbridas.............................................................................................................................173
4.2. RADIO.............................................................................................................................................................181
4.2.1.4. Presencia en tribunales y presidencia ...........................................................................183
4.2.1.5. Departamentos de producción .........................................................................................184
4.2.1.6. Temáticas estudiadas............................................................................................................185
4.2.2. Análisis de Redes Sociales.......................................................................................................187
4.2.2.1. Descripción de la Red...........................................................................................................187
4.2.2.2. Medidas de Centralidad de la Red; Grado, Cercanía e Intermediación........187
4.2.2.3. Subredes por periodos.........................................................................................................188
4.2.2.3.1. Periodo 1976-1987..............................................................................................................188
4.2.2.3.2. Periodo 1988-1997..............................................................................................................188
4.2.2.3.3. Periodo 1998-2007..............................................................................................................189
4.2.2.3.4. Periodo 1976-2007..............................................................................................................189
4.2.2.4. Red de Selección de tribunales.........................................................................................190
4.3. CINE ................................................................................................................................................................192
4.3.1.6. Temática estudiadas .............................................................................................................196

5
4.3.2.2. Medidas de centralidad.......................................................................................................198
4.3.2.3.1. Periodo 1976-1987..............................................................................................................199
4.3.2.3.2. Periodo 1988-1997..............................................................................................................199
4.3.2.3.3. Periodo 1998-2007..............................................................................................................200
4.3.2.3.4. Red Total 1976-2007 .........................................................................................................203
4.3.2.4. Red de selección de tribunales..........................................................................................205
4.4. TELEVISIÓN..................................................................................................................................................207
4.4.2.3.1. Periodo 1976-1987..............................................................................................................215
4.4.2.3.2. Periodo 1988-1997..............................................................................................................217
4.4.2.3.3. Periodo 1998-2007..............................................................................................................217
4.4.2.3.4. Red Total 1976-2007 .........................................................................................................219
4.4.2.4. Red de selección de tribunales..........................................................................................221
4.5. FOTOGRAFÍA................................................................................................................................................223
4.5.2.3.1. Periodo 1976-1987..............................................................................................................230
4.5.2.3.2. Periodo 1988-1997..............................................................................................................230
4.5.2.3.3. Periodo 1998-2007..............................................................................................................231
4.5.2.3.4. Red Total 1976-2007 .........................................................................................................233
4.5.2.4. Selección de Tribunales.......................................................................................................235

6
5. DISCUSIÓN Y CONCLUSIONES................................................................................................237
5.1. DISCUSIÓN ....................................................................................................................................................239
5.1.1. Consideraciones metodológicas ............................................................................................239
5.1.2. Comunicación Audiovisual.....................................................................................................241
5.1.2.1. Producción de Tesis...................................................................................................................241
5.1.2.2. Universidades...............................................................................................................................242
5.1.2.3. Departamentos universitarios...............................................................................................243
5.1.2.4. Dirección de tesis.........................................................................................................................243
5.1.2.5. Codirecciones ...............................................................................................................................244
5.1.2.6. Tribunales......................................................................................................................................244
5.1.2.7. Presidencia.....................................................................................................................................245
5.1.2.8. Género.............................................................................................................................................245
5.1.2.9. Idioma..............................................................................................................................................246
5.1.2.10. Agrupación y similitud de Especialidades .......................................................................247
5.1.2.11. Evolución de Comunidad Científica...................................................................................247
5.1.3. Radio................................................................................................................................................248
5.1.4. Cine...................................................................................................................................................249
5.1.5. Televisión........................................................................................................................................251
5.1.6. Fotografía.......................................................................................................................................252
5.2. CONCLUSIONES...........................................................................................................................................252
5.3. FUTURAS LÍNEAS DE INVESTIGACIÓN ................................................................................................254
6. BIBLIOGRAFÍA........................................................................................................................255
ANEXO I...............................................................................................................................................273
ANEXO II .............................................................................................................................................343

7
ÍNDICE DE TABLAS
Tabla 2.1. Áreas de producción de trabajos sobre tesis ...................................................................................... 74
Tabla 2.2. Trabajos científicos españoles cuyo objeto de estudio son las tesis .................................................. 76
Tabla 2.3. Tipología de relaciones en redes sociales.......................................................................................... 92
Tabla 2.4. Instauración de los Estudios Universitarios en Comunicación Audiovisual ................................... 105
Tabla 2.5. Principales trabajos sobre investigación en Comunicación en España............................................ 107
Tabla 2.6. Evolución de tesis de Comunicación por periodos.......................................................................... 109
Tabla 3.1. Comparativa de las tesis registradas por INE y TESEO (España, 1997-2007) ............................... 121
Tabla 3.2. Ejemplo de tabla de normalización de departamentos..................................................................... 125
Tabla 3.3. Ejemplo de estructura de datos usados para construir la matriz de relaciones entre especialidades.
Directores ......................................................................................................................................................... 127
Tabla 3.4. Algoritmo - Cálculo de distancias entre especialidades a través de las tesis ................................... 127
Tabla 4.1. Producción de tesis por universidades de lectura. Radio, Televisión, Cine y Fotografía (1976-2007)
.......................................................................................................................................................................... 140
Tabla 4.2. Distribución de las tesis por departamentos de producción............................................................. 142
Tabla 4.3. Cuarenta y cinco directores más productivos en Comunicación Audiovisual................................. 144
Tabla 4.4. Top de los 40 académicos que han participado en mayor número de tribunales de Comunicación
Audiovisual ...................................................................................................................................................... 146
Tabla 4.5. Comparación de la presencia en tribunales de los profesores con mayor número de direcciones... 147
Tabla 4.6. Top de los 40 académicos que mayor número de veces han ocupado la presidencia de los tribunales de
tesis................................................................................................................................................................... 148
Tabla 4.7. Coeficiente de similitud para Presidencias, Direcciones y Participación en tribunales de tesis ...... 149
Tabla 4.8 Distribución de las direcciones tesis por periodo y sexo .................................................................. 152
Tabla 4.9. Distribución por profesores en Comunicación Audiovisual. Años 2003 y 2007............................. 152
Tabla 4.10. Distribución de direcciones atendiendo al sexo del director y del doctorando.............................. 152
Tabla 4.11. Académicos y su participación en disciplinas ............................................................................... 153
Tabla 4.12. Matriz de proximidad de especialidades en Comunicación Audiovisual (coeficiente de correlación de
Pearson)............................................................................................................................................................ 153
Tabla 4.13. Distancias medidas en el espacio de representación bidimensional entre las especialidades de
Comunicación Audiovisual .............................................................................................................................. 154
Tabla 4.14. Distancias calculadas según el modelo previo a la reducción bidimensional................................ 155
Tabla 4.15. Distancias medidas en el espacio de representación. Direcciones y Tribunales............................ 156
Tabla 4.16. Valor de las relaciones en la red de coparticipación en tribunales en tesis de Cine, Radio, Televisión
y Fotografía. (1976-2007) ................................................................................................................................ 157
Tabla 4.17. Académicos con mayor grado de relación en tribunales de Comunicación Audiovisual .............. 158
Tabla 4.18. Académicos con mayor grado de centralidad, medida en Grado, Cercanía e Intermediación.
Comunicación Audiovisual. Periodo 1976-2007.............................................................................................. 159
Tabla 4.19. Académicos con mayor grado de centralidad medido en Grado, Cercanía e Intermediación. Periodo
1976-1987......................................................................................................................................................... 162
Tabla 4.22. Selección de tribunales por los directores más productivos .......................................................... 168
Tabla 4.23. Nº de tesis sobre radio leídas en las Universidades Españolas por períodos. 1976-2007.............. 182
Tabla 4.24. Directores con más de tres tesis dirigidas...................................................................................... 182
Tabla 4.25. Académicos con más de 6 presencias en tribunales de tesis de Radio o 3 presidencias. Periodo 1976-
2007.................................................................................................................................................................. 184
Tabla 4.26. Distribución de las tesis de Radio según departamentos. 1998-2007............................................ 184
Tabla 4.27. Académicos con mayor grado de relación en Tribunales de Radio............................................... 187
Tabla 4.28. Académicos con mayor grado de centralidad, medida en Grado, Cercanía e Intermediación. Radio.
Periodo 1976-2007 ........................................................................................................................................... 187

