Network analysis of temporal trends in scholarly research productivity

We propose a method to identify the journals or proceedings that are most highly esteemed by a research group over some time frame. Using open publication databases, we identify the experts in the community, and analyse their publication pattern, and then use this as a guideline for evaluating scientific outputs of other groups of researchers publishing in the same domain. To illustrate the practicality of our method, we analyse the scientific output of Korean researchers in the security subject domain from 2004 to 2009, and comparing this groups’ output with that of well-known researchers. Our empirical analysis demonstrates that there is a persistent gap between these two research groups’ publications impact over this period, although the absolute number of journal publications greatly increased over recent years.     

Research impact and scholars’ geographical diversity

In recent years there has been a sharp increase in collaborations among scholars and there are studies on the effects of scientific collaboration on scholars’ performance. This study examines the hypothesis that geographically diverse scientific collaboration is associated with research impact. Here, the approach is differentiated from other studies by: (a) focusing on publications rather than researchers or institutes; (b) considering the geographical diversity of authors of each publication; (c) considering the average number of citations a publication receives per year (time-based normalization of citations) as a surrogate for its impact; and (d) not focusing on a specific country (developed or developing) or region. Analysis of the collected bibliometric data shows that a publication impact is significantly and positively associated with all related geographical collaboration indicators. But publication impact has a stronger association with the numbers of external collaborations at department and institution levels (inter-departmental and inter-institutional collaborations) compared to internal collaborations. Conversely, national collaboration correlates better with impact than international collaboration.     

Book editors in the social sciences and humanities: an analysis of publication and collaboration patterns of established researchers in Flanders

Book editors in the social sciences and humanities play an important role in their fields but little is known about their typical publication and collaboration patterns. To partially fill this gap, we compare Flemish editors and other researchers, in terms of career stage, productivity, publication types, publications with domestic and international collaboration as well as the number of (international or all) unique co‐authors, co‐editors and associated book chapter authors. The results show that editors are mostly established researchers, especially in the social sciences, produce more book chapters and monographs than do other researchers, and are more productive. Nevertheless, editors collaborate less than do other researchers, both in terms of publications and in number of co‐authors. Including book chapter authors in the editors' collaboration networks makes those networks substantially larger, demonstrating that editors do not mainly call upon authors from their existing collaboration network when choosing book chapter authors in the edited books. Finally, editors seem to co‐author with their book chapter authors slightly more often after the publication of the edited book than before.     

Scientific performance across research disciplines: Trends and differences in the case of Slovenia

This paper presents an analysis of several dimensions of scientific performance across all research disciplines measured by seven essentially different indicators that quantify productivity (absolute and fractional), collaboration (general, per publication, and international), independence from (co)advisors, and citations. The study population consists of all researchers who have obtained a Ph.D. degree in Slovenia since the country's independence in 1991. We assign researchers to 234 disciplines based on their Ph.D. thesis’ UDC classification; for each researcher, only bibliographic data for the first 10 years of their careers were used in order to avoid inconsistencies due to different career stages.While our findings show that there are notable differences between disciplines for all indicators, we also find that the trends for individual indicators are similar for the vast majority of disciplines; specifically, we observe that the fractional productivity and independence from (co)advisors of researchers are decreasing in all disciplines throughout the observed period, whereas collaboration (general, per publication, and international), and the number of citations are increasing. Moreover, our research results expose two disciplines in terms of UDC classification (mathematics and natural sciences (UDC 5), and applied sciences, medicine, technology (UDC 6)), which stand out in terms of the analyzed indicators.     

Public-private collaboration and scientific impact: An analysis based on Danish publication data for 1995–2013

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.     

Information shocks and parental response in education. A case study of an open government initiative

Although a large body of literature has examined the effects of open government from a theoretical perspective, evidence on the empirical effects is still limited. This paper analyses parental response to an open government initiative consisting of the publication on a government website of school inspection reports. As an indicator of school quality, school inspection reports allow parents to make well informed school choices for their children. We employ a unique natural experiment in Belgium where schools are randomly selected for inspection, and online school inspection reports are the first and only source of objective quality data publicly available. This results in exogenous information shocks. Our findings indicate that information about school quality strongly affects school choice. After the publication, inspected schools experience higher enrolments, with effects driven by positively evaluated schools and rural schools. No differentiated response is observed by schools' socioeconomic composition. We interpret these findings as evidence that parents made extensive use of the government website on which school inspection reports were published.     

