The relationship between interdisciplinarity and distinct modes of university-industry interaction

Interdisciplinary research (IDR) has raised increasing expectations among scholars and policymakers about its potential to produce ground-breaking scientific contributions and satisfy societal demands. While existing research highlights that novel connections across fields is beneficial for scientific contributions with high academic impact, comparatively less is known about whether IDR is positively associated to scientists’ engagement with non-academic actors. To investigate this, we examine whether there is a systematic relationship between scientists’ IDR-orientation and their interactions with industry. We conceptually distinguish four stylized modes of interaction (firm creation, technology transfer, co-production and response modes) and employ three distinct indicators of IDR. We use data on 1,170 scientists affiliated to public research organizations in Spain, bibliometric dataset of scientists’ publications, and details of scientists’ past involvement in interactions with industry. Our results show that IDR has a transversal influence on all four modes. However, IDR-oriented scientists are more strongly associated to transactional (market-mediated) compared to relational (personal-based) interaction mechanisms; while we find no evidence of a significant difference between IDR-oriented scientists and their propensity to engage in different modes of U-I interaction according to the degree of goal specificity.     

International research networks in pharmaceuticals: Structure and dynamics

Knowledge production and scientific research have become increasingly more collaborative and international, particularly in pharmaceuticals. We analyze this tendency in general and tie formation in international research networks on the country level in particular. Based on a unique dataset of scientific publications related to pharmaceutical research and applying social network analysis, we find that both the number of countries and their connectivity increase in almost all disease group specific networks. The cores of the networks consist of high income OECD countries and remain rather stable over time. Using network regression techniques to analyze the network dynamics our results indicate that accumulative advantages based on connectedness and multi-connectivity are positively related to changes in the countries’ collaboration intensity whereas various indicators on similarity between countries do not allow for unambiguous conclusions.     

Knowledge transfer activities in social sciences and humanities: Explaining the interactions of research groups with non-academic agents

The aim of this research is to achieve a better understanding of the processes underlying knowledge transfer (KT) in social sciences and humanities (SSH). The paper addresses: first, the extent of SSH research groups’ engagement in KT and the formal KT activities used to interact with non-academic communities; and second, how the characteristics of research groups may influence engagement in various types of KT. The empirical analysis is at research group level using data derived from a questionnaire of SSH research groups belonging to the Spanish Council for Scientific Research (CSIC). We find that KT activities are based on relational rather than commercial activities. The most frequent relational activities in which SSH research groups engage are consultancy and contract research. We find also that the characteristics of research groups (e.g. size and multidisciplinarity) and individuals (e.g. academic status and star scientist) are associated with involvement in KT activities and that a deliberate focus on the societal impacts and relevance of the research conducted is strongly related to active engagement of research groups in all the modes of KT considered in this study. From a managerial perspective, our findings suggest that measures promoting a focus on the societal impact of research could enhance research groups’ engagement in KT activities.     

Institutional shaping of research priorities: A case study on avian influenza

Since outbreaks in 2003, avian influenza has received a considerable amount of funding and become a controversial science policy issue in various respects. Like in many other global and multidisciplinary societal problems fraught with high levels of uncertainty, a variety of perspectives have emerged over how to “tackle” avian influenza and public voices have expressed concern over how research funds are being allocated. In this article, we document if and how research agendas are being informed by public policy debates. We use qualitative and quantitative approaches to examine the relations between expectations of outcomes of public science and the existing research landscape. Interviews with a cross-section of stakeholders reveal a wide range of perspectives and values associated with the nature and objectives of existing research avenues. We find that the landscape of public avian influenza research is not directly driven by expectations of societal outcomes. Instead, it is shaped by three institutional drivers: pharmaceutical industry priorities, publishing and public research funding pressures, and the mandates of science-based policy or public health organizations. These insights suggest that, in research prioritization, funding agencies should embrace a broad perspective of research governance that explicitly considers underlying institutional drivers. Deliberative approaches in public priority setting might help to make agendas more plural and diverse and thus more responsive to the contested and uncertain nature of avian influenza research.     