8
Tabla 4.29. Número, porcentaje y evolución por quinquenio del número de Tesis sobre Cine defendidas en las
universidades españolas durante el período 1976-2007 ................................................................................... 193
Tabla 4.30. Directores con más de cuatro tesis dirigidas en Cine .................................................................... 194
Tabla 4.31. Académicos con más de 11 presencias en tribunales de tesis de Cine. Periodo 1976-2007.......... 195
Tabla 4.32. Distribución de las tesis de Cine según departamentos. 1998-2007.............................................. 196
Tabla 4.33. Académicos con mayor grado de relación en Tribunales de Cine................................................. 198
Tabla 4 34. Académicos con mayor grado de centralidad, medida en Grado, Cercanía e Intermediación. Cine.
Periodo 1976-2007 ........................................................................................................................................... 198
Tabla 4.35. Número, porcentaje y evolución por quinquenio del número de Tesis sobre Televisión defendidas en
las universidades españolas durante el período 1976-2007.............................................................................. 208
Tabla 4.36. Profesores con mayor número de direcciones en Televisión en el periodo 1976-2007................. 209
Tabla 4.37. Académicos con más de 8 presencias en tribunales de tesis de Televisión. Periodo 1976-2007... 210
Tabla 4.38. Distribución de las tesis de Televisión según departamentos. 1998-2007..................................... 211
Tabla 4.39. Académicos con mayor grado de relación en Tribunales de Televisión........................................ 214
Televisión. Periodo 1976-2007 ........................................................................................................................ 214
Tabla 4.41. Número, porcentaje y evolución por quinquenios del número de Tesis sobre Fotografía defendidas en
las universidades españolas durante el período 1976-2007.............................................................................. 224
Tabla 4.42. Profesores con mayor número de direcciones en Fotografía ......................................................... 225
Tabla 4.43. Académicos con más de 6 presencias en tribunales de tesis de Fotografía. Periodo 1976-2007... 226
Tabla 4.44. Distribución de las tesis de Fotografía según departamentos. 1998-2007..................................... 226
Tabla 4.45. Académicos con mayor grado de relación en Tribunales de Fotografía........................................ 229
Fotografía. Periodo 1976-2007......................................................................................................................... 229

9
ÍNDICE DE FIGURAS
Figura 2.1. Distribución de trabajos basados en tesis ......................................................................................... 73
Figura 2.2. Distribución de trabajos sobre tesis por tipología documental......................................................... 73
Figura 2.3. Red Social de chicas fugadas ........................................................................................................... 88
Figura 2.4. Los orígenes teóricos de la Teoría de Redes Sociales...................................................................... 89
Figura 2.5. Direccionalidad de las relaciones sociales ....................................................................................... 91
Figura 2.6. Ejemplo de valores de relaciones ..................................................................................................... 91
Figura 2.7. Ejemplo de Atributos en un Grafo ................................................................................................... 94
Figura 2.8. Algoritmo de fuerza ......................................................................................................................... 95
Figura 2.9. Visualización comparativa delos los algoritmos de Fruchterman-Reingold y Kamada-Kawai ....... 95
Figura 2.10. Correspondencia entre Grafo de Kamada-Kaway y el cartograma de ArcGIS. Tesis de José Pino
Díaz .................................................................................................................................................................... 96
Figura 3.1. Captura de un registro de Teseo..................................................................................................... 114
Figura 3.2. Actual proceso de inclusión de registros en Teseo......................................................................... 115
Figura 3.3. Proceso de trabajo .......................................................................................................................... 120
Figura 3.4. Interfaz de Pajek 2.05..................................................................................................................... 135
Figura 4.1. Distribución de la producción de tesis en Comunicación Audiovisual .......................................... 138
Figura 4.2. Producción española de tesis en Comunicación Audiovisual por quinquenios, 1976–2007.......... 139
Figura 4.3. Distribución del número de tesis dirigidas por académicos en Comunicación Audiovisual .......... 143
Figura 4.4. Distribución de las tesis codirigidas............................................................................................... 145
Figura 4.5 Coeficiente de Similitud para Presidencias, Direcciones y Participación en tribunales de tesis..... 150
Figura 4.6. Distribución de la producción de tesis de Comunicación Audiovisual por sexo y quinquenios .... 151
Figura 4.7. Distribución de los directores de tesis en Comunicación Audiovisual por sexo ............................ 151
Figura 4.8. Representación de la distancia de las disciplinas usando la presencia de académicos en tesis ...... 154
Figura 4.9. Representaciones de la distancia de las disciplinas usando la dirección y los tribunales de tesis .. 155
Figura 4.10. Red de coparticipación de Comunicación Audiovisual. 1976-2007. Podada con valor 4............ 161
Figura 4.11. Red de coparticipación de comunicación Audiovisual. 1976-1987. Podada con valor 2............. 163
Figura 4.12. Red de coparticipación de Comunicación Audiovisual 1988-1997. Podada con valor 3............. 165
Figura 4.13. Red de coparticipación de Comunicación Audiovisual. 1998-2007. Podada con valor 3............ 167
Figura 4.14. Red de Selección de Tribunales de Comunicación Audiovisual. 1976-2007. Podada con valor 4170
Figura 4.15. Red de relación entre universidades a través de la participación en tribunales de sus miembros 172
Figura 4.16. Red de coparticipación en tribunales de Fotografía y Cine. podada con Valor 2......................... 174
Figura 4.17. Red de coparticipación en tribunales de Radio y Televisión. podada con Valor 2 ...................... 175
Figura 4.18. Red de coparticipación en tribunales de Fotografía y Televisión. podada con Valor 2 ............... 176
Figura 4.19. Red de coparticipación en tribunales de Fotografía y Radio. podada con Valor 2....................... 177
Figura 4.20. Red de coparticipación en tribunales de Cine y Radio. podada con Valor 2................................ 178
Figura 4.21. Red de coparticipación en tribunales de Televisión y Cine. podada con Valor 2 ........................ 179
Figura 4.22. Red de coparticipación en tribunales de Comunicación Audiovisual. Podada con Valor 2......... 180
Figura 4.23. Producción de tesis sobre radio leídas en España según quinquenios. 1976-2007....................... 181
Figura 4.24. Distribución de dirección por directores. Tesis de Radio. 1976-2007 ......................................... 183
Figura 4.25. Nube de palabras de títulos de las tesis de Radio......................................................................... 186
Figura 4.26. Red de coparticipación de Radio. 1976-1987. Podada con valor 2.............................................. 188
Figura 4.30. Red de selección de tribunales de Radio podada. 1976-2007. Podada con valor 2...................... 191
Figura 4.31. Evolución por quinquenios del número de tesis defendidas sobre Cine en España durante el período
1976-2007......................................................................................................................................................... 192
Figura 4.32. Número de directores por producción de tesis de Cine ................................................................ 195
Figura 4.33. Nubes de palabras de los títulos de las tesis producidas en Cine ................................................. 197
Figura 4.34. Red de coparticipacion de Cine. 1976-1987. Podada con valor 2................................................ 199
Figura 4.35. Red de coparticipación de Cine. 1988-1997. Podada con valor 3................................................ 200

