On the origins of bibliometrics

Godin, Benoı̂t

doi:10.1007/s11192-006-0086-0

Cited by 212 publications

(140 citation statements)

References 120 publications

(56 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

103

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…White et al (3) published a comprehensive study showing that both the age of first-time R01 grantees and the average age of all R01 grantees is steadily increasing, whereas Nobel Prizes are generally awarded for early career work. Adams (23) noted prizes for early work, a 1946 "bibliometric" study (24). Fig.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Future of fundamental discovery in US biomedical research

Levitt

2017

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Young researchers are crucially important for basic science as they make unexpected, fundamental discoveries. Since 1982, we find a steady drop in the number of grant-eligible basic-science faculty [principal investigators (PIs)] younger than 46. This fall occurred over a 32-y period when inflation-corrected congressional funds for NIH almost tripled. During this time, the PI success ratio (fraction of basic-science PIs who are R01 grantees) dropped for younger PIs (below 46) and increased for older PIs (above 55). This age-related bias seems to have caused the steady drop in the number of young basic-science PIs and could reduce future US discoveries in fundamental biomedical science. The NIH recognized this bias in its 2008 early-stage investigator (ESI) policy to fund young PIs at higher rates. We show this policy is working and recommend that it be enhanced by using better data. Together with the National Institute of General Medical Sciences (NIGMS) Maximizing Investigators’ Research Award (MIRA) program to reward senior PIs with research time in exchange for less funding, this may reverse a decades-long trend of more money going to older PIs. To prepare young scientists for increased demand, additional resources should be devoted to transitional postdoctoral fellowships already offered by NIH.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Future of fundamental discovery in US biomedical research

Levitt

2017

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…El término bibliometrics fue acuñado por Alan Pritchard en 1969, quien sugirió reemplazar el concepto statistical bibliographic usado desde 1923 por Wyndham Hulme (Lawani, 1981). Este tipo de estudios permite delimitar el curso de una disciplina o área científica mediante recuentos y análisis para así ofrecer una mirada general (Godin, 2006) de un determinado foco de estudio.…”

Section: La Productividad De Psicología Y El Rol Actual De La Produccunclassified

25 Años de Psykhe: Un Análisis Bibliométrico

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

El objetivo del presente estudio fue realizar un análisis bibliométrico de Psykhe (1992de Psykhe ( -2016, considerando algunos elementos históricos que contextualizan su trayectoria, para describir sus principales características y evaluar su evolución cronológica. Para ello se construyó una base de datos con la totalidad de publicaciones de la revista (25 volúmenes y 48 números), con una muestra total de 531 artículos científicos. Se aplicaron indicadores bibliométricos, tales como los índices de productividad (Lotka), de colaboración (Subramanyam y Lawani), de temáticas y metodologías utilizadas, así como indicadores de impacto que permiten realizar comparaciones con otras revistas de referencia en la región. Los resultados evidencian que la primera autoría de los artículos correspondió a una mayor proporción de mujeres. Se vislumbra una clara tendencia al alza del número de artículos a mediados de los años 2000, el área temática con mayor número de artículos es psicología educacional y los índices de colaboración han mejorado sustancialmente hacia la actualidad. El análisis permite visualizar algunas de las fortalezas y desafíos de Psykhe. Sería interesante en futuros estudios realizar comparaciones con otras revistas de similares características. Palabras clave: bibliometría, indicadores, productividad científica, revista, psicologíaThe aim of this study was to carry out a bibliometric analysis of Psykhe , taking into consideration some historical elements that contextualize the history of the publication, to describe its main characteristics and evaluate its chronological evolution. In order to do this, a database of the entire journal (25 volumes and 48 issues) was constructed with a total sample of 531 scientific articles. Bibliometric indicators were applied, covering productivity (Lotka), collaboration (Subramanyam and Lawani), subject matters and methodologies indexes, as well as impact indicators, all of which made it possible to compare Psykhe with other reference journals in the region. Results show that most first authors were women. There is a clear upward trend in the number of articles published at the mid2000s, the subject area with the most articles published is educational psychology, and collaboration rates have improved substantially up to now. The analysis conducted sheds light on some of Psykhe's strengths and challenges. It would be interesting to perform comparisons with other journals of similar characteristics in future studies.Keywords: bibliometrics, indicators, scientific productivity, journal, psychology Las revistas científicas nacen del interés y necesidad de comunicar los resultados de investigación y generar espacios de discusión entre académicos. No obstante, hoy las revistas se han convertido en el principal y más confiable canal de comunicación de la investigación, por cuanto las mismas suponen una evaluación rigurosa y exhaustiva de los contenidos por parte de la comunidad científica. Adicionalmente, estas experimentan como nunca antes procesos de transformación, tanto en ...

show abstract

“…The assessment of scientific results is part of a different tradition, linked primarily to quantitative methods that are used to analyse publications, rarely patent and other forms of research activity. The assessment reflects not so much their productivity, but rather their presence and visibility in the international scientific community [Godin, 2006;Garfield, 2009;Hicks et al, 2015;Kirchik, 2011]. Still, the number of publications in peer-reviewed academic journals, citations, and derivative indicators are recognized by most countries as key criteria of scientific productivity, including when deciding on funding for R&D [Hicks, 2012].…”

Section: Indicators Of Scientific Productivitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Determinants of Research Productivity: An Individual-level Lens

Fursov

Roschina

Balmush

2016

Foresight and STI Governance

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

T he continuous growth of investment in R&D inRussia and the world increases the demand for optimal allocation of public funds to support the most productive scientific performers. These are, however, hard to conceptualize and measure. First, we need to consider the nature of research activity itself and, second, we need to evaluate a number of factors that influence such activities at the national, institutional and individual levels. One of the key issues is motivation of academic personnel, who are considered the main producers of new knowledge. Therefore, it is necessary to analyse the employment characteristics of researchers, and develop adequate mechanisms to facilitate their scientific productivity.This paper aims to examine determinants of publication activity among doctorate holders employed in the academic sector in Russia. Data for the analysis was derived from a survey on the labour market for highly qualified R&D personnel conducted in 2010 by the HSE, within the framework of the OECD / UNESCO Institute for Statistics / Eurostat international project on Careers of Doctorate Holders (CDH). With the use of regression analysis, Keywords: performance-based payment; bibliometric indicators; Russian scholars; the productivity of science; human capital; scientific publications we assess the effects of scientific capital, international cooperation, employment, and socio-demographic characteristics of researchers on their productivity, which is measured through their total publication output as well as through the number of papers in peer-reviewed academic journals.The differences between factors were assessed for two generations of researchers -those under 40 years old, and above. It was shown that the quality of scientific capital, measured through diversity of research experience, has a stronger impact on research productivity, rather than the age or other socio-demographic characteristics of doctorate holders. It was also demonstrated that direct economic stimuli and actual research productivity of researchers are weakly correlated. Consequently, we identified that a potentially winning strategy for universities and research institutions that want to improve their performance indicators would be to provide younger scholars with wider opportunities for professional growth, including intense global cooperation in the professional community.

show abstract

On the origins of bibliometrics

Cited by 212 publications

References 120 publications

Future of fundamental discovery in US biomedical research

Future of fundamental discovery in US biomedical research

25 Años de Psykhe: Un Análisis Bibliométrico

Determinants of Research Productivity: An Individual-level Lens

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About