Assessing basic research: Some partial indicators of scientific progress in radio astronomy

As the costs of certain types of scientific research have escalated and as growth rates in overall national science budgets have declined, so the need for an explicit science policy has grown more urgent. In order to establish priorities between research groups competing for scarce funds, one of the most important pieces of information needed by science policy-makers is an assessment of those groups' recent scientific performance. This paper suggests a method for evaluating that performance.After reviewing the literature on scientific assessment, we argue that, while there are no simple measures of the contributions to scientific knowledge made by scientists, there are a number of ‘partial indicators’ — that is, variables determined partly by the magnitude of the particular contributions, and partly by ‘other factors’. If the partial indicators are to yield reliable results, then the influence of these ‘other factors’ must be minimised. This is the aim of the method of ‘converging partial indicators’ proposed in this paper. We argue that the method overcomes many of the problems encountered in previous work on scientific assessment by incorporating the following elements: (1) the indicators are applied to research groups rather than individual scientists; (2) the indicators based on citations are seen as reflecting the impact, rather than the quality or importance, of the research work; (3) a range of indicators are employed, each of which focusses on different aspects of a group's performance; (4) the indicators are applied to matched groups, comparing ‘like’ with ‘like’ as far as possible; (5) because of the imperfect or partial nature of the indicators, only in those cases where they yield convergent results can it be assumed that the influence of the ‘other factors’ has been kept relatively small (i.e. the matching of the groups has been largely successful), and that the indicators therefore provide a reasonably reliable estimate of the contribution to scientific progress made by different research groups.In an empirical study of four radio astronomy observatories, the method of converging partial indicators is tested, and several of the indicators (publications per researcher, citations per paper, numbers of highly cited papers, and peer evaluation) are found to give fairly consistent results. The results are of relevance to two questions: (a) can basic research be assessed? (b) more specifically, can significant differences in the research performance of radio astronomy centres be identified? We would maintain that the evidence presented in this paper is sufficient to justify a positive answer to both these questions, and hence to show that the method of converging partial indicators can yield information useful to science policy-makers.     

Gender diversity in the management field: Does it matter for research outcomes?

This study examines the relationship between gender diversity and research outcomes. Existing research on the topic primarily focuses on how team gender diversity influences scholarly productivity in terms of citations and publication rates. Far less attention has been devoted to the question of how the intellectual contents of research disciplines change as they become more gender diverse. Drawing on a global sample of more than 25,000 management papers, we use natural language processing techniques, correspondence analysis and regression models to illuminate impact-, content- and status-related dimensions of gender diversity in management research. In regression models adjusting for geographical setting, institutional prestige and collaboration patterns, we find no discernable effects of team gender diversity on per-paper scientific impact. In contrast, our analyses converge to yield a broadly consistent pattern of gender-related variations in research focus: women are well-represented in social- and human-centered areas of management, while men comprise the vast majority in areas addressing more technical and operational aspects. Our findings corroborate recent sociological research suggesting that cultural norms and expectations are channeling women and men towards different areas of work and study. We argue that the broadened repertoire of perspectives, values and questions resulting from gender diversity may render management research more responsive to the full gamut of societal needs and expectations.     

Out of Asia: Understanding the nexus between technology usage and research productivity in Japan,Singapore, and Taiwan

Journal and conference publications are well-known measures of scientific and academic research productivity. Prior research on scientific productivity that studies dimensions such as research culture, technological support, and researcher collaboration focuses on Western world contexts. Asian countries, such as Japan, Singapore, and Taiwan have received attention recently for the quality of their educational institutions, which have increasingly emphasized research productivity. With a large number of established and funded public universities, these countries show a strong potential for future scientific research. Consequently, it is crucial to understand the factors that influence the research productivity of scholars in these countries. In this paper the focus is specifically on the research productivity of students and faculty members in three countries: Singapore, Taiwan, and Japan. We investigate an important factor that influences research productivity: technology usage, which we conceptualize as the summation of mobile phone and computer usage. In addition, we analyze the relationship between technology usage and international collaboration.     

Short-term incentives of research evaluations: Evidence from the UK Research Excellence Framework

We document incentive effects of the evaluation deadlines in the UK’s performance-based research funding system. Studying 3,597,272 publications by UK researchers, we find that publications just before assessment deadlines obtain substantially fewer citations and are published in venues with lower impact factors. These trends reverse abruptly after the deadlines. We discuss different factors that contribute to this observation and provide evidence that evaluation deadlines are likely to set incentives against investment in research quality and long-term topics. We conclude that where such shifts in research incentives are not intended, they might require balancing by additional incentives for exploratory, long-term oriented research.     

Industry funding and university professors’ research performance

University research is to an increasing extent funded by industry, and the share of basic funding is decreasing. In the literature, there are optimistic and pessimistic views on the implication of this development. Based on data from a questionnaire study among all tenured university professors in Norway (N = 1967) we find that there is a significant relationship between industry funding and research performance: professors with industrial funding describe their research as applied to a greater extent, they collaborate more with other researchers both in academia and in industry, and they report more scientific publications as well as more frequent entrepreneurial results. There is neither a positive nor negative relationship between academic publishing and entrepreneurial outputs.     