10
Figura 4.38. Red de selección de tribunales de Cine. 1976-2007. Podada con valor 3 .................................... 206
Figura 4.39. Evolución por quinquenios del número de tesis defendidas sobre Televisión en España durante el
período 1976-2007 ........................................................................................................................................... 207
Figura 4.40. Distribución de dirección por directores. Tesis de Televisión. 1976-2007 .................................. 210
Figura 4.41. Nube de palabras de los títulos de Tesis de Televisión ................................................................ 213
Figura 4.42. Red de coparticipación de Televisión. 1976-1987. Podada con valor 2....................................... 216
Figura 4.46. Red de selección de tribunales de Televisión. 1976-2007. Podada con valor 3........................... 222
Figura 4.47. Nº de tesis sobre Fotografía leídas en España según quinquenios. 1976-2007 ............................ 223
Figura 4.48. Distribución de direcciones y directores. Tesis de Fotografía. 1976-2007 .................................. 225
Figura 4.49. Nube de palabras de los títulos de las tesis producidas en Fotografía.......................................... 228
Figura 4.50. Red de coparticipación de Fotografía. 1976-1987. Podada con valor 2....................................... 230
Figura 4.51. Red de coparticipación de Fotografía. 1988-1997- Podada con valor 2....................................... 231
Figura 4.54. Red de selección de tribunales de Fotografía. 1976-2007. Podada con valor 2 ........................... 236

11
ACRÓNIMOS DE UNIVERSIDADES
CEU UNIVERSIDAD DE SAN PABLO-CEU
DEUSTO UNIVERSIDAD DE DEUSTO
UA UNIVERSIDAD DE ALICANTE
UAB UNIVERSITAT AUTÓNOMA DE BARCELONA
UAH UNIVERSIDAD DE ALCALÁ DE HENARES
UAL UNIVERSIDAD DE ALMERÍA
UAM UNIVERSIDAD AUTÓNOMA DE MADRID
UAX UNIVERSIDAD ALFONSO X EL SABIO
UB UNIVERSITAT DE BARCELONA
UBU UNIVERSIDAD DE BURGOS
UC3M UNIVERSIDAD CARLOS III DE MADRID
UCA UNIVERSIDAD DE CÁDIZ
UCAM UNIVERSIDAD CATÓLICA SAN ANTONIO DE
MURCIA
UCAVILA UNIVERSIDAD CATÓLICA DE
ÁVILA
UCHCEU UNIVERSIDAD CARDENAL
HERRERA-CEU
UCJC UNIVERSIDAD CAMILO JOSÉ CELA
UCLM UNIVERSIDAD DE CASTILLA LA MANCHA
UCM UNIVERSIDAD COMPLUTENSE DE MADRID
UCO UNIVERSIDAD DE CÓRDOBA
UCV UNIVERSIDAD CATÓLICA DE VALENCIA
UDC UNIVERSIDAD DA CORUÑA
UDG UNIVERSITAT DE GIRONA
UDIMA UNIVERSIDAD A DISTANCIA DE MADRID
UDL UNIVERSITAT DE LLEIDA
UEM UNIVERSIDAD EUROPEA DE MADRID
UEMC UNIVERSIDAD EUROPEA MIGUEL DE
CERVANTES
UFV UNIVERSIDAD FRANCISCO DE VITORIA
UGR UNIVERSIDAD DE GRANADA
UHU UNIVERSIDAD DE HUELVA
UIA UNIVERSIDAD INTERNACIONAL DE
ANDALUCÍA
UIB UNIVERSIDAD DE LAS ISLAS BALEARES.
UIMP UNIVERSIDAD INTERNACIONAL MENÉNDEZ
PELAYO
UJAEN UNIVERSIDAD DE JAÉN
UJI UNIVERSITAT JAUME I
ULL UNIVERSIDAD DE LA LAGUNA
ULPGC UNIVERSIDAD DE LAS PALMAS DE GRAN
CANARIA
UM UNIVERSIDAD DE MURCIA
UMA UNIVERSIDAD DE MÁLAGA
UMH UNIVERSIDAD MIGUEL HERNÁNDEZ
UNAV UNIVERSIDAD DE NAVARRA
UNAVARRA UNIVERSIDAD PÚBLICA DE
NAVARRA
UNED UNIVERSIDAD NACIONAL DE EDUCACIÓN A
DISTANCIA
UNEX UNIVERSIDAD DE EXTREMADURA
UNICA UNIVERSITAT INTERNACIONAL DE
CATALUNYA
UNICAN UNIVERSIDAD DE CANTABRIA
UNILEON UNIVERSIDAD DE LEÓN
UNIOVI UNIVERSIDAD DE OVIEDO
UNIR UNIVERSIDAD INTERNACIONAL DE LA
RIOJA
UNIRIOJA UNIVERSIDAD DE LA RIOJA
UNIZAR UNIVERSIDAD DE ZARAGOZA
UOC UNIVERSITAT OBERTA DE CATALUNYA
UPC UNIVERSITAT POLITÉCNICA DE
CATALUNYA
UPCO UNIVERSIDAD PONTIFICIA DE COMILLAS
UPCT UNIVERSIDAD POLITÉCNICA DE
CARTAGENA
UPF UNIVERSITAT POMPEU FABRA
UPM UNIVERSIDAD POLITÉCNICA DE MADRID
UPO UNIVERSIDAD PABLO DE OLAVIDE
UPSA UNIVERSIDAD PONTIFICIA DE SALAMANCA
UPV UNIVERSIDAD DEL PAÍS VASCO
UPVAL UNIVERSITAT POLITÉCNICA DE VALENCIA
URJC UNIVERSIDAD REY JUAN CARLOS
URL UNIVERSITAT RAMÓN LLUL
URV UNIVERSITAT ROVIRA I VIRGILI
US UNIVERSIDAD DE SEVILLA
USAL UNIVERSIDAD DE SALAMANCA
USC UNIVERSIDADE DE SANTIAGO DE
COMPOSTELA
USJ UNIVERSIDAD DE SAN JORGE
UTECEM UNIVERSIDAD TECNOLOGÍA Y
EMPRESA
UV UNIVERSITAT DE VALENCIA
UVA UNIVERSIDAD DE VALLADOLID
UVIC UNIVERSITAT DE VIC
UVIGO UNIVERSIDADE DE VIGO
UVIU UNIVERSIDADE INTERNACIONAL
VALENCIANA