Correlation between variables subject to an order restriction,with application to scientometric indices

Variables subject to an order restriction, for instance Y ≤ X, have a bivariate distribution over a non-rectangular joint domain that entails a non-null and potentially large structural relation even if the variables show no association (in the sense that particular ranges of values of X do not co-occur with particular ranges of values of Y). Order restrictions affect a number of scientometric indices (including the h index and its variants) that are routinely subjected to correlational analyses to assess whether they provide redundant information, but these correlations are contaminated by the structural relation. This paper proposes an alternative definition of association between variables subject to an order restriction that eliminates their structural relation and reverts to the conventional definition when applied to variables that are not subject to order restrictions. This alternative definition is illustrated in a number of theoretical cases and it is also applied to empirical data involving scientometric indices subject to an order restriction. A test statistic is also derived which allows testing for the significance of an association between variables subject to an order restriction.     

Predicting the Q of junior researchers using data from the first years of publication

A researcher's Q denotes their ability in scientific research as a real number. Due to their short presence in the academic environment, junior researchers have unstable Q values. This article aims to present a model that uses data from junior researchers’ first years of publication to predict their stable Q values. We tested the deep model and the linear regression model and compared their accuracies. We have obtained reliable results showing that the predicted values estimated with both models are better than the estimated Q values computed with the Q model itself when using only data from the first five years of publication. Lastly, we note that both approaches are robust approaches to deal with the inflation of citation bias.     

Understanding relevance judgment in the view of perceived value

While researchers have explored and proposed dozens of user relevance judgment criteria (RJC) in various situations, there is a lack of empirical research on the effects of RJC on user relevance judgment and how. The study sought to develop relations between RJC and situational relevance (SR) via four perceived values, epistemic value, functional value, conditional value, and social value, by introducing multi-factors perceived value (PV) theory and structural equation modeling (SEM). The study developed a RJC model basing on multi-factors PV and derived seven hypotheses to be verified. The data of the use of RJC and self-estimation of PVs from 453 people who were all participants of a national data sharing competition were collected by questionnaire, and then were verified and analyzed by SEM to test the hypotheses. The results verify the effectiveness of four PVs on SR with different levels. Meanwhile, it also suggests that RJC can function as the measurements of PVs and reduce RJC as well. Based on the above process, the study puts forward a new definition of SR based on four information values and verifies the SR judgment model—information value-utility model. The research provides theoretical basis and measurement dimensions for understanding and measuring SR. Finally, the theoretical and practical implications of this study are discussed.     

Do researchers collaborate in a similar way to publish and to develop projects?

The aim of this paper is to establish the similarities and differences between the way of collaboration and the production of researchers when dealing with publications or with the development of projects and whether the collaboration patterns change across disciplines.We have studied the networks of researchers formed through the collaborations in papers or in projects in a research institution (the University of Zaragoza) and we have analyzed a series of individual and global magnitudes. As a general result, we have observed that the laws governing the individual productivity are similar for the cases of publications and projects but, however, the behavior is different when analyzing more complex magnitudes such as the collaborations or other structural variables. We consider also the subnetworks defined by the researchers of the different disciplines and characterize their topologies and compare the corresponding collaboration patterns.Because of the general approach, we expect most of the conclusions to be applicable to other universities or research centers.     

Publication counting methods for a national research evaluation exercise

In this paper, we investigate the effects of using four methods of publication counting (complete, whole, fractional, square root fractional) and limiting the number of publications (at researcher and institution levels) on the results of a national research evaluation exercise across fields using Polish data. We use bibliographic information on 0.58 million publications from the 2013–2016 period. Our analysis reveals that the largest effects are in those fields within which a variety publication and cooperation patterns can be observed (e.g. in Physical sciences or History and archeology). We argue that selecting the publication counting method for national evaluation purposes needs to take into account the current situation in the given country in terms of the excellence of research outcomes, level of internal, external and international collaboration, and publication patterns in the various fields of sciences. Our findings show that the social sciences and humanities are not significantly influenced by the different publication counting methods and limiting the number of publications included in the evaluation, as publication patterns in these fields are quite different from those observed in the so-called hard sciences. When discussing the goals of any national research evaluation system, we should be aware that the ways of achieving these goals are closely related to the publication counting method, which can serve as incentives for certain publication practices.     

