为什么中国学术研究数量众多但缺乏高水平成果?

近年来我国学术研究有了长足进步,但同时也存在重视数量而忽视质量、缺乏原创性成果等问题。本文认为这种浮躁学术氛围的形成依赖于两个条件:一是学术研究的激励措施得以加强,二是学术质量评价措施没有跟上,因而研究人员被激发起来的积极性朝向数量维度扩张。基于一个锦标竞争模型,本文证明了学术激励的三种力量:科研奖励力度加大、不同职称间的待遇差距扩大,晋升指标紧缩;同时证明了无法准确鉴定学术质量的三种可能性因素:非专家评议、非同行竞争、考评过于频繁。因而高水平研究成果的出现,有赖中国学术界专家评议、同行竞争、终身教职等制度的建立。     

University research funding and publication performance—An international comparison

In current science policies, competition and output incentives are emphasized as a means of making university systems efficient and productive. By comparing eight countries, this article analyzes how funding environments of university research vary across countries and whether more competitive funding systems are more efficient in producing scientific publications. The article shows that there are significant differences in the competitiveness of funding systems, but no straightforward connection between financial incentives and the efficiency of university systems exists. Our results provoke questions about whether financial incentives boost publication productivity, and whether policy-makers should place greater emphasis on other factors relevant to high productivity.     

英国政府促进大学与产业合作的机制与启示

大学与产业进行有效合作是推动知识向现实生产力转化并促成新知识不断产生的重要途径。近年来,英国政府部门针对社会加强公共科研系统知识转移的要求,逐步构建并完善了以英国商业、创新和技能部为主导的,促进大学与产业合作的国家推进体系。研究显示,健全行政管理体系的结构与功能、灵活配置国家财政资源进行分类引导以及加强反馈机制建设等措施有效地支撑了英国大学与产业界合作局面的形成。这些思路与做法,值得我国政府部门在有关大学与产业合作发展中定位功能、布局实施内容、制订工作方案、把握工作成效等相关工作设计时参考借鉴。     

Does research organization influence academic production?: Laboratory level evidence from a large European university

The paper analyses scientific research production at the laboratory level. The evidence on which the study is based describes precisely the research activity over the period 1993-2000 of more than eighty labs belonging to Louis Pasteur University, a large and well-ranked European research university. The research organization of the labs is analysed by focusing on the characteristics of the research personnel in relation with the scores in two outcomes that are publications and patents. The paper proposes a five-classes typology of laboratories that highlights different styles of research organization and productivity at the laboratory level. It also studies the determinants of the publication performances of labs. We show how appropriate combinations of inputs in academic labs may be strongly associated to high publication performances. We find that combining full-time researchers and university professors in labs tend to preserve incentives. Highly publishing labs also patent. The size of the labs, the individual promotions, and the role of non-permanent researchers and of non-researchers are also underlined.     

Management system for a scientific research institute based on the assessment of scientific publications

This study depicts ihe management system of a research institute based on input-output principles. The elements of the system are the scientific departments. The main categories of the controlling system arc the planning and supervision or research activities, evaluation of scientific and economic results and rewarding of researchers. The evaluation of scientific results focuses on the analysis of publications. The quality of scientific papers is characterized by a scoring system based on impact factors of periodicals and by citations received. Possible reasons for the lack of citations are discussed. The results of mission-oriented research (MOR) are evaluated on the basis of revenues and earnings. The amount of bonus given to researchers is based on a scoring system taking publication and MOR activity into account. A marked difference in the number of publications and citations among individual departments was observed.     

