首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
相似文献
 共查询到20条相似文献，搜索用时 46 毫秒
1.
This paper presents a statistical analysis of the relationship between three science indicators applied in earlier bibliometric studies, namely research leadership based on corresponding authorship, international collaboration using international co-authorship data, and field-normalized citation impact. Indicators at the level of countries are extracted from the SIR database created by SCImago Research Group from publication records indexed for Elsevier’s Scopus. The relationship between authorship and citation-based indicators is found to be complex, as it reflects a country’s phase of scientific development and the coverage policy of the database. Moreover, one should distinguish a genuine leadership effect from a purely statistical effect due to fractional counting. Further analyses at the level of institutions and qualitative validation studies are recommended.  相似文献   

2.
This study explores the impact of different collaboration modes on the cited frequency of publications. Though several studies have obtained some research results, most of them exploit association or regression-based methods, which may not lead to causal conclusions. To overcome the above challenges, we use the Propensity Score Matching (PSM) method to analyze and compare the citation frequencies resulting from four groups of collaboration models: international versus domestic, international multilateral versus international bilateral, domestic inter-organizational versus domestic intra-organizational, and domestic multi-author versus domestic single-author. More specifically, we conduct this analysis by exploring the publications with three computer science subfields from the Web of Science (WoS) database. The experimental results show that international collaboration, especially international multilateral collaboration, has a significant role in increasing the frequency of citations to scientific publications, showing that internationalization and collaboration are critical factors in the growth of the impact of the papers. Among national co-publications, collaborative publications within national organizations receive a higher citation impact. Multi-author collaborations significantly increase citation frequency compared to single-author publications. Our heterogeneity analysis across the different subfields of the computer science domain finds that the treatment effects for the three subfields differ modestly and mostly significant from the whole sample. Moreover, besides the implications for developing research policy and scientist collaboration, our study can capture the causal effect between author collaboration patterns and citation frequency to reveal their causal effects.  相似文献   

3.
The numerical-algorithmic procedures of fractional counting and field normalization are often mentioned as indispensable requirements for bibliometric analyses. Against the background of the increasing importance of statistics in bibliometrics, a multilevel Poisson regression model (level 1: publication, level 2: author) shows possible ways to consider fractional counting and field normalization in a statistical model (fractional counting I). However, due to the assumption of duplicate publications in the data set, the approach is not quite optimal. Therefore, a more advanced approach, a multilevel multiple membership model, is proposed that no longer provides for duplicates (fractional counting II). It is assumed that the citation impact can essentially be attributed to time-stable dispositions of researchers as authors who contribute with different fractions to the success of a publication’s citation. The two approaches are applied to bibliometric data for 254 scientists working in social science methodology. A major advantage of fractional counting II is that the results no longer depend on the type of fractional counting (e.g., equal weighting). Differences between authors in rankings are reproduced more clearly than on the basis of percentiles. In addition, the strong importance of field normalization is demonstrated; 60% of the citation variance is explained by field normalization.  相似文献   

4.
The present work investigates the relations between amplitude and type of collaboration (intramural, extramural domestic or international) and output of specialized versus diversified research. By specialized or diversified research, we mean within or beyond the author’s dominant research topic. The field of observation is the scientific production over five years from about 23,500 academics. The analyses are conducted at the aggregate and disciplinary level. The results lead to the conclusion that in general, the output of diversified research is no more frequently the fruit of collaboration than is specialized research. At the level of the particular collaboration types, international collaborations weakly underlie the specialized kind of research output; on the contrary, extramural domestic and intramural collaborations are weakly associated with diversified research. While the weakness of association remains, exceptions are observed at the level of the individual disciplines.  相似文献   

5.
The normalized citation indicator may not be sufficiently reliable when a short citation time window is used, because the citation counts for recently published papers are not as reliable as those for papers published many years ago. In a limited time period, recent publications usually have insufficient time to accumulate citations and the citation counts of these publications are not sufficiently reliable to be used in the citation impact indicators. However, normalization methods themselves cannot solve this problem. To solve this problem, we introduce a weighting factor to the commonly used normalization indicator Category Normalized Citation Impact (CNCI) at the paper level. The weighting factor, which is calculated as the correlation coefficient between citation counts of papers in the given short citation window and those in the fixed long citation window, reflects the degree of reliability of the CNCI value of one paper. To verify the effect of the proposed weighted CNCI indicator, we compared the CNCI score and CNCI ranking of 500 universities before and after introducing the weighting factor. The results showed that although there was a strong positive correlation before and after the introduction of the weighting factor, some universities’ performance and rankings changed dramatically.  相似文献   