15
SUMMARY
INTRODUCTION
The doctorate is the highest educational standard offered by universities, and its goal is
training researchers. Through doctoral training, students become independent from the
university and develop the ability of interpreting reality and presenting new knowledge.
Doctoral theses contain the results of original research and their objective is that of obtaining
the doctorate and proving the research ability of the candidate. There are theses present in
similar percentages across all of the disciplines, unlike scientific articles, the latter being the
main object of study of bibliometric research. A thesis is a scientific document in which all of
the scientific community takes part, from thesis directors to members of the tribunal.
According to Delgado, Torres and Jiménez (2006), theses are the mirror that reflects the
scientific community of a given discipline, and their analysis can provide a great deal of
information on scientific production, lines of research and academic structure.
Most of the studies that are carried out on a given discipline merely describe its historical
evolution and characterize its scientific production. However, a scientific system is much
more complex; it is defined by the manner in which its elements are interrelated and how
information flows across these interrelations in order to achieve its goals.
This study mainly tries to analyse the relational factor during three decades of research in
Radio, Television, Cinema and Photography in Spain, as well as providing a quantitative
description of its production. This period of study is extremely interesting given that it
coincides with the beginnings of specialized university education and research in these fields
in Spain. The aim of this analysis is to study how scientific social networking has developed
in these areas of study, as well as determining which academic figures lead the processes and
how their positions and relationships affect the configuration of the social structure of the
network.
OBJECTIVES
 Using the composition of the thesis tribunals as a method of data compilation for the
Social Network Analysis of scientific communities, obtained from the TESEO
database, a sampling method previously used in several other projects and validated
for the Spanish case.
 Describing the production of doctoral theses from the four fields of study (Radio,
Television, Cinema and Photography), separately and jointly, and characterizing it by
period, university, department, directors and the most active members of the thesis
tribunals.
 Using Social Network Analysis, outline and study the social structures that are
generated through the academic relationships that take place for the production and
evaluation of a thesis (relationships in the selection and co-participation in tribunals).
 Analysing the existing connections between Television, Cinema, Radio and
Photography through the co-participation of the academics that intervene in the
processes of production and assessment of theses.
JUSTIFICATION

16
The data collected in this thesis starts in the year 1976, when the TESEO database was
created, the only database that provides the composition of tribunals. However, the
Departments of Communication were created in the 1970s. From the creation of these
departments (1972) to the creation of the TESEO database (1976) only 15 doctoral theses
were produced. Therefore, this study focuses on the institutionalization period of the
Audiovisual Communication Degree in Spain; its birth, expansion and consolidation. It
encompasses 30 years of production of theses on Television, Radio, Cinema and Photography
that have witnessed the changes in Spanish universities (expansion and changes of the model),
as well as the changes produced in the discipline itself, in which technological progress has
brought about new approaches and paradigms in Communication.
This topic is relevant because of all this. By studying doctoral theses, we analyse the social
and academic component of a discipline. This information is useful and important for any
person that has to make decisions, for it portrays a large and very complex community in a
reliable way.
ORIGIN AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE TOPIC
The elements that have conditioned the topic and the form of this thesis are influenced, firstly,
by my studies in Information Science, secondly, my belonging to a Faculty of Communication
and, thirdly, by my relationship with the EC3 Research Group for scientific assessment. The
academic purpose of a thesis is always the education of the doctoral student, in the EC3
research group the non-PhD members are also encouraged to become familiar with group
methodologies (Bibliometric Analysis) and to develop their own methodologies (Social
Network Analysis).
STRUCTURE OF THE THESIS
Due to the eminently scientific/exploratory objective of the present thesis, the classic IMRAD
classification (Introduction, Methodology, Analysis and Results, and Discussion and
Conclusions) has been adopted. Nevertheless, as this piece of work includes much more
information that the common scientific paper, the section of “research question” has been
separated from the “Introduction” and divided into a section of its own.
The “research question” includes three well-differentiated sections: Doctoral Theses, Social
Network Analysis and a section that is transverse to the latter, Bibliometry, which is present in
all three in an applied manner. The first deals with Doctoral theses, justifying the importance
of the thesis as a scientific document of bibliometric analysis, as well as other social elements
that influence its process: doctoral student, PhD, tribunals, university, etc. At the same time, a
brief historical-legislative overview is provided of doctoral theses in Spain and their
assessment process until the present day. One of the goals of this review is demonstrating the
importance of doctoral theses as a reflection of the scientific community. Subsequently, there
is a brief analysis of the main Spanish studies examining doctoral thesis, especially those that
have used Social Network Analysis to this end. The second section of the “Introduction”
focuses on the main methodology that is used, Social Network Analysis. It illustrates the
creation and evolution of this methodology with the aim of making the best use of its
characteristics of relational analysis of a purely documental object (the theses), with the aim
of describing the relational characteristics of an academic community. Finally, there is a
section on Audiovisual Communication that focuses on the description of the theoretical
object of study, the characteristics that may have influenced the evolution of Spanish doctoral

17
theses in this field, as well as a brief compilation of studies on research in Audiovisual
Communication and related subjects (Communication).
The section entitled Material and Methods describes the object of study, the theses, and both
of the main information sources (the TESEO database and a study on Communication theses
in Spain). Subsequently, a description of the process of selection, identification, extraction,
treatment and analysis of the data is included. The methods of analysis, section 3.2, are
divided into two large parts: section 3.2.1, which comprises of the Bibliometric Analysis of
the study. These are primarily descriptive statistics, although multidimensional scaling
techniques are described in the final part. However, section 3.2.2 focuses on Social Network
Analysis. As opposed to the Methodology, the Analysis and Results (and also the Discussion
and Conclusions), this is organized according to the object of the study, and not the techniques
used for its analysis. Therefore, the main categories are Radio, Television, Cinema,
Photography and Audiovisual Communication, and in each of these categories the studies are
divided according to the order previously described in the Methodology.
Similarly, in the section entitled Discussion and Conclusions, the information is structured
according to the specialities. Firstly, the specialities are analysed, and then the four studied
specialities are connected and compared.
Appendix 2 includes the references of the analysed theses. Apart from adding transparency to
the exercise, this piece of work is of great value for researchers (such as the author himself).
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
THE DOCTORATE AND THE DOCTORAL THESIS
The PhD is the highest education standard offered by universities. Its objective is to impart a
solid knowledge of a discipline and to foment an ability to generate and transmit scientific
knowledge. From this it may be deduced that the doctoral student is currently in the chief
training period of the researcher, although it may have had different purposes throughout
history.
The doctoral degree appears in the middle of the 12th
Century in the universities of Medieval
Europe, at first having a ritual aspect. Later, in the 13th
Century, it obtained the function of
training teachers, although at first the thesis did not exist as an element of assessment. The
changes which occurred in the 19th
Century modify the model of university, and stimulate the
transformation of the university in conjunction with society. Three models of universities are
created: the Napoleon model, the Humboldt model and the British model. In the Humboldt
and British models, research becomes one of the main focal points of the university, having an
impact on doctoral education. This becomes, in general terms, the main training process of
researchers, and the theses therefore becomes proof of the research ability of the doctor; that
is to say, a piece of work of original research.
During the Ancien Régime in which the term doctor appears in the university, it is
characterized by being an elitist appointment, awarded through a process which is more
ceremonial than scientific. It hardly varies throughout several centuries and its aim is in
training teachers. The second period starts with the end of the Ancien Régime, and finishes at
the end of the 19th
Century. During this period, universities generate management models of
their own in Spain, and the state starts to legislate the doctorate. In the third period, during the
20th
Century, the importance of the doctorate in universities is confirmed. The university is