中文学术论文的外文文献引用特征分析

【目的/意义】对中文学术论文中的外文文献引用特征的充分挖掘和系统分析是了解国内学者的外文文献 资源使用规律,从而促进外文资源合理利用的有效手段,也是完善论文质量评价体系和制订文献保障战略的重要 研究课题之一。【方法/过程】从论文审稿人和指标评价角度,对外文文献利用的主观意愿、期刊质量相关性、研究主 题特征等要素进行了深入分析。【结果/结论】实证研究结果显示,期刊审稿人对外文文献的价值一致持肯定态度, 期刊外文引文率和影响因子之间存在显著的正相关关系。不同的研究主题因国际化程度不同,外文引文率有较大 差异。【创新/局限】通过定量方法发现和解释了中文学术论文中外文参考文献的引用模式。     

Evaluating a department’s research: Testing the Leiden methodology in business and management

The Leiden methodology (LM), also sometimes called the “crown indicator”, is a quantitative method for evaluating the research quality of a research group or academic department based on the citations received by the group in comparison to averages for the field. There have been a number of applications but these have mainly been in the hard sciences where the data on citations, provided by the ISI Web of Science (WoS), is more reliable. In the social sciences, including business and management, many journals and books are not included within WoS and so the LM has not been tested here. In this research study the LM has been applied on a dataset of over 3000 research publications from three UK business schools. The results show that the LM does indeed discriminate between the schools, and has a degree of concordance with other forms of evaluation, but that there are significant limitations and problems within this discipline.     

Why do firms publish? A systematic literature review and a conceptual framework

In this paper, we address the question of ‘Why do firms publish scientific papers?’. Research examining the competitive advantages that firms accrue from investment in R&D has provided evidence that such efforts can be associated with the voluntary disclosure of research findings in scientific publications. This form of scientific openness occurs despite potentially undermining the value-capturing process by generating knowledge spillovers and hindering the use of other instruments for protecting intellectual property (patents and secrecy). Our understanding of what leads firms to engage in scientific publishing remains relatively limited, however. We address this gap by presenting a systematic review of 164 studies examining firm publishing. We then develop a conceptual framework that outlines five incentives for firms to engage in publishing: (i) accessing external knowledge and resources; (ii) attracting and retaining researchers; (iii) supporting IP strategies; (iv) building the firm's reputation; and (v) supporting commercialization strategies. Mechanisms that relate incentives to publish to firms' major stakeholders – i.e. academia, industry, investors, users, and institutions – are also outlined in the framework. We conclude by setting out an agenda for future research.     

A combined bibliometric indicator to predict article impact

In both the UK and Australia there has been a recent move to use citation analysis in the evaluation of the research of individuals. In particular, the future UK Research Excellence Framework (REF), proposes using citation data in the research evaluation of articles published as recently as the year prior to the evaluation. In response to this move, this research develops an indicator at the level of individual articles that, when normalized, can supplement peer review. The new hybrid indicator is the weighted sum of two indicators in common usage: the article’s total number of citations in a citation window, and the Impact Factor of the journal in which the article was published. This research compares this new indicator with the article’s total number of citations in a longer citation window (the standard indicator of article impact). For citation windows of 0 or 1 years, the correlation of the simplified weighted sum with long-term citation is substantially higher than the correlation of the standard indicator of article citation with long-term citation. Moreover, for citation windows of as long as 3 years the standard indicator of citation correlates significantly with the month of publication, in that articles published earlier in the year are on average more highly cited than those published later in the year. By contrast, the skewing of the simplified weighted sum towards articles published early in the year is considerably less than that of the standard indicator.     

New journal classification methods based on the global h-index

In this work we develop new journal classification methods based on the h-index. The introduction of the h-index for research evaluation has attracted much attention in the bibliometric study and research quality evaluation. The main purpose of using an h-index is to compare the index for different research units (e.g. researchers, journals, etc.) to differentiate their research performance. However the h-index is defined by only comparing citations counts of one’s own publications, it is doubtful that the h index alone should be used for reliable comparisons among different research units, like researchers or journals. In this paper we propose a new global h-index (Gh-index), where the publications in the core are selected in comparison with all the publications of the units to be evaluated. Furthermore, we introduce some variants of the Gh-index to address the issue of discrimination power. We show that together with the original h-index, they can be used to evaluate and classify academic journals with some distinct advantages, in particular that they can produce an automatic classification into a number of categories without arbitrary cut-off points. We then carry out an empirical study for classification of operations research and management science (OR/MS) journals using this index, and compare it with other well-known journal ranking results such as the Association of Business Schools (ABS) Journal Quality Guide and the Committee of Professors in OR (COPIOR) ranking lists.     

