Research productivity in the internet era

Scientometrics

Volumn 68, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 343-360

  Barjak, Franz ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF APPLIED SCIENCES AND ARTS NORTHWESTERN SWITZERLAND   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33746450775     PISSN: 01389130     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11192-006-0116-y     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (56)

1. ANDREWS, F. M. (1979), The international study: its data sources and measurement procedures. In: F. M. ANDREWS (Ed.), Scientific Productivity. The Effectiveness of Research Groups in Six Countries, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 17-52.
2. BAIRD, L. L. (1986), What characterizes a productive research department? Research in Higher Education, 25:211-225.
3. BLACKBURN, R. T., BEHYMER, C. E., HALL, D. E. (1978), Research note: Correlates of faculty publications. Sociology of Education, 51 : 132-141.
4. BLACKBURN, R., BIEBER, J. P., LAWRENCE, L. H., TRAUTVETTER, L. (1991), Faculty at work: focus on research, scholarship and service. Research in Higher Education, 32 : 385-413.
5. BLAND, C. J., RUFFIN, M. T. (1992), Characteristics of a productive research environment: literature review. Academic Medicine, 67 : 385-397.
6. BORDONS, M., MORILLO, F., FERNANDEZ, M. T., GOMEZ, I. (2003), One step further in the production of bibliometrics indicator at the micro level: Differences by gender and professional category of scientists. Scientometrics, 57 : 159-173.
7. BORDONS, M., GOMEZ, I., FERNANDEZ, M. T., ZULUETA, M. A., MENDEZ, A. (1996), Local, domestic and international scientific collaboration in biomedical research. Scientometrics, 37 : 279-295.
8. BRAUN, T., GLÄNZEL, W., SCHUBERT, A. (2001), Publication and cooperation patterns of the authors of neuroscience journals. Scientometrics, 51 : 499-510.
9. CAMERON, A. C., TRIVEDI, P. K. (1998), Regression Analysis of Count Data. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
10. CARAYOL, N., MATT, M. (2004), Does research organization influence academic production? Laboratory level evidence from a large European university. Research Policy, 33 : 1081-1102.
11. CARLEY, K., WENDT, K. (1991), Electronic mail and scientific communication. A study of the SOAR extended research group. Knowledge: Creation, Diffusion, Utilization, 12 : 406-440.
12. CLARK, B. R. (1995), Places of Inquiry: Research and Advanced Education in Modern Universities. Berkeley: University of California Press.
13. COHEN, J. (1996), Computer mediated communication and publication productivity among faculty. Internet Research: Electronic Networking Applications and Policy, 6 (2/3) : 41-63.
14. COLE, J. R., ZUCKERMAN, H. (1984), The productivity puzzle: persistence and change in patterns of publication of men and women scientists. In: P. MAEHR, M. W. STEINKAMP (Eds), Advances in Motivation and Achievement, Vol. 2, Greenwich: JAI Press, pp. 217-258.
15. EUROPEAN COMMISSION (2003), Third European Report on Science & Technology Indicators 2003 - Towards a knowledge-based economy. Brussels: European Commission.
16. ETZKOWITZ, H., KEMELGOR, C., NEUSCHATZ, M., UZZI, B. (1992), Athena unbound: Barriers to women in academic science and engineering. Science and Public Policy, 19 : 157-179.
17. FINHOLT, T. A. (2002), Collaboratories. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 36 : 74-107.
18. FINHOLT, T. A., OLSON, G. M. (1997), From laboratories to collaboratories: A new organizational form for scientific collaboration. Psychological Science, 8 : 28-36.
19. FOX, M. F. (1983), Publication productivity among scientists: a critical review. Social Studies of Science, 13 : 283-305.
20. FOX, M. F. (1992), Research, teaching and publication productivity: mutuality versus competition in academia. Sociology of Education, 65 : 293-305.
21. FRY, J. (2004): The cultural shaping of ICTs within academic fields: Corpus-based linguistics as a case study. Literary and Linguistic Computing, 19 : 303-319.
22. GLÄNZEL, W. (2002), Co-authorship patterns and trends in the sciences (1980-1998). A bibliometric study with implications for database indexing and search strategies. Library Trends, 50 : 461-473.
23. GLÄSER, J. (2003), What internet use does and does not change in scientific communities. Science Studies, 16 : 38-51.
24. th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
25. HAGSTROM, W. O. (1965), The Scientific Community. New York: Basic books.
26. HEMLIN, S., GUSTAFSSON, M. (1996), Research production in the arts and humanities - A questionnaire study of factors influencing research performance. Scientometrics, 37 : 417-432.
27. HEMPTINNE, Y. DE, ANDREWS, F. M. (1979), The international comparative study on the organization and performance of research units: an overview. In: F. M. ANDREWS (Ed.), Scientific Productivity. The Effectiveness of Research Groups in Six Countries. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 3-15.