18
made accessible to most citizens. From this moment on, the doctorate not only has the
purpose of training its own personnel, but also of training the highly qualified professionals
required by society. Finally, the 21st
Century introduced strong incentives for improving the
large amount of existing doctorates in regard to quality and internationalisation.
The doctoral thesis is currently a key element for acquiring the doctoral degree. The thesis is
an original piece of scientific work, a sound and consistent first piece of work, a text that
represents one of the greatest scientific efforts in the life of the author, and with which the
researcher obtains the doctoral degree. The choice of topic of the thesis is usually related to
the lines of research in which the student has been specialised in the doctoral education and
the knowledge of the thesis director.
After the doctoral candidate, the thesis director is the second most relevant figure in doctoral
training and is jointly responsible for it. The PhD student creates a thesis, and the thesis
director creates a doctor. The thesis director should be a novel researcher, with a scientific
maturity and solidity. The thesis director has a series of obligations towards the PhD student;
training responsibilities (teaching research), social responsibilities (reputation in the scientific
community) and management responsibilities. The thesis director educates the student in three
aspects: 1. Thorough theoretical knowledge of the subject matter. 2. Methodological and
instrumental knowledge. 3. Formal and instrumental knowledge of Scientific Communication.
One of the most intense academic relationships is that of the PhD student and his thesis
director. Normally the researcher is incorporated into the social network of the director, who
is always a theoretical reference for him. The knowledge transmitted by the teacher to the
disciples is one of the main contributions of a scientist to his field. In the U.S.A, Professor
Cassidy Sugimoto investigates the influence that the training of the advisors of Information &
Library Science theses has on the discipline, among other things, and how these individual
contributions have shaped a discipline that is highly interdisciplinary. Similarly and prior to
this, in Spain, professor José López Yepes studied the theses produced in Information Science
in Spain and the meaning and implications of the phenomenon (J. López Yepes, 2002; José
López Yepes & Fernández Bajón, 2005; José López Yepes, 2010).
The thesis director is one of the main elements of assessment of the thesis, given that he lends
his approval before the thesis is presented. However, the thesis tribunal is the chief guarantor
of the quality of the work and the maturity of the defence of the doctoral candidate. The thesis
tribunal should be made up of academics of great prestige in the discipline that the thesis
deals with, capable of recognising the methodological validity and its contribution to the field.
In the Spanish system, the jury is made up of five members, university teachers or researchers
of the CSIC (Spanish National Research Council). The composition of the jury is proposed by
the thesis director and the department. The suitability of each of its ten members has to be
justified to the Council.
In the scientific world in Spain during the whole of the period under study, the members of
the jury are suggested by the director and the Department, and approved by the Doctorate
Commission. Therefore, the thesis goes beyond being a mere academic phenomenon; it
becomes a social phenomenon, with two added consequences according to professors
Casanueva, Escóbar and Larrinaga: “1. The recognition of the prestige and the academic or
personal origin of the members of each jury which are chosen as presidents, and 2. How the
members of the jury know each other and the director, before after the academic act itself”
(Casanueva Roche, Escobar Pérez, & Larrinaga González, 2007).
Price, in his book “Little science, big science” (Price, 1969[1963]), indicates that the
quantitative study of theses is a reliable indicator for measuring the growth of science. Under

19
this premise, several studies have been carried out to measure the growth of different
scientific fields, such as the one developed in eight scientific fields by Andersen &
Hammarfelt and Wood (Andersen & Hammarfelt, 2011; Wood, 1988). “The doctoral theses in
all disciplines, and even more so in young disciplines such as ours [Librarianship and
Documentation/Library and Information Science], truly impulse research” (López Yepes et
al., 2005).
The importance of studying doctoral theses is reflected in the scientific production it
generates. Only in Spain, there are tens of scientific analyses of a given area or unit through
the study of the theses produced within it. Most of these works, 79% (52 of them) are
scientific papers, followed by 15% of theses (11 theses) which focus on this object of study,
and the talks in congresses and books, which together represent 6% of the total (2 documents
each). The areas which produce most pieces of work are Education (11), Communication (10),
Information Science (10), and Medicine (7).
Among these works there are a great amount of theses that study the object of study of the
theses (Escamilla Hernández, 2009; Gete Benavente, 2005; Herrera Rodríguez, 1987; Juan
Quilis, 1997; Martínez Cerverón, 2007; Nascimiento, 1996; Ordóñez Rubio, 2000; Pérez
López, 2007; Sabater Lorenzo, 2001; Torralbo Rodríguez, 2000; Urbano Salido, 2000; Vallejo
Ruiz, 2005; Delgado, Torres and Jiménez, 2006).
Most of these studies are circumscribed to one discipline or academic specialty, and many of
them have a temporal slant, in most cases due to the information provided by the TESEO
database (they usually start in the year 1976).
Communication is one of the areas with the highest production, with 10 works. Without a
doubt, there are two notable works by Professor Daniel L. Jones, who was the first to take an
interest in the evolution of research in Communication through doctoral theses (Jones, 1994;
D.E. Jones, 1997). Later, there are works on Public Relations theses by Antonio Castillo and
Jordi Xifra (Castillo & Xifra, 2006; Xifra & Castillo, 2006). In Advertising there are two
studies by Martínez Pestaña (author of the first, and co-author of the second) and Marcos
Recio and Blasco Ibáñez. The first one analyses 30 years of production of theses on
Advertising (1971-2001, 109 theses) including a description according to centres, directors
and topics, and the second one updates the first study up to the year 2010 and incorporates
151 theses, also studying co-directors (Marcos Recio, Martínez Pestaña, & Blasco López,
2012; Martínez Pestaña, 2004). Another piece of research related to Communication was
published last year by Víctor Herrero Solana and Luis Arboledas with the aim of analysing
theses produced on Communication in the universities of Seville and Malaga, and carry out an
analysis of the social network of the used descriptors (Arboledas Márquez and Herrero
Solana, 2011).
The rest of the pieces of research which study the theses produced in Communication are
works derived from this thesis, and their results are mostly incorporated here. These are two
works on Radio, (a talk and a paper), a paper on Television and a paper on Cinema.
SOCIAL NETWORKS ANALYSIS
In Social Sciences, Social Networks Analysis (SNA) emerges as a structuralist response to
reductionist paradigms. Researchers define Social Networks Analysis as: a) “A collection of
methods for the study of the relational aspects of social structures (Scott, 1992); B) “The
techniques focused on illuminating the interaction patterns of people” (Freeman, 2006); c)