6.
In an age of intensifying scientific collaboration, the counting of papers by multiple authors has become an important methodological issue in scientometric based research evaluation. Especially, how counting methods influence institutional level research evaluation has not been studied in existing literatures. In this study, we selected the top 300 universities in physics in the 2011 HEEACT Ranking as our study subjects. We compared the university rankings generated from four different counting methods (i.e. whole counting, straight counting using first author, straight counting using corresponding author, and fractional counting) to show how paper counts and citation counts and the subsequent university ranks were affected by counting method selection. The counting was based on the 1988–2008 physics papers records indexed in ISI WoS. We also observed how paper and citation counts were inflated by whole counting. The results show that counting methods affected the universities in the middle range more than those in the upper or lower ranges. Citation counts were also more affected than paper counts. The correlation between the rankings generated from whole counting and those from the other methods were low or negative in the middle ranges. Based on the findings, this study concluded that straight counting and fractional counting were better choices for paper count and citation count in the institutional level research evaluation.  相似文献   

7.
[目的/意义]分析学科规范引文影响力在科学评价中的可行性及其与同行评议的相关性,为负责任计量及以其为支撑的同行评议提供借鉴。[方法/过程]选取F1000以及InCites平台,将29 850篇细胞生物学文献、30 326篇生物技术文献的CNCI （学科规范化引文影响力）与被引频次进行相关分析,对其中956篇细胞生物学论文的CNCI与F1000分值进行斯皮尔曼相关系数检验。[结果/结论]研究结果表明,从统计学视角看CNCI与被引频次呈高度正相关,与F1000分值呈显著正相关,同时亦存在二者相悖的情形。因此,CNCI在一定程度上能够反映同行评议结果、能代偿实施学术影响力归誉的功能,并适用于跨学科比较;但同行评议或CNCI单独作为科学评价标准都会有失偏颇,以CNCI为代表的新一代负责任计量指标为支撑的同行评议将成为未来科学评价的主流。  相似文献   

8.
International scientific collaboration has been the dominant driving force for promoting scientific and technological advancement. However, current international scientific collaboration analysis and evaluation mainly concentrate on the exploration of international collaboration network; hence, an evaluation method of international scientific collaboration is yet to be formed. In this paper, we take the dye-sensitized solar cells (DSSCs) as an empirical object and combine the international collaboration network with geographic information, which we call the International Collaboration Map, to display the international collaboration situations among countries or regions worldwide (inter-country collaboration), the collaborations among countries or regions within each continent (intra-continent collaboration), and the collaborations among continents (inter-continent collaboration) from different angles. Based on the thought of fractional count, this study introduces the indicators of collaborative country rank, international collaboration width, and international collaboration activity; the study employs the International Collaboration Activity Index (ICAI) to comprehensively measure the degree of countries or regions international collaboration at the country or region level. It systematically evaluates the differences between the active degree of relevant countries or regions in collaborative research. We use correlation analysis among the five sub-criterions and verify the rationality of index construction. K-means clustering analysis is undertaken among 84 countries or regions in the DSSCs field. The results show the formation of three groups, each with their unique international collaboration features.  相似文献   

9.
[目的/意义]对科学计量研究中计数方法的相关概念进行界定,构建计数方法分类体系,梳理比较计数方法的特征和差异,分析现存问题并提出未来改进的方向和选择计数方法的建议。[方法/过程] 首先概括计数方法的组成要素和使用流程,从信誉值分配的角度提出计数方法分类的两个要素,将计数方法分为全计数法与分数计数法两大类,并对各方法进行概述;以全计数与分数计数法的等权算法--full counts与fractional counts为例,从论文指标、引文指标、网络指标3个视角,比较计数方法的差异。[结果/结论] 文章对于全计数与分数计数方法的优劣势、计数单元与计数对象的一致性、信誉值分配规则合理性、网络影响力测度4个方面的问题进行了思考,指出在未来上述4个方面进一步研究的方向。  相似文献   