Above a swamp: A theory of high-quality scientific production

We elaborate a model of the incentives of scientists to perform activities of control and criticism when these activities, just like the production of novel findings, are costly, and we study the strategic interaction between these incentives. We then use the model to assess policies meant to enhance the reliability of scientific knowledge. We show that a certain fraction of low-quality science characterizes all the equilibria in the basic model. In fact, the absence of detected low-quality research can be interpreted as the lack of verification activities and thus as a potential limitation to the reliability of a field. Incentivizing incremental research and verification activities improves the expected quality of research; this effect, however, is contrasted by the incentives to free ride on performing verification if many scientists are involved, and may discourage scientists to undertake new research in the first place. Finally, softening incentives to publish does not enhance quality, although it increases the fraction of detected low-quality papers. We also advance empirical predictions and discuss the insights for firms and investors as they “scout” the scientific landscape.     

放松卖空管制与基于研发费用的盈余管理

本文以2008-2016年沪深A股上市公司为样本,采用双重差分模型及倾向得分匹配下的双重差分模型,考察了放松卖空管制对企业基于研发费用的盈余管理行为的影响。结果表明：放松卖空管制促使上市公司削减研发费用;其背后的原因在于卖空机制强化了管理者削减研发费用进行盈余管理的动机;这一现象在市场化程度高的地区更明显,但在管理者持有长期股权激励的公司中得到了有效抑制,且长期股权激励的治理效用在市场化程度高的地区依然存在。进一步研究排除了投资机会改变等替代性解释,证明放松卖空管制后管理者削减研发费用确实是盈余管理动机增强所致。本研究扩展了对卖空机制实施效果的理论认知,为公司外部环境和内部治理关系的研究提供了新视角。     

Monetary donations to an open source software platform

Online open source software platforms, such as Sourceforge.net, play a vital role in creating an ecosystem that enables the creation and growth of open source projects. However, there is little research exploring the interactions between open source stakeholders and the platform. We believe that the sustainability of the platform crucially depends on financial incentives. While platforms can obtain these incentives through multiple means, in this paper we focus on one form of financial incentives—voluntary monetary donations by open source community members. We report findings from two empirical studies that examine factors that impact donations. Study 1 investigates the factors that cause some community members to donate and not others. We find that the decision to donate is impacted by relational commitment with open source software platform, donation to projects and accepting donations from others. Study 2 examines what drives the level of donation. We find that the length of association with the platform and relational commitment affects donation levels.     

我国高等医学院校科研能力内部评估体系设计中应注意的重要问题

我国的高等医学院校定位为教学研究型大学,在科研设施、人才结构及研究内容方面与国际水平有一定差距,这些特点决定了在建立其科研能力内部评估体系时必须充分考虑其特殊性.文章详细解析了国内外广泛认可的英国高校科研评估系统内容,并结合我国实际情况,提出了高等医学院校在进行科研能力内部评估体系设计时应该重点注意的问题.我国高等医学院校科研能力内部评估体系的建立可以借鉴英国高校科研评估系统中的主要指标,但必须对其中的具体内容和权重进行修正才能制订出适应我国高等医学院校实际科研状况的评估体系;同时强调评估体系中要特别注意鼓励进行前沿性课题研究以及必须兼顾教学活动.     

Measuring the economic benefits from R&D: improvements in the MMI model of the United Kingdom National Measurement System

The benefits and priorities of public funding of R&D programmes are the subject of considerable research and debate and a number of methodologies have been suggested which might allow us to arbitrate on the issues involved. This paper looks at one method that is actually used in practice to evaluate and rank publicly funded R&D programmes in the UK. We describe the improvements that have been made to the mapping measurement impact (MMI) model, which is used by the UK Department of Trade and Industry to assess the economic benefit to industry of different research projects funded as part of the United Kingdom National Measurement System. The model has been in use for more than 5 years as a means to compare publicly funded R&D programmes. It allows evaluation of their benefit and prioritisation of future funding schemes and has potential for wider application in other areas of public R&D investment both inside and outside the UK.     

