Title: New methods in bibliometric analyses
1New methods in bibliometric analyses
2In search of new bibliometric methods and
techniques
- Measuring impact of a scholarly discipline in the
periphery (Polish Sociology Citation Index) - Surname analysis a valid method in assessing
productivity and impact of groups of scientists
(women and ethnic minorities)? - Identifying funders of research
3What is bibliometrics?
- Bibliometrics as a method of inquiry into volume
and impact of scholarly activity - Publication output as a measure of scholarly
activity of a scholar - Volume count of publication outputs
- Impact citation counts (for individual papers
or impact factors for journals) - ISIs citation indices as an established source
of data - Other sources monographs, acknowledgements,
weblinks
4PSCI
- Background
- Policy implications for creation of PSCI
- Polish sociology as an example of social
scientific discipline in a periphery - Polish sociology as a mirror of social, economic
and political changes in the country
5PSCI, or why SSCI does not work for everyone
- National/local importance of social scientific
research - Nature of communication in social sciences
- American bias in sociology (casus of Max Weber)
- Structure and coverage of SSCI
6Main findings
- PSCI is a more sensitive tool allowing for more
in-depth analysis - Political and economic changes are reflected in
productivity of Polish sociologists - There is little international collaboration
(despite post-1989 changes - SSCI shows only the iceberg Polish sociology
(methodological papers and fashionable topics) - There are variations in impact of different
centres (Lodz strong in PSCI, Warsaw in SSCI) - In both indices, institutes of the Academy of
Sciences had higher impact than universities
(teaching informing research?)
7Surname analysis (1)
- Polish women in science winners amongst losers
- Employment at 40 level, productivity at 32 and
dropping - Favourite disciplines include clinical medicine
and biomedicine little research in physics,
engineering and maths - Preference for domestic journals
- Less international cooperation than men
- Better represented in basic than applied research
8Surname analysis (2)
- Ethnic minorities in UK science
- Publications by ethnic minority authors currently
constitute over 7 of all UK-only SCI outputs - In engineering and technology nearly 15 of all
papers were written by ethnic minority authors
(fractional count) - Also in physics, maths, clinical medicine and
chemistry ethnic minority outputs are greater
than expected (i.e. they surpass both population
and employment counts)
9Surname analysis (3)
- Ethnic minorities in UK science (cont.)
- Chinese and Indians are dominant groups (57 of
ethnic employment and nearly 70 of ethnic
outputs) - Chinese show the biggest share and growth across
disciplines and concentrate mainly in the areas
of engineering, mathematics and physics - Indians dominate in clinical research and
biomedicine - Black Africans are behind other groups (0.7 of
population, 0.6 of academics and 0.1 of outputs)
10Surname analysis (4)
- Ethnic minorities in UK science (cont.)
- Ethnic minority research is published in lower
impact journals than that of non-ethnic authors
they also produce less basic work - Indian authors produce high impact applied
research, while Chinese concentrate on basic
research - Black African research shows the lowest potential
impact
11Identification of funding sources the example
of UK biomedical research 1989-2000
- Nearly 400K bibliographic records were analysed
as a part of a bigger exercise mapping the
characteristics of UK biomedical research - Nearly 9,000 individual funders were identified
in acknowledgements - Bradford distribution
- Positive correlation between numbers of funders
per paper and its impact (up to 6 funders)
12Percentages of ROD papers acknowledging support
from five main sectors and with no funding
acknowledgement, 1989-2000
UK governments support is acknowledged in
decreasing numbers of papers, while UK PNPs,
foreign and international funders are increasing
their share dramatically (e.g. EC support grew
from around 1,000 papers in late 1980s to over
6,000 ten years later)
13 of funding acknowledgements in 32 subfields
by major funding sectors, 1989-2000