10.
Nations can be distinguished in terms of whether domestic or international research is cited. We analyzed the research output in the natural sciences of three leading European research economies (Germany, the Netherlands, and the UK) and ask where their researchers look for the knowledge that underpins their most highly-cited papers. Is one internationally oriented or is citation limited to national resources? Do the citation patterns reflect a growing differentiation between the domestic and international research enterprise? To evaluate change over time, we include natural-sciences papers published in the countries from three publication years: 2004, 2009, and 2014. The results show that articles co-authored by researchers from Germany or the Netherlands are less likely to be among the globally most highly-cited articles if they also cite “domestic” research (i.e. research authored by authors from the same country). To put this another way, less well-cited research is more likely to stand on domestic shoulders and research that becomes more highly-cited is more likely to stand on international shoulders. A possible reason for the results is that researchers “over-cite” the papers from their own country – lacking the focus on quality in citing. However, these differences between domestic and international shoulders are not visible for the UK.  相似文献   

11.
  相似文献   

12.
The aim of this paper is to explore the collaboration of female inventors, how it affects their innovation production and whether it influences their innovation impact. Empirical knowledge of how inventors collaborate in co-patenting collaborations holds an important key to innovation development. In this article, we report on an analysis of international inventors and patents granted by the European Patent Office (EPO) between 1978 and 2019. We investigate the structure of inventors’ networks—particularly those of female inventors—over time using social network analysis and address the gender patterns of collaboration. It can be observed that while female inventors’ overall involvement in patenting activity is not that high, the share of female inventors increases over the time period in question from 1.2% to 8.9%. We also estimate panel data regressions on the number of patents and the citation rates of the patents at an individual level. Our results show that although all inventors benefit from a more central network position within the co-patenting network in terms of their innovation output, the positive influence is greater for male inventors than female inventors. In addition, when inventors collaborate with inventors from more diversified countries and regions they contribute to more patents and their patents are more cited.  相似文献   

13.
It is widely accepted that data is fundamental for research and should therefore be cited as textual scientific publications. However, issues like data citation, handling and counting the credit generated by such citations, remain open research questions.Data credit is a new measure of value built on top of data citation, which enables us to annotate data with a value, representing its importance. Data credit can be considered as a new tool that, together with traditional citations, helps to recognize the value of data and its creators in a world that is ever more depending on data.In this paper we define data credit distribution (DCD) as a process by which credit generated by citations is given to the single elements of a database. We focus on a scenario where a paper cites data from a database obtained by issuing a query. The citation generates credit which is then divided among the database entities responsible for generating the query output. One key aspect of our work is to credit not only the explicitly cited entities, but even those that contribute to their existence, but which are not accounted in the query output.We propose a data credit distribution strategy (CDS) based on data provenance and implement a system that uses the information provided by data citations to distribute the credit in a relational database accordingly.As use case and for evaluation purposes, we adopt the IUPHAR/BPS Guide to Pharmacology (GtoPdb), a curated relational database. We show how credit can be used to highlight areas of the database that are frequently used. Moreover, we also underline how credit rewards data and authors based on their research impact, and not merely on the number of citations. This can lead to designing new bibliometrics for data citations.  相似文献   

14.
The author order of multi-authored papers can reveal subtle patterns of scientific collaboration and provide insights on the nature of credit assignment among coauthors. This article proposes a sequence-based perspective on scientific collaboration. Using frequently occurring sequences as the unit of analysis, this study explores (1) what types of sequence patterns are most common in the scientific collaboration at the level of authors, institutions, U.S. states, and nations in Library and Information Science (LIS); and (2) the productivity (measured by number of papers) and influence (measured by citation counts) of different types of sequence patterns. Results show that (1) the productivity and influence approximately follow the power law for frequent sequences in the four levels of analysis; (2) the productivity and influence present a significant positive correlation among frequent sequences, and the strength of the correlation increases with the level of integration; (3) for author-level, institution-level, and state-level frequent sequences, short geographical distances between the authors usually co-present with high productivities, while long distances tend to co-occur with large citation counts; (4) for author-level frequent sequences, the pattern of “the more productive and prestigious authors ranking ahead” is the one with the highest productivity and the highest influence; however, in the rest of the levels of analysis, the pattern with the highest productivity and the highest influence is the one with “the less productive and prestigious institutions/states/nations ranking ahead.”  相似文献   