20
“The characterization (character mapping) and measurement of relationships between people
(Krebs, 2005).
Social networks have always formed part of Social Sciences. However, it was not until the
1930s that this paradigm started to be studied individually or in any depth; “The analysis of
social networks is a wide intellectual approximation for the identification of social structures
that emerge from the diverse forms of relationships, but is also collection of research methods
and techniques”. SNA, in relatively few years, has begun to gain solidity as a discipline and
study method. It makes use of mathematics borrowed from Graph Theory and Matrix Algebra
and, in the same way, takes from other related disciplines such as Social Psychology,
Anthropology and Sociology.
An external factor which has had a strong influence upon the history of SNA, and which has
ended up supporting this method of research within the field of Social Sciences, has been the
evolution of technology experienced in the second half of the 20th century. This evolution is
marked by three landmark events: 1) The appearance of computers, bringing the first
databases onto the scene and later the first network analysis programmes. 2) The creation of
the internet, the network of networks) 3) The appearance alongside Web 2.0 of the first Virtual
Social Networks (Facebook, Twitter, etc.).
The analysis of social networks does not focus on the characteristics and traits individually,
but does so under the concept of relationships. Its aim is to try to explain the behaviour of
individuals based on their relationships within a structured social system.
The principal differentiating characteristics for the analysis of networks are:
 The actors of the system and their actions are studied as interrelated, not isolated,
elements.
 The relationships between actors, the links/arrows, are channels of material and non-
material resource exchange between nodes.
 The actors of the system obtain opportunities or restrictions for carrying out individual
actions according to the network models in which they are integrated.
Social networks are formed by a collection of actors between whom links are formed. The
links that can occur in a social network are varied and complex, given that they describe the
complexity of the human being in its relationships. The links can also have values and
degrees.
People find themselves immersed in multiple networks of direct and indirect relationships
with other people. Many of these relationships are visible or even held within traditional
forms of relationships; family networks are the most common form of institutionalised
network. The different levels on which a population can be analysed are micro, meso and
macro. Individual, group, organizational, community, institutional and global levels are
discussed, both from a sociological and statistical viewpoint. Nevertheless, the method of
Network Analysis allows work to be carried out on various levels of analysis simultaneously.
Social Network Analysis has developed its own method of relationship sampling; the methods
are divided into “complete network methods” and “partial network methods”. Complete
network methods are more exhaustive and costly than partial methods, which depend more
upon a selection of sampling techniques.

21
Social Networks are usually represented by means of tables of matrices and sociograms,
which also called graphs. There are different graphic typologies of sociograms, adapted to the
type of social network to be represented, for which there are different specific algorithms.
Within the generic graphs, the best known and most widely used family is that of “force
directed algorithms”.
Network analysis has a strong sociological perspective. In the 1950s, Robert K. Merton
encoded the basic forms in which reference groups affect us. They can have comparative
effects and effects of influence. Gustave Le Bon came close to SNA in studying the
phenomenon of crowd psychology. Social networks are formed around concepts such as
homophilia, assortativity, transivity and “distance decay”.
The sociological concepts of academic networks have been mainly dealt with from two
perspectives, the Invisible College formulated by Derek de Solla and more deeply developed
by Diana Crane and the Social Capital of Pierre Bordieu. Invisible colleges have their field of
action within the research system of a discipline. Social Capital applied to academics moves
within a wider sociological framework, academic of course including research networks.
Another differentiating element is that the objective of invisible colleges is to unravel the
“hidden” scientific structures within a scientific speciality. Social Capital, however, is centred
on the individual characteristics of the actors of the network which helps to form the social
structures. In this case, these would be the university social structures, the different forms of
social capital described by Pierre Bourdieau.
The first study to apply this SNA to doctoral theses in Spain was carried out by members of
the EC3 research group and analysed the scientific structure of bibliometry in Spain through
theses produced in the area (Delgado-López-Cózar et al., 2006), although a precursor to this
type of study was carried out by Germán Sierra. Instead of analysing the tribunals of doctoral
theses, he analysed CSIC in order to obtain the place of research professor in Physics (Sierra,
2003). Subsequently, there have been several studies applied to different fields (Arboledas
Márquez & Herrero Solana, 2011; Casanueva Roche, Escobar Pérez, & Larrinaga González,
2007; Casanueva Roche & Espasandín Buestelo, 2007; Repiso Caballero, Torres Salinas, &
Delgado López-Cózar, 2012; Repiso, Torres, & Delgado-López-Cózar, 2011).
AUDIOVISUAL COMMUNICATION
“Audiovisual communication includes all technical media, recorded on a medium
(photographic, magnetic, digital) that employs visual or sound image to produce a message”
(Puyal, 2006).
Law differentiates three specialities of Science; those based on theory, method, or on the
question of study (Law, 1973). Audio-visual Communication, as opposed to Advertising and
Journalism, specializes in the characteristics of messages incorporating visual and sound
images.
Audio-visual Communication includes the traditions of Communication in its corpus, but has
a significant difference, its fundamental interest lies in non-textual communication, centred on
visual image, auditory image or both.
The content and boundaries of Audiovisual Communication are difficult to place and this is
perfectly exemplified in different sections. The material relating to Audiovisual
Communication in Decimal Classification is found in different sections, such as the categories
of its publications in the databases. However, studies on Cinema, Radio, Television and
Photography have always been related to more technical disciplines which produce and bring

22
innovation to the field (Chemistry, electronics, information technology, etc.) or which use
audiovisual techniques for its own ends (Medicine, Architecture, etc.).
In Spain, prior to the creation of departments of Audiovisual Communication (1972), there
were professional schools of Journalism, Radio and Television. In 1971, the substitution of
these official schools with Audiovisual Communications studies was formalised. At the start
of the 1990s, the study of Audiovisual Communication was finally legislated in Spain by
Royal Decree 1427/1991 30th of August. In the “White Book of Communication” (2004),
Audiovisual Communication is the degree from this field that is taught in the highest number
of centres and possesses the most students.
On the other hand, the scientific character of a discipline does not directly answer to the
creation of training centres, but to the research that must materialize in the form of scientific
studies. Delgado López-Cózar (2001) points out that: academic institutionalization of a
discipline is the first sign of the social institutionalization of this discipline. Evidently, the
scientific character of the latter is given by the exercise of research activity. Audiovisual
Communication is a speciality which has arisen from within the field of Information Sciences,
which in turn draws on different traditions that developed within connected fields such as
Sociology, Psychology, Philosophy, Languages, Anthropology, History, Fine Arts, etc.
There are not currently any studies which analyse research in Audiovisual Communication in
Spain, but the field appears in works with a wider scope. In Spain, out of all the bibliography
dealt with (Table 2.5) the work of Daniel L. Jones.(Jones, Baró, Landa, & Ontalba, 2000;
Jones, 1994; Jones, 1997; Jones, 1997) merits note.
METHODOLOGY
This work is a longitudinal retrospective and descriptive study of doctoral theses on
Television, Cinema, Radio and Photography, produced in Spanish universities between 1976
and 2007.
In order to locate the doctoral theses, the TESEO database has been used as a fundamental
source of information on doctoral theses on Communication defended in Spain, supplemented
by an exhaustive check of the work, carried out by Daniel L. Jones, Baró, Landa and Ontalbo
(2000). The university catalogues of the reading centres and the catalogue of the National
Library have also been used, with the aim of filling in the gaps sometimes presented by
TESEO.
TESEO (Tesis Españolas Ordenadas) (Ordered Spanish Theses) is the database of the
Ministry of Education whose objective is to collect the doctoral theses produced in Spain on a
single registry. TESEO is unique in its class; firstly because it is the most complete database
on doctoral theses in Spain and secondly because it was the first to record the composition of
thesis tribunals, an essential factor for the execution of this present study.
As a second source of information, the bibliographic compilation of the study “Comunicación
en España: Aproximación bibliométrica las tesis doctorales (Communication in Spain: A
bibliometric approximation of doctoral theses) (1926-1998), which contains 1550 theses on
Communication and includes theses on Radio, Cinema, Television and Photography. This
study was carried out by Daniel L. Jones, Jaume Baró i Queralt, Carmelo Landa Montenegro
and José Antonio Ontalba y Ruipérez.