地方高校图书馆员学术参与研究 ——基于CNKI的文献计量分析

图书馆员群体参与学术研究是高校学科建设的要求和必然趋势,利用CNKI数字出版物超市2005-2009年4个地方高校图书馆学术研究成果的统计,反映出馆员参与学术和学科建设的不协调,分析图书馆员学术参与度低的影响原因:馆员素质参差不齐、学术激励机制缺失、学术任务缺少压力,应采取相应措施,提高图书馆员的整体学术素质、营造学术氛围、重构激励机制、加强参与管理,提升学术的广度和深度。     

Cheat or perish? A theory of scientific customs

Performance incentives have become increasingly important in academia. Evidence suggest that they increase not only researchers’ effort but also their cheating. We develop a principal–agent framework in which a research institution (principal) aims to reward scientific productivity considering the social benefit of research and the remuneration costs. Researchers (agents) take into account what others are doing. As a consequence, the introduction of performance incentives not only leads to fraudulent behavior in the short run, but may also deteriorate the scientific norm in the long run. In the face of these dynamics, the principal pursues two goals: to increase productivity (effort incentive policy) and to deal with fraud (anti-fraud policy). Several factors determine the optimal mix of policies: economic factors (researchers’ cost of providing high or low effort, the societal value of scientific knowledge and the societal costs of scientific misbehavior) and psychological factors (the evolution of norms over time). An important insight of our theory is that when research institutions seek to encourage the production of high quality research, they should also raise the salary for normal research to avoid misconduct.     

高校研究生科研贡献度实证研究*—以暨南大学人文社科类研究生为例

随着高校扩招,研究生的数量越来越多,他们不仅是受教育的客体,也是科研力量的生力军。研究生综合素质不仅仅指学生成绩的高低,更重要的是其科研能力的培养、协作能力的培养、解决问题能力的培养等方面。科学研究是研究生教育的核心和关键, 而目前国内对于研究研究生参与科研工作的学术研究成果较为缺乏,本研究重点关注的是人文社科类研究生对学校科研方面的贡献及价值体现,通过分析总体贡献度及各类具体指标,进而挖掘影响研究生科研贡献的背后因素,包括政策诱因、评价制度等。     

How does openness affect the importance of incentives for innovation?

When firms open up to external resources for innovation, do internal incentives still matter? This paper investigates the moderating effect of open innovation on the relationship between incentives and innovation using a survey database of British firms. Whilst both openness and incentives are positively associated with innovation efficiency, a substitution effect is found between openness and incentives. Whilst long-term incentives appear to enhance efficiency to a greater extent than short-term incentives, the substitution effect of openness is stronger regarding long-term incentives.     

University licensing and the flow of scientific knowledge

As university involvement in technology transfer and entrepreneurship has increased, concerns over the patenting and licensing of scientific discoveries have grown. This paper examines the effect that the licensing of academic patents has on journal citations to academic publications covering the same scientific research. We analyze data on invention disclosures, patents, and licenses from the University of California, a leading U.S. academic patenter and licensor, between 1997 and 2007. We also develop a novel “inventor-based” maximum-likelihood matching technique to automate and generalize Murray's (2002) “patent-paper pairs” methodology. We use this methodology to identify the scientific publications associated with University of California patents and licenses.Based on a “difference-in-differences” analysis, we find that within our sample of patented academic discoveries, citations to licensed patent-linked publications are higher in the three years after the license, although this difference is not statistically significant. We then disaggregate our sample into (a) patented discoveries that are likely to be used as “research tools” by other researchers (based on the presence of material transfer agreements (MTAs) that cover them) and (b) patented discoveries not covered by MTAs. Citations to publications linked to licensed patents in the latter subset (not covered by MTAs) are higher for publications linked to licensed patents, and this difference is statistically significant. In contrast, licensing of patented discoveries that are also research tools is associated with a reduction in citations to papers linked to these research advances, raising the possibility that licensing may restrict the flow of inputs to “follow-on” scientific research.