Author-team diversity and the impact of scientific publications: Evidence from physics research at a national science lab

In the second half of the 20th century, scientific research in physics, chemistry, and engineering began to focus on the use of large government-funded laboratories. This shift toward so-called big science also brought about a concomitant change in scientific work itself, with a sustained trend toward the use of highly specialized scientific teams, elevating the role of team characteristics on scientific outputs. The actual impact of scientific knowledge is commonly measured by how often peer-reviewed publications are, in turn, cited by other researchers. Therefore, how characteristics such as author team seniority, affiliation diversity, and size affect the overall impact of team publications was examined. Citation information and author demographics were reviewed for 123 articles published in Physical Review Letters from 2004 to 2006 and written by 476 scientists who used the National High Magnetic Field Laboratory's facilities. Correlation analysis indicated that author teams that were more multi-institutional and had homogeneous seniority tended to have more senior scientists. In addition, the analysis suggests that more mixed seniority author teams were likely to be less institutionally dispersed. Quantile regression was used to examine the relationships between author-team characteristics and publication impact. The analysis indicated that both weighted average seniority and average seniority had a negative relationship with the number of citations the publication received. Furthermore, the analysis also showed a positive relationship between first-author seniority and the number of citations, and a negative relationship between the number of authors and the number of citations.     

Poincare: Recommending Publication Venues via Treatment Effect Estimation

Choosing a publication venue for an academic paper is a crucial step in the research process. However, in many cases, decisions are based solely on the experience of researchers, which often leads to suboptimal results. Although there exist venue recommender systems for academic papers, they recommend venues where the paper is expected to be published. In this study, we aim to recommend publication venues from a different perspective. We estimate the number of citations a paper will receive if the paper is published in each venue and recommend the venue where the paper has the most potential impact. However, there are two challenges to this task. First, a paper is published in only one venue, and thus, we cannot observe the number of citations the paper would receive if the paper were published in another venue. Secondly, the contents of a paper and the publication venue are not statistically independent; that is, there exist selection biases in choosing publication venues. In this paper, we formulate the venue recommendation problem as a treatment effect estimation problem. We use a bias correction method to estimate the potential impact of choosing a publication venue effectively and to recommend venues based on the potential impact of papers in each venue. We highlight the effectiveness of our method using paper data from computer science conferences.     

Regularity in the time-dependent distribution of the percentage of never-cited papers: An empirical pilot study based on the six journals

The non-citation rate refers to the proportion of papers that do not attract any citation over a period of time following their publication. After reviewing all the related papers in Web of Science, Google Scholar and Scopus database, we find the current literature on citation distribution gives more focus on the distribution of the percentages and citations of papers receiving at least one citation, while there are fewer studies on the time-dependent patterns of the percentage of never-cited papers, on what distribution model can fit their time-dependent patterns, as well as on the factors influencing the non-citation rate. Here, we perform an empirical pilot analysis to the time-dependent distribution of the percentages of never-cited papers in a series of different, consecutive citation time windows following their publication in our selected six sample journals, and study the influence of paper length on the chance of papers’ getting cited. Through the above analysis, the following general conclusions are drawn: (1) a three-parameter negative exponential model can well fit time-dependent distribution curve of the percentages of never-cited papers; (2) in the initial citation time window, the percentage of never-cited papers in each journal is very high. However, as the citation time window becomes wider and wider, the percentage of never-cited papers begins to drop rapidly at first, and then drop more slowly, and the total degree of decline for most of journals is very large; (3) when applying the wider citation time windows, the percentage of never-cited papers for each journal begins to approach a stable value, and after that value, there will be very few changes in these stable percentages, unless we meet a large amount of “Sleeping Beauties” type papers; (4) the length of an paper has a great influence on whether it will be cited or not.     

The Publication Success of 102 Nations in Scopus and the Performance of Their Scopus-Indexed Journals

Over the years, the number of journals indexed in Scopus has increased, although it varies significantly between countries. The increasing proportion of international journals of a country provides new venues for papers from that country to be seen by other researchers worldwide. In this work, we evaluate the relationship of a country’s scientific performance or publication success with both its journals’ quantity and quality. The specific objective of the study is to identify the relationship between the country’s publication success and the quantity and quality of those country’s journals indexed in Scopus during 2005–2014. The publication success of 102 individual countries, measured by their scientific productivity, impact and collaboration indicators, the quantity of country’s Scopus-indexed journals in 2014 (a total of 22,581 journals) as well as the quantity of its journals were investigated. Scopus-indexed journals are predominantly from Western Europe (48.9%) and North America (27.7%), with the United States and the United Kingdom dominate with a total 51%. The contribution from the peripheral countries is comparatively small, however there are a good number of contributions from the South-East Asian countries. Estonia is the fastest growing country in terms of having indexed journals in Scopus, following by Iran and Malaysia. Among the studied indices, it was found that publication success (total publications and total citations) of 102 countries are strongly correlated with quantity (number of indexed journals and number of documents published in indexed journals) and quality (citations per paper, SJR, h-index, CiteScore and SNIP) indicators of country’s journals. We can conclude that the scientific productivity of a country depend critically on the number of journals indexed from that country in citation databases. The study provides a context with which the relative success of publications can be assessed, yielding new insights into the scientific impact of individual countries and the performance of journals that they published.     