23
The logical search for theses in TESEO would have consisted of a search by topic in the
thesaurus of the database. However, due to errors located in the database (Figueredo et al.,
2004; Cerverón, 2007; Delgado, 2001), this type of search returns a low number of documents
and, although highly precise, is not exhaustive. For this reason, a special search was decided
upon. The objective of this special search was the recovery of the highest possible number of
theses apt for this study. The search was carried out in two stages:
• Recovery of theses on Audiovisual Communication and identification of keywords.
This first stage saw the search for all the theses according to their department of production.
Of interest were all theses on Radio, Cinema, Photography and Advertising, produced in
Communication Departments, in their respective disciplines. a) Audiovisual Communication,
b) Journalism y c) Advertising.
• Recovery in TESEO of theses on Cinema, Radio, Photography and Television. The
second stage was carried out as a search by topic using the thesis title and conclusion. To this
end, a frequency study was carried out of terms used in the theses recovered by stage 1, with
the aim of identifying the keywords pertaining to each speciality.
Finally, a voiding of thesis from the second information source was carried by Daniel L. Jones
and others. Subsequently, a search was carried out for the pertinent theses for the four
specialities studied in this work. The results were as follows:
o Television: 105 theses recovered.
o Cinema: 119 theses recovered.
o Photography: 29 theses recovered.
o Radio: 25 theses recovered.
The information underwent a semiautomatic treatment:
 Export to Microsoft Excel. The theses extracted from TESEO were transferred to
Microsoft Excel using a Macro.
 Elimination of duplications.
 Data recovery. In some cases, the registries recovered from TESEO did not include
some fields (these were checked in university catalogues).
 Normalization. The fields from TESEO are not normalized, especially author fields.
 Control. With the aim of analysing the reliability of the recovery and selection process
of the thesis sample to be studied, a concordance analysis was carried out between
observers. A second observer, in this case one of the thesis directors, analysed and
checked a random sample of 100 theses. The level of concordance reached 99%.
 Transfer to Microsoft Access.
 Data analysis. The bibliometric study was carried out using two statistical
programmes, the generic Microsoft Excel 2010® and XLSTAT®, specific software for
statistical analysis. The Analysis of Social Networks was carried out using Pajek 2.04
and Microsoft Access®.
 Visualization and representation of data. The majority of the figures of Bibliometric
Analysis have been created using Microsoft Excel, with the exception of the word
clouds, which are products of ManyEyes(R) from IBM. The figures for Social
Network Analysis have been made with Pajek 2.04.
The period studied (Chronological Framework) includes the years from 1976 to 2007. The
recompilation of data starts in the year 1976 due to this being the year that TESEO began to
store references. Why set a limit in the year 2007 when the thesis is presented five years after

24
this date, in 2012? The answer to this question lies in the properties of the TESEO database.
Previous studies confirm that theses are not immediately visible in TESEO once they are
defended, not even in the following year. In fact, a high percentage of theses that reach
TESEO do so 2, 3 or 4 years after reading; some theses never register on the database at all.
With the aim of obtaining a reliable representation, especially in the later period analysed, it
was decided to close the study with theses read in 2007, four years before the latest data
update.
The variables and indicators analysed with statistical methodology are:
• Production (collectively and by period).
o 1976-1982*
o 1983-1987
o 1988-1992
o 1993-1997
o 1998-2002
o 2003-2007
• Reading universities
• Reading departments
• Thesis direction
• Joint directions
• Tribunal presence
• Tribunal presidencies
• Topic
The relationships between specialities have also been analysed, using statistical techniques
(Multidimensional Scaling) and Social Network Analysis.
In Social Network Analysis, two typologies of network are mainly carried out. These are the
Co-participation Network of thesis tribunals and the Network of tribunal Selection.
Co-participation in doctoral theses is the existing relationship between the members, the PhD
student, and the thesis director/s. That is to say, all those people who officially appear in the
minutes of the reading of the thesis. It can be said that these people at least know each other
personally. However, tribunal selection consists of the relationship that is established between
the tribunals and the director/s of a thesis.
The variables and indicators studied are:
• Properties of the general network of co-participation in Audiovisual
Communication theses
• Interaction between academics
• Measurements of network centrality
o Level
o Proximity
o Mediation
Furthermore, different sub-networks have been generated and studied:
• Sub-networks of tribunal co-participation (by period and speciality).
• Networks of the exchange of assessing professors between universities.
• Tribunal selection networks.
• Hybrid networks (overlapping between specialities).

25
The majority of visualized networks have been “pruned”, signifying that they only show the
most consolidated links and the nodes with the highest level of participation in the network.
Representation by any other means would prove impossible. However, for general
calculations, the networks are dealt with in their entirety.
RESULTS
The total number of theses studied finally reaches 1141; 118 theses on Radio, 404 on
Television, 500 theses on Cinema and 173 theses on Photography (many of the theses study
more than one of these specialities, therefore the sum of the parts is superior to the whole
because of theses repeating). Television and Cinema together, make up ¾ of total production.
Radio and Photography, being more limited forms of media, only make up ¼ of the total for
Audiovisual Communication. Thesis production in Audiovisual Communication has
undergone a steady growth throughout all the periods studied. It can be generally said that it
adjusts to Spanish production for the same period.
The theses within Audiovisual Communication have been defended at 54 universities,
although production tends to be concentrated around a few centres. The five most productive
universities share 52% of the total. Production from the historical universities in the field,
especially from the Complutense University, which accounts for 28.83% of theses. In the
same manner, the majority of theses are concentrated in a few departments. Of note are the
departments of Audiovisual Communication, Journalism and Languages. However, theses on
Cinema and Photography also come from departments of Fine Arts and Art History.
Thesis directions are characterized by the fact that the majority of academics (481) only direct
one thesis, as opposed to an elite group of 5 professors that directs 6% of the total (84 theses).
Equally, three generations of directors can be seen; the first is made up of professors trained in
unconnected fields and then train the first students of Communication. Next, there is a
generation of professors trained in Information Sciences, and finally a third generation of
professors specifically trained in the 1990s in Audiovisual Communication. Another notable
event in thesis direction is that, from 1998, co-directions of studies begin to appear. These
reach 60 co-directions in the last five years under study.
When studying tribunal participation, it can be seen how this is a more common academic act
than thesis direction, although less common than presidency. Tribunal participation is
normally distributed according to speciality. However, the academics with the highest level of
thesis tribunal participation do so for the four specialities studied. Professors from the
Complutense University of Madrid and la Autonomous University of Barcelona stand out in
both number and participation. Presidency mainly falls on full professors.
If thesis participation is studied in terms of gender, it can be seen that the male population is
dominant (PhD graduates, directors, tribunals). However, there is a change in tendency
indicating an increase in female PhD graduates and professors. It can also be seen that women
like to be directed by other women.
Upon analyzing relationships between disciplines by means of Multidimensional Scaling, it
can be appreciated that Television is the media that best represents the group and the values of
similitude seen in the groups, on the one hand Radio and Television and on the other hand
Cinema and Photography. Cinema and Photography have a certain level of similarity, due to
the fact that the professors who participate in theses on Television also tend to participate in
the direction or evaluation of theses on Radio. Those for Cinema do the same for
Photography. Nevertheless, it is uncommon for a professor implicated in studies on Radio to