Towards a taxonomy of research misconduct: The case of business school research

This paper examines the growing pressures and incentives encouraging research misconduct, along with the consequences, as illustrated by the case of business school research. Drawing on a review of the literature on different theoretical approaches to analysing organizational misconduct, we develop a formal taxonomy distinguishing appropriate conduct from blatantly inappropriate misconduct but with a specific focus on the ‘grey’ areas between these extremes in the form of questionable and inappropriate behaviour. We identify various sources of research misbehaviour and different categories of those affected. The aim is to provide a clearer understanding of what research behaviour is deemed appropriate or not, which stakeholders it affects, and the pressures and incentives likely to exacerbate such misconduct. We conclude with a discussion of how the taxonomy can help shape future good research practice (thereby setting a better example to students), and offer some propositions for future research.     

The role of ICT knowledge flows for international market share dynamics

This paper investigates the role of Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) related knowledge flows for international market shares. Using bibliometric data on scientific publications, we analyse the relationship between the strength of 14 OECD countries in four ICT-related scientific fields and the ability of those countries to maintain and acquire export market shares in the OECD market, across 16 manufacturing industries over the period 1981-2003. We find that domestic and foreign ICT-related scientific knowledge flows have a positive and significant impact on export market shares in ICT industries, while only domestic flows positively affect export shares in non-ICT industries. We also find that small open economies benefit more than other countries from foreign knowledge flows both in ICT and in non-ICT industries.     

Measuring the temporal dynamics of policy mixes – An empirical analysis of renewable energy policy mixes’ balance and design features in nine countries

Complex societal or environmental problems require fast and substantial socio-technical transitions. For instance, in the case of climate change, these transitions need to take place in the energy, transport and several industry sectors. To induce and accelerate such transitions, numerous policy interventions are required, which interact with each other in policy mixes. While several conceptual studies on policy mixes have been published recently, there is very little empirical research apart from single case or small-n studies. It has been prominently argued that the debate about policy mixes has reached an impasse partly due to this lack of empirical work. This paper addresses this gap by providing a first analysis of the temporal dynamics of complex policy mixes. To do so, we develop a conceptualization and measurement of policy mix balance across instrument types as well as policy mix design features (in the form of intensity as a general and technology specificity as a technology-focused design feature). This allows us to answer the question how temporal dynamics of policy mixes differ between countries regarding their balance and design features. Our measurement approach is developed bottom-up, i.e., policies are assessed individually and then aggregated systematically at the policy mix level. This enables overcoming the ‘dependent variable problem in the study of policy change’, i.e., the problem of measuring policy output. More specifically, we develop a comparative dataset of 522 renewable energy policies in nine OECD countries. Our analysis shows that countries’ policy mix dynamics vary strongly regarding some variables (e.g., technology specificity) but less regarding others (e.g., balance). As a validity check, we also test the effects of these mix dynamics on policy outcome in the form of renewable energy technology diffusion. We reflect our findings in light of the theoretical debates around policy mixes and policy design and discuss how our results provoke an agenda for the new generation of research on policy mixes. We specifically discuss avenues for future research with a particular focus on the ‘politics of policy mixes’.     

Diversity of backgrounds and ideas: The case of research evaluation in economics

This paper contributes to the literature on the effect of research evaluation in terms of preserving and reproducing diversity. Through a large-scale natural experiment encompassing two entire cohorts of Italian economists, we document how candidates for academic positions, especially top-tier positions, in economics are pushed to increasingly conform to a standardised research profile. We find evidence of gender bias in research evaluation and observe substantial variability in the chances of qualifying for an academic position, depending on candidates’ main fields, topics and methods of research. Our results also indicate that economists working on less popular research fields and/or with heterodox methods are less likely to qualify for top-tier academic positions, independently of their bibliometric indicators.     

基于文献计量的国家治理研究现状分析

中国共产党第十八届三中全会提出推进国家治理体系与治理能力现代化,激发了国内学术界对国家治理及国家建设问题的研究热情。由于国家治理体系与治理能力问题是近30年才得到国际学术界重视的议题,本文采用文献计量学和文本分析的方法,探讨了该领域的研究成熟度、研究热点及发展趋势。分别以1998—2017年间CSSCI和SSCI作为中文文献、英文文献的数据来源,利用文献题录信息统计分析工具（SATI）,根据布拉德佛定律(Bradford′s law)、洛特卡定律(Lotka′s law)和文本分析,我们发现：（1）“国家治理”研究在国内尚在初始阶段,在国外虽然起步较早且仍在平稳发展,但均未达到一个完全成熟的研究领域。（2）国内的国家治理研究主要集中在国家治理体系和治理能力及其现代化、依法治国、协商民主等方面,其研究重点深受国家政策的引导和影响,研究热点随着政策改变较为明显。国外的治理理论研究主要集中在气候变化、欧盟、民主、责任、监管、政策、政府、全球治理等方面,且长期以来无明显的较大的变化,但近些年来“中国（China）”成了国外治理领域研究的一个热点。     