15.
This paper presents an empirical analysis of two different methodologies for calculating national citation indicators: whole counts and fractionalised counts. The aim of our study is to investigate the effect on relative citation indicators when citations to documents are fractionalised among the authoring countries. We have performed two analyses: a time series analysis of one country and a cross-sectional analysis of 23 countries. The results show that all countries’ relative citation indicators are lower when fractionalised counting is used. Further, the difference between whole and fractionalised counts is generally greatest for the countries with the highest proportion of internationally co-authored articles. In our view there are strong arguments in favour of using fractionalised counts to calculate relative citation indexes at the national level, rather than using whole counts, which is the most common practice today.  相似文献   

16.
《Journal of Informetrics》2019,13(2):593-604
In the past few decades, there has been increasing interest in public-private collaboration, which has motivated lengthy discussion of the implications of collaboration in general, and co-authorship in particular, for the scientific impact of research. However, despite this strong interest in the topic, there is little systematic knowledge on the relation between public-private collaboration and citation impact. This paper examines the citation impact of papers involving public-private collaboration in comparison with academic research papers. We examine the role of a variety of factors, such as international collaboration, the number of co-authors, academic disciplines, and whether the research is mainly basic or applied. We first examine citation impact for a comprehensive dataset covering all Web of Science journal articles with at least one Danish author in the period 1995–2013. Thereafter, we examine whether citation impact for individual researchers differs when collaborating with industry compared to work only involving academic researchers, by looking at a fixed group of researchers that have both engaged in public-private collaborations and university-only publications. For national collaboration papers, we find no significant difference in citation impact for public-only and public-private collaborations. For international collaboration, we observe much higher citation impact for papers involving public-private collaboration.  相似文献   

17.
A diachronous time-series of bibliometric data (using all data available) suggests rising normalised citation impact (nci) for Germany and other G7 nations, while China suffers a decline in later years of any series. This is shown to be a consequence of the time-series, which has led to an erroneous interpretation of real trajectories. A synchronous series (using fixed time windows) based on the final year suggests a lower trajectory while a diachronous series tracking the fate of a single publication year reveals that nci progressively falls for Germany and the USA whereas it climbs for China. This has implications for research policy and for the interpretation of changes in the competitive research environment in the presence of dynamic growth. By analogy, this may extend to institutional as well as national comparisons. It has implications for analytical methodology, supporting prior suggestions that recent papers should be omitted from citation analysis.  相似文献   

18.
[目的/意义]科研评价中,短时间引文窗口下的学科标准化指标往往是不可靠的,因为这时论文发表的时间较短,还没有充足的时间获取被引次数.然而,各种标准化方法本身并不能解决这一问题.研究旨在解决这一科研评价中的难题.[方法/过程]研究引入一个权重因素以表示每篇论文标准分的可靠程度,权重由论文在给定的短时间窗口下的被引次数与长...  相似文献   

19.
The fundamental research question being pursued in this study is what influences the degree of international scientific collaboration among Turkish scientists? While the study has been illuminated by bibliometrics, the research study is largely exploratory and qualitative. Email questionnaire surveys and semi-structured interviews were employed to collect data from Turkish scholars. According to the findings, both external (uncontrollable) factors (e.g., institutional, economic, and governmental factors) and internal factors (e.g., motivation, ambition, trust, and hope) play roles in the international collaboration behavior of Turkish scholars. It is expected that this research will contribute to the understanding of Turkey’s international scientific collaboration processes pertaining to technology, economic, strategic, and cultural policy factors. Also, the analytical framework of this study may be useful for analyzing other developing countries that have a similar scientific and demographic context to Turkey’s.  相似文献   

20.
The fundamental research question being pursued in this study is what influences the degree of international scientific collaboration among Turkish scientists? While the study has been illuminated by bibliometrics, the research study is largely exploratory and qualitative. Email questionnaire surveys and semi-structured interviews were employed to collect data from Turkish scholars. According to the findings, both external (uncontrollable) factors (e.g., institutional, economic, and governmental factors) and internal factors (e.g., motivation, ambition, trust, and hope) play roles in the international collaboration behavior of Turkish scholars. It is expected that this research will contribute to the understanding of Turkey’s international scientific collaboration processes pertaining to technology, economic, strategic, and cultural policy factors. Also, the analytical framework of this study may be useful for analyzing other developing countries that have a similar scientific and demographic context to Turkey’s.  相似文献   

设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号