26
do the same for photography. Through Social Networks, the same results are found, the
overlapping between networks for specialities are similar.
When studying the general networks of Audiovisual Communication and by periods, the main
groups and figures of the network are identified, as well as the relationships and structures
that it consists of. The total network is made up of 3733 different nodes, connected by 19893
links, of which only 1733 have a value above 1. That is to say that the network studied is
composed of weak links to a degree of 91.29%. Networks by period, in relation to thesis
production, are seen to grow throughout the time period studied.
The academics with the highest level of centrality are mainly expert professors in the field,
belonging to the first or second generation. The components into which the networks are
divided are principally the result of the centre or particular field of study to which these
individuals belong. The large universities such as the Complutense are able to generate
several subgroups, whilst members of small universities join other, larger, groups. Professors
of Television and Cinema, the fields with the highest number of theses, are notable in
presence and position.
If the networks are studied by speciality, few differences are encountered, the biggest
differences springing from the size of these networks.
RADIO
A total of 118 theses were identified for Radio (10% of the total). Growth is constant and
lineal, apart from in the last 5 years, when fewer theses are produced than the previous period.
As far as production is concerned, the historical universities for Communication lead the
field; the most prolific thesis directors are José Ventín Pereira and Emilio Prado Picó. Tribunal
analysis highlights that the largest number of participations belong to professors from the
Complutense in the field of Communication, not specialized in Radio. Network results also
highlight these professors, especially Armand Balsebre. The groups generated show their
origins in the historical universities.
CINEMA
The theses on Cinema that were recovered reached a total of 500 (43% of the total), making
this the speciality with the most theses in this study. Thesis production grows between 138%
and 172% for all periods studied. The majority of theses were produced at the Universidad
Complutense, followed by the Universidad de Barcelona and País Vasco. There are a notable
number of theses directed by Antonio Lara, Emilio Carlos García, Ángel Luis Hueso and
Jenaro Talens. Noteworthy tribunal presence is the domain of professors from the elite group
of directors and a few others, such as Román Gubern. The fields of study of Communication,
Languages, History and Fine Arts are the main producers for Cinema. In the social networks
analysis, the names of the directors and tribunal participants repeatedly crop up, Antonio Lara
being the main figure in the first five periods. For the last period, however, where new
professors appear, he is substituted by Santos Zunzunegui and Emilio Carlos García. The
networks for Cinema, given their number, are quite consolidated and generate 6 differentiated
subgroups, led by 6 professors.
TELEVISION
The total number of doctoral theses on Television defended in Spain for the period 1976-2007
was 404 theses, which represents 35% of the production in Audiovisual Communication and

27
placing Television as the second largest source of study in this field. The historical
universities for thesis production stand out. The Complutense shows 128 theses (32%). The
elite group of professors that direct theses is led by Mariano Cebrián, followed by Emilio
Prado. The majority of theses are produced in the field of Communication. The actors with the
highest level of centrality vary for these periods. The network as a whole is made up of seven
components, where there is a noteworthy presence of professors from the Complutense
University of Madrid.
PHOTOGRAPHY
Thesis production for photography reaches 173 theses (15% of the total). It also registers a
steady increase. The Universidad Complutense is the main protagonist in thesis production,
especially in the first three periods. It is noteworthy that Photography networks (general and
by period) show little consistency and little ability to generate groups. Thesis production is led
by specialist professors from the field, such as Joaquín Perea and Francisco Caja, or from
Cinema, such as Antonio Lara and Román de la Calle. There are few academics who have
directed large number of thesis, the majority of directions being isolated. Manuel Laguillo and
Eduardo Rodríguez Merchán stand out for presence in tribunals. The majority of theses are
produced in departments of Fine Arts, Communication and Art History. Through social
network analysis it can be seen that the network is not very dense without any solid structures.
The same figures as for thesis production and presence in tribunals stand out.

29
DISCUSSION & CONCLUSIONS
The aims of this study are mainly descriptive. On the one hand, the intention is to
quantitatively describe the production of the thesis and its related elements (academic,
university, departments, etc.) in the principal specialities of Audiovisual Communication
(Radio, Television, Cinema and Photography). Secondly, it was desirable, through the use of
SNA, to characterize the existing scientific communities within this discipline and to see their
evolution throughout 30 years of studies. To this end, the relational information needed to
reconstruct the scientific networks of the composition of the thesis tribunals has been
extracted. Finally, it is also desirable to compare the specialities on different levels with the
aim of seeing how they interrelated (similarities between specialities, groupings, etc.).
One of the elements that must be taken into account before any discussion is the description
of the specialist groups studied. This must be undertaken in order to interpret the results in
accordance with the size of the studied specialities (thesis production and network size). The
theses produced in four specialities within Audiovisual Communication have been studied.
This study has portrayed a very unequal production of each speciality, describing
distributions of thesis production (and therefore different networks). Cinema, which is the
field with most production, has four times the production of Radio the field with least
production (Figura 5.1.). It is for this reason that, when carrying out comparative analyses, the
contribution of each speciality towards the total must be taken into account. This not only
includes the number of theses but also the number of centres, directors, evaluators, etc.
DISCUSSION
METHODOLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS
From a methodological point of view, this thesis has had the innovation of combining
different analytical tools. The methodology used to analyse the scientific structure of the four
principal specialities of Audiovisual Communication has proven to be precise. Analysis of
Social Networks had been tried in the study of doctoral theses with small groups and in other
fields, showing its effectiveness (Delgado-López-Cózar, Torres-Salinas, Jiménez-Contreras,
& Ruiz-Pérez, 2006) and reaching similar conclusions of a methodological kind. Due to the
selection of the study subject (theses), this may show itself at times as not being thorough.
This is because, although theses are the principal initiation rite of the scientific community,
not all of the scientific community participates in thesis production and most importantly, not
all researchers participate at the same level of direction and evaluation. In analysing
doctorates, thesis producers and academics who participate in thesis tribunals we are
excluding the other researchers of the national research social network who bring studies to
the field, especially those researchers outside the field of university degrees. In specialities
such as Psychology, less than 50% of university professors have carried out doctoral theses.
(Moyano, M., Delgado, C. J., & Buela-Casal, G. (2006). Análisis de la productividad
científica de la Psiquiatría española a través de las tesis doctorales en la base de datos TESEO
(1993-2002). International Journal of Psychology and Psychological Therapy, 6(1), 111-
120.)
From a methodological point of view, the very strong complementarity of the Bibliometric
Analysis and Analysis of Social Networks can be appreciated. The former centres on the
actors and their attributes whilst the Network Analysis centres on the actors and their

Tesis doctoral: La investigación en Televisión, Cine, Radio y Fotografía en España. Análisis bibliométrico y de Redes Sociales de la estructura científica a través de las tesis doctorales

Tesis doctoral: La investigación en Televisión, Cine, Radio y Fotografía en España. Análisis bibliométrico y de Redes Sociales de la estructura científica a través de las tesis doctorales

Empfohlen

Empfohlen

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Was ist angesagt?

Was ist angesagt? (15)

Andere mochten auch

Andere mochten auch (20)

Ähnlich wie Tesis doctoral: La investigación en Televisión, Cine, Radio y Fotografía en España. Análisis bibliométrico y de Redes Sociales de la estructura científica a través de las tesis doctorales

Ähnlich wie Tesis doctoral: La investigación en Televisión, Cine, Radio y Fotografía en España. Análisis bibliométrico y de Redes Sociales de la estructura científica a través de las tesis doctorales (20)

Mehr von Universidad de Málaga

Mehr von Universidad de Málaga (20)

Kürzlich hochgeladen

Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)

Tesis doctoral: La investigación en Televisión, Cine, Radio y Fotografía en España. Análisis bibliométrico y de Redes Sociales de la estructura científica a través de las tesis doctorales