2018
DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2018.03.008
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

University licensing and the flow of scientific knowledge

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
14
0
2

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8
2

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 30 publications
(17 citation statements)
references
References 30 publications
1
14
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…This result was confirmed using WOS as an alternative source of information for the number of scientific papers published annually at the university institutions level. Such a conclusion corroborates the findings in a number of related studies in this field (Hsu, & Ken, 2014;Thompson, Ziedonis, & Mowery, 2016). The same data suggests that larger universities are able to generate larger numbers of registered patents; this suggests the possibility that larger institutions are able to afford certain types of research infrastructure such as specialized laboratories and related facilities that endow them with higher innovation performance (Ho et al, 2014;Moutinho, Au-Yong-Oliveira, Coelho, & Manso, 2016;Cantu-Ortiz, Galeano, Mora-Castro, & Fangmeyer, 2017).…”
Section: Final Remarkssupporting
confidence: 79%
“…This result was confirmed using WOS as an alternative source of information for the number of scientific papers published annually at the university institutions level. Such a conclusion corroborates the findings in a number of related studies in this field (Hsu, & Ken, 2014;Thompson, Ziedonis, & Mowery, 2016). The same data suggests that larger universities are able to generate larger numbers of registered patents; this suggests the possibility that larger institutions are able to afford certain types of research infrastructure such as specialized laboratories and related facilities that endow them with higher innovation performance (Ho et al, 2014;Moutinho, Au-Yong-Oliveira, Coelho, & Manso, 2016;Cantu-Ortiz, Galeano, Mora-Castro, & Fangmeyer, 2017).…”
Section: Final Remarkssupporting
confidence: 79%
“…Many reasons to encourage co-authorship in research works have been cited in the literature, one of the most recurrent is that unlike publishing individually, the co-authorship has a greater impact on the research in terms of the number of publications and citation (Lee and Bozeman, 2005;Ponomariov and Boardman 2010). Which is why, over time, coauthorships in all disciplines have increased (Lopaciuk 2016;De Stefano et al, 2013;Kronegger et al, 2011;Acedo et al, 2006;Laband and Tollison, 2000), and the number of coauthors per publication has also increased (Goyal et al, 2006;Wuchty et al, 2007) although the degrees and types of collaboration differ from one country to another, and from discipline to discipline.…”
Section: Scientific Co-authorship Networkmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Sin embargo, al reflexionar que las universidades son las unidades rectoras en la producción de conocimientos científicos (Thompson, Ziedonis & Mowery, 2018) es que se necesitan PCU coherentes para la búsqueda de conocimientos fluidos y progresivos. Cualquier análisis científico en forma prescriptiva derivado de las PCU puede establecer la creación optimizada sobre lo que se realiza en el presente y de esta manera, orientar disímiles actividades en el futuro.…”
Section: Situación De Análisisunclassified