Public and private value in citizen participation in E-governance: Evidence from a government-sponsored green commuting platform

Citizen participation in E-governance is, essentially, a social exchange between individuals and their government through which the citizen creates public value as well as acquires private value. The direct effects of participation antecedents on participation outcomes have been fully examined, but few researchers have investigated the internal mechanism of citizen participation at the level of psychological value perception. The roles of perceived public and private value between the participation antecedents and outcomes remain unclear. Private value merits careful research in particular as the E-governance environment is being shaped by increasing privatization and continuous IT innovation. Based on the cognitive integration theory and the civic voluntarism model, this paper proposes a theoretical framework to examine the mediating roles of two values. We built a complete research model encompassing ten hypotheses centered on citizen e-participation in the context of green commuting governance. By analyzing survey data on a green commuting platform, we demonstrate the significant mediating effects of these two values and greater effect of private value acquisition on continuous e-participation intentions than public value creation. Our results have important research implications in regards to the roles of perceived values in participation, especially perceived private value.     

Artificial Intelligence for data-driven decision-making and governance in public affairs

Literature shows there is a growing interest in studies involving Artificial Intelligence (AI) in the public sector; and while there is evidence of many governmental initiatives that have been established to harness the power of AI, empirical research on the topic and evidence-based insights are rather lacking. The aim of this Special Issue on Artificial Intelligence for Data-Driven Decision-Making and Governance in Public Affairs is to extend both the theoretical and practical boundaries of AI research in the public sector in order to improve governmental decision-making and governance, thus enhancing public value creation. The papers in this special issue focus on AI risks and guidelines, AI governance, the risks of governmental implementation of AI to citizens' privacy, increasing citizen satisfaction through AI-enabled government services, the enablers and challenges of AI implementation in specific public sectors, and using AI to study political opinion. These papers not only advance our knowledge and understanding of the use of AI in government and public governance, but they also help to set out a renewed research agenda. Future research should, among other things, focus on inter- and multi-disciplinary empirical studies that call for the collaboration of a variety of stakeholders; on the longitudinal dynamics of creating public value through the breadth and depth of AI assimilation; and on the investigation of the ethical challenges (particularly data privacy) in AI implementation.     

Standing on the shoulders of giants?—Faculty hiring in information schools

The past three decades have witnessed the tremendous growth of the number of information schools (a.k.a., iSchools) and the size of their faculty bodies. However, there is little empirical evidence in faculty hiring patterns within the community. Analyzing hand-curated data of 81 junior and 485 senior faculty members from 27 iSchools in the United States and a total of 41?981 journal and conference proceeding publications, we investigate the effects of collaboration experience on placement quality, controlling for other well studied factors including gender, scholarly performance, and prestige of degree-granting programs. In particular, we find that strong ties in collaboration, as measured by PhD advisors’ academic achievements, have little correlation with placement quality fixing other factors. On the other hand, weak ties, manifested by coauthors excluding advisors, are found to be beneficial. Providing a better understanding of hiring practice in iSchools, the results highlight the importance of “standing on the shoulders of giants” for junior information science researchers wishing to find high-quality faculty job. Finally, our findings lay the foundation for future investigations, where stakeholders and administrators can assess the effectiveness of existing hiring strategies, which in turn provide managerial and policy implications for iSchools to adapt to the fast growing landscape of information science.     

Quantifying the degree of research collaboration: A comparative study of collaborative measures

This article reports a comparative study of five measures that quantify the degree of research collaboration, including the collaborative index, the degree of collaboration, the collaborative coefficient, the revised collaborative coefficient, and degree centrality. The empirical results showed that these measures all capture the notion of research collaboration, which is consistent with prior studies. Moreover, the results showed that degree centrality, the revised collaborative coefficient, and the degree of collaboration had the highest coefficient estimates on research productivity, the average JIF, and the average number of citations, respectively. Overall, this article suggests that the degree of collaboration and the revised collaborative coefficient are superior measures that can be applied to bibliometric studies for future researchers.