Do funded papers attract more usage?

Zhao, Star X.; Wen, Lan; Tan, Alice M.; Yu, Shuang

doi:10.1007/s11192-018-2662-5

Cited by 37 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Several studies in scientometrics have investigated the role of different factors in scientific change, such as public research labs, publications, emerging research fields, nations’ research performance, etc. (Coccia, 2005a , 2005b , 2009 , 2019a ; Coccia et al, 2015 ; Pagliaro & Coccia, 2021 ; Radicchi et al, 2008 ; Yan et al, 2018 ; Zhao et al, 2018 ). A central question in social studies of science is how to enhance the diffusion of scientific research in vital research fields, such as medicine, to increase societal impact.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Scientific laws of research funding to support citations and diffusion of knowledge in life science

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

One of the main problems in scientometrics is to explore the factors that affect the growth of citations in publications to identify best practices of research policy to increase the diffusion of scientific research and knowledge in science and society. The principal purpose of this study is to analyze how research funding affects the citation-based performance of scientific output in vital research fields of life science, which is a critical province (area of knowledge) in science to improve the wellbeing of people. This study uses data from the Scopus database in 2015 (to assess the impact on citations in 2021, after more than 5 years) concerning different disciplines of life science, given by “agricultural and biological sciences”, “biochemistry, genetics, and molecular biology”, “Immunology and microbiology”, “neuroscience” and “pharmacology, toxicology and pharmaceutics”. Results demonstrate that although journals publish un-funded articles more than funded publications in all disciplines of life science, the fraction of total citations in funded papers is higher than the share in the total number of publications. In short, funded documents receive more citations than un-funded papers in all research fields of life science under study. Findings also support that citations of total (funded + un-funded), funded, and un-funded published papers have a power-law distribution in all five research fields of life science. Original results here reveal a general property in scientific development: funded research has a higher scaling potential than un-funded publications. Critical implications of research policy, systematized in a decision-making matrix, suggest that R&D investments in “Neuroscience” can generate a positive impact of scientific results in science and society-in terms of citations-higher than other research fields in medicine. Overall, then, results here can explain some characteristics driving scientific change and help policymakers and scholars to allocate resources towards research fields that facilitate the development and diffusion of scientific research and knowledge in life science for positive societal impact.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Scientific laws of research funding to support citations and diffusion of knowledge in life science

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Zhao et al analyzed the relationship between funding and the usage count of the Web of Science database. A positive correlation was found between usage and research funding (Heinze 2008 ; Zhao et al 2018 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…They found that China has the highest proportion, while Italy the lowest proportion, of funded articles based on scientific output. The relationship between research funding and bibliometric indicators has also been analyzed (Zhao et al 2018 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Factors influencing the scientific performance of Momentum grant holders: an evaluation of the first 117 research groups

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Momentum program launched in 2009 provides funding of up to 1 million Euro to establish new, independent research groups at Hungarian academic institutions. Here, our aim was to determine factors associated with the scientific output of these research groups. Publication data were downloaded from the Hungarian Scientific Work Archive (www.mtmt.hu), impact factor data were obtained from Thomson Reuters (jcr.incites.thomsonreuters.com), and journal ranks were extracted from the Scimago Journal Rank database (www.scimagojr.com). Investigated input features for each grant holder include gender, degree, targeted category, international mobility, international grants, number of publications, total number of citations, H-index, best publications, impact factors in the last 2 years, and assessment scores provided by the experts. Evaluated performance indicators include cumulative impact factor, number of D1 publications, and number of first/last author D1 publications during the grant running time. Grant holders’ publication output increased by 23 and 52% for life sciences and material sciences researchers. Scientific performance was independent from gender, degree, international grants, category applied for, and citations received for the best pre-grant publication. Those with international mobility had significantly lower scientific output (yearly impact factor, number of D1 publications, number of first/last author publications). Scores received from grant review experts were independent from later publication activity. The strongest correlations were observed between scientific output and total number of citations, H-index, and impact factor in the last 2 years pre-grant. In summary, group leaders with a dynamic publication track record were able to attain the most additional momentum. Our results can help accelerate and improve future grant review processes.

show abstract

“…These funding grants contribute to the formation of human resources via scholarships, improvement of laboratorial infrastructure via acquisition of new equipment, creation of research networks with exchange between researchers, and the development of new technologies and patents. Thus, investments in science, technology, and innovation can directly affect other impact indicators, such as citations (output), and number of co-authors and collaboration (processes; Zhao et al, 2018). This situation reinforces the importance of investigating the impacts of funding on scientific processes.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 95%

Effects of funding on the collaboration and citation in environmental papers and the relationship with nation’s science and technology budgets

Nabout

Faquim

Carvalho

et al. 2021

Rev. Bras. Ciênc. Ambient.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Input, output, impact, and processes are central indicators of the science, technology, and innovation production. The input is usually associated to investments made in science and technology, and it varies among different countries and scientific fields. Thus, the input can influence other impact indicators. Here, we evaluated the effect of the input data (i.e., number of funding) on process (i.e., collaboration) and output (i.e., number of citation) indicators of ecological research. Moreover, we detailed the effect of the number of funding on the collaboration and number of citations by each country (based on the nationality of authors). We found that most of published papers had some degrees of financial support, and that the production of papers with funding increased over the years. Funding had a positive effect on the collaboration and citation of papers; however, we observed that: in countries with higher investments in Science and Technology, the number of funding impacts positively and directly on the number of authors (collaboration) and in countries with low levels of investments in Science and Technology, the number of funding impacts positively and directly on the number of citations. Our models presented a low predictive power, but similar to other informetric studies. Our results indicated that impact indicators evaluated have an integrated structure, and the effects at one level can affect other levels. Nonetheless, the impact of the number of funding on informetric data can vary among countries; therefore, these results are important to the development of national policies and future informetric studies.

show abstract

Do funded papers attract more usage?

Cited by 37 publications

References 41 publications

Scientific laws of research funding to support citations and diffusion of knowledge in life science

Scientific laws of research funding to support citations and diffusion of knowledge in life science

Factors influencing the scientific performance of Momentum grant holders: an evaluation of the first 117 research groups

Effects of funding on the collaboration and citation in environmental papers and the relationship with nation’s science and technology budgets

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About