28. HESSE, B. W., SPROULL, L. S., KIESLER, S. B., WALSH, J. P. (1993), Returns to science: Computer networks in oceanography. Communications of the ACM, 36 (8) : 90-101.
29. HILGARTNER, S. (1995), Biomolecular database - new communication regimes for biology? Science Communication, 17 : 240-263.
30. HOLLINGSWORTH, R., HOLLINGSWORTH, E. J. (2000), Major Discoveries and Biomedical Research Organizations: Perspectives on Interdisciplinarity, Nurturing Leadership, and Integrated Structure and Cultures. Retrieved March 08, 2005 from http://www.umu.se/inforsk/universitets ligan/hollingsworth.html
31. JOHNSTON, R. (1994), Effects of resource concentration on research performance. Higher Education, 28 : 25-37.
32. KAMINER, N., BRAUNSTEIN, Y. M. (1998), Bibliometric analysis of the impact of Internet use on scholarly productivity. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 49 : 720-730.
33. KATZ, J. S., MARTIN, B. R. (1997), What is research collaboration? Research Policy, 26 : 1-18.
34. KIRCZ, J. G. (1998), Changing Presentations! Changing Science? Paper presented at the Colloquium "L'écrit de la science/Writing Science" organised by the journal "Alliage" for The European Science & Technology Forum of the European Commission (DG XII), Nice 12-14 March 1998. Retrieved October 12, 2003 from http://www.science.uva.nl/projects/ commphys/papers/nicem.htm
35. KLING, R., CALLAHAN, E. (2001), Electronic journals, the Internet, and scholarly communication. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 37 : 127-177.
36. KLING, R., MCKIM, G. (2000), Not just a matter of time: Field differences and the shaping of electronic media in supporting scientific communication. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 51 : 1306-1320.
37. KNORR, K. D., MITTERMEIR, R., AICHHOLZER, G., WALLER, G. (1979), Individual publication productivity as a social position effect in academic and industrial research units. In: F. M. ANDREWS (Ed.), Scientific productivity. The effectiveness of research groups in six countries. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 55-94.
38. LATOUR, B., WOOLGAR, S. (1979), Laboratory Life. The Social Construction of Scientific Facts. Beverly Hills, CA, and London: Sage Publications.
39. LEVIN S. G., STEPHAN P. E. (1991), Research productivity over the life cycle: Evidence for academic scientists. American Economic Review, 81 : 114-132.
40. LONG, J. S. (1978), Productivity and academic position in the scientific career. American Sociological Review, 43 : 889-908.
41. NENTWICH, M. (2003), Cyberscience - Research in the Age of the Internet. Vienna: Austrian Academy of Sciences Press.
42. NOAM, E. M. (1995), Electronics and the dim future of the University. Science, 270 : 247-249.
43. PELZ, D. C., ANDREWS, F. M. (1966), Scientists in Organizations. Productive Climates for Research and Development. New York: John Wiley.
44. PRPIC, K. (1996), Scientific fields and eminent scientists' productivity patterns and factors. Scientometrics, 37:445-471.
45. PRPIC, K. (2002), Gender and productivity differentials in science. Scientometrics, 55 : 27-58.
46. RAMESH BABU, A., SINGH, Y. P. (1998), Determinants of research productivity. Scientometrics, 43 : 309-329.
47. RAMSDEN, P. (1994), Describing and explaining research productivity. Higher Education, 28 : 207-226.
48. SHAUMAN, K., Y. XIE, (2003), Explaining sex differences in publication productivity among postsecondary faculty. In: L. S. HORNIG (Ed.), Equal Rights, Unequal Outcomes: Women in American Research Universities. New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers, pp. 175-208.
49. STEINMUELLER, W. E. (2000), Will information and communciation technology improve the 'codification' of knowledge? Industrial and Corporate Change, 9 : 361-376.
50. VAN ALSTYNE, M., BRYNJOLFSSON, E. (1996), Could the Internet Balkanize science? Science, 274 (5292) : 1479-1480.
51. VAN LEEUWEN, T. N., MOED, H. F., TIJSSEN, R. J. W., VISSER, M. S., VAN RAAN, A. F. J. (2001), Language biases in the coverage of the Science Citation Index and its consequences for international comparisons of national research performance. Scientometrics, 51 : 335-346.
52. VISART, N. (1979), Communication between and within research units. In: F. M. ANDREWS (Ed.), Scientific productivity. The effectiveness of research groups in six countries. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 223-252.
53. VON TUNZELMANN, N., RANGA, M., MARTIN, B., GEUNA, A. (2003), The Effects of Size on Research Performance: A SPRU Review. Retrieved November 22, 2004, from University of Sussex, Science Policy Research Unit Web site: http://www.sussex.ac.uk/spru/documents/geunaost.pdf
54. WALSH, J. P., KUCKER, S., MALONEY, N., GABBAY, S. (2000), Connecting minds: CMC and scientific work. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 51 : 1295-1305.
55. WALSH, J. P., ROSELLE, A. (1999), Computer Networks and the Virtual College. Global Research Village (Special Issue), STI Review, 24 : 49-77.
56. WRAY, K. B. (2003), Is science really a young man's game? Social Studies of Science, 33 : 137-149.