Towards transdisciplinary impact of scientific publications: A longitudinal,comprehensive, and large-scale analysis on Microsoft Academic Graph

This paper studies the transdisciplinary impact of scientific publications with a longitudinal, comprehensive, and large-scale analysis on the Microsoft Academic Graph (MAG) dataset. More specifically, this paper aims to understand to what extent publications in discipline A have impact on discipline B. To this end, we propose a novel method to characterize the degree to which a publication impacts another discipline instead of its original discipline. We consider the ratio of the number of citations in a certain discipline and that in the original discipline. We also adopt an OLS regression to identify the equation between the ratio and the affinity of discipline pair and find a clear positive relation. This inspires us to categorize a publication's degree of transdisciplinarity by setting up two thresholds, the top 95% and the bottom 95% confident interval curve (of the fitted line). Publications above the top 95% curve is categorized as transdisciplinary ones, those below the bottom 95% curve as domain-specific ones, and those between the two curve as normal publications. This categorization does not require any pre-defined framework for transdisciplinarity and offers an automatic way of definition by data distribution itself. We find that sociology, mathematics, physics, and chemistry account for a great proportion of transdisciplinary publications that influence other domains, and that medicine, biology, economics, and geology have the greatest proportion of domain-specific publications that show impact in the original discipline. Moreover, we observe a negative relation between the number of citations and the proportion of transdisciplinary publications. A longitudinal analysis presents that the proportion of transdisciplinary publications shows a slightly increase trend for years.     

Research collaboration and research output: A longitudinal study of 65 biomedical scientists in a New Zealand university

Collaborative research has been increasingly celebrated by the science community, but the hypothesized positive relationship between research collaboration and research output is more assumed than rigorously tested. In this paper, we identify three methodological gaps in the literature: (a) hierarchical coding based on the ISI Web of Science database causes severe loss of information on local collaboration, (b) the relationship between research collaboration and research output is likely to be confounded by a common latent variable such as a scientist's ability, and (c) the lack of longitudinal analysis prevents causal inferences from being made. To address these methodological concerns, we constructed a longitudinal dataset of 65 biomedical scientists at a New Zealand university and coded collaboration variables by hand checking each of their publications in a period of 14 years. We found that at article level, both within-university collaboration and international collaboration are positively related to an article's quality and that, at scientist-year level, only international collaboration is positively related to a scientist's future research output.     

The skewness of computer science

Computer science is a relatively young discipline combining science, engineering, and mathematics. The main flavors of computer science research involve the theoretical development of conceptual models for the different aspects of computing and the more applicative building of software artifacts and assessment of their properties. In the computer science publication culture, conferences are an important vehicle to quickly move ideas, and journals often publish deeper versions of papers already presented at conferences. These peculiarities of the discipline make computer science an original research field within the sciences, and, therefore, the assessment of classical bibliometric laws is particularly important for this field. In this paper, we study the skewness of the distribution of citations to papers published in computer science publication venues (journals and conferences). We find that the skewness in the distribution of mean citedness of different venues combines with the asymmetry in citedness of articles in each venue, resulting in a highly asymmetric citation distribution with a power law tail. Furthermore, the skewness of conference publications is more pronounced than the asymmetry of journal papers. Finally, the impact of journal papers, as measured with bibliometric indicators, largely dominates that of proceeding papers.     

Performance-based research funding: Evidence from the largest natural experiment worldwide

A performance-based research funding system (PRFS) is a nationwide incentive scheme that promotes and rewards university research performance through competition for government funding. The UK’s PRFS, currently the Research Excellence Framework (REF), is considered the oldest, largest and most developed payment-by-results system in academia worldwide. Surprisingly, and despite the strong criticisms, little has been done to quantitatively and casually evaluate the intended and unintended effects of the PRFSs. In this paper, we evaluate the incremental impact of the REF 2014 in the fields of Economics and Business. We use a synthetic control method to compare the performance of UK universities with their artificial counterfactual units constructed using data from US universities. Our analysis shows, on the whole, that the introduction of the REF had a significant and positive impact on the quantity and quality of the scientific research produced at UK universities. However, we do not find a significant effect on the per author measures, suggesting that the REF did not result in an increase in research productivity. We also show that the effects are more heterogeneous across universities than across academic disciplines. We do not find evidence of a shift of research focus from Economics to Business topics, as some feared. But our analysis indicates that the REF 2014 may have contributed to the concentration of research excellence in elite institutions.