Revisiting country research profiles: Learning about the scientific cultures

Scientometrics

Volumn 93, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 517-531

  Schulz, Peter A ^a   Manganote, Edmilson J T ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CAMPINAS   (Brazil)

^b UNIANCHIETA Centro Universitário Padre Anchieta   (Brazil)

Author keywords

Activity index; Country research profile; Research patterns; Scientific cultures

Indexed keywords

EID: 84867985419     PISSN: 01389130     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11192-012-0696-7     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Adams, J., & King, C. (2009). Global research Report-Brazil-research and collaboration in the new geography of science. http://researchanalytics. thomsonreuters. com/m/pdfs/GRR-Brazil-Jun09. pdf.
2. Andersen, J. P., & Hammarfelt, B. (2011). Price revisited: On the growth of dissertations in eight research fields. Scientometrics, 88(2), 371-383. doi: 10. 1007/s11192-011-0408-8.
3. Archambault, E., Campbell, D., Gingras, Y., & Larivière, V. (2009). Comparing bibliometric statistics obtained from the web of science and scopus. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60(7), 1320-1326.
4. Bornmann, L., & Daniel, H. D. (2008). What do citation counts measure? A review of studies on citing behavior. Journal of Documentation, 64, 45-80.
5. Frame, J. D. (1977). Mainstream research in Latin American and the Caribbean. Intersciencia, 2, 143-148.
6. Garfield, E. (1979). Is citation analysis a legitimate evaluation tool? Scientometrics, 1(4), 359-375.
7. Glänzel, W., & Gupta, B. M. (2008). Science in India. A bibliometric study of national research performance in 1991-2006. ISSI Newsletter, 4(3), 42-48.
8. Glänzel, W., Leta, J., & Thus, B. (2006). Science in Brazil. Part 1: A macro-level comparative study. Scientometrics, 67, 67-86.
9. Glänzel, W., Debackere, K., & Meyer, M. (2008). 'Triad' or 'tetrad'? On global changes in a dynamic world. Scientometrics, 74(1), 71-88.
10. Godin, B. (2006). On the origin of Bibliometrics. Scientometrics, 68(1), 109-133.
11. Hammarfelt, B. (2010). Interdisciplinary and the intellectual base of literature studies: citation analysis of highly cited monographs. Scientometrics, 86, 705-725.
12. Jeffery, K. G. (2000). Architecture for grey literature in a R& D context. International Journal on Grey Literature, 1(2), 64-72.
13. Kostoff, R. N. (1998). The use and misuse of citation analysis in research evaluation. Scientometrics, 43(1), 27-43.
14. Leydesdorff, L. (2005). Evaluation of research and evolution of science indicators. Current Science, 89, 1510-1517.
15. Leydesdorff, L. (2010). A knowledge-based economy and the triple-helix model. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 44, 367-417.
16. McAllister, P. R., Narin, F., & Corrigan, J. G. (1983). Programmatic evaluation and comparison based on standardized citation scores. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 30(4), 205-211.
17. Meneghini, R., Mugnaini, R., & Packer, A. L. (2006). International versus National Oriented Brazilian Scientific Journals: A scientometric analysis based on SciELO and JCR-ISI databases. Scientometrics, 69(3), 529-538.
18. Moed, H. F. (2010). Measuring contextual citation impact of scientific journals. Journal of Informetrics, 4(3), 265-277. doi: 10. 1016/j. joi. 2010. 01. 002.
19. Nederhof, A. J. (2006). Bibliometric monitoring of research performance in the social sciences and the humanities: A review. Scientometrics, 66, 81-100.
20. Neely, A. (2005). The evolution of performance measurement research: Developments in the last decade and a research agenda for the next. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 25(12), 1264-1277.
21. Price, D. D. S. (1963). Little Science, Big Science. New York: Columbia University Press.
22. Pudovkin, A. I., & Garfield, E. (2002). Algorithmic procedure for finding semantically related journals. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 53(13), 1113-1119.
23. Rafols, I., & Leydesdorff, L. (2009). Content-based and algorithmic classifications of journals: Perspectives on the dynamics of scientific communication and indexer effects. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60(9), 1823-1835.
24. Roessner, D. (2000). Quantitative and qualitative methods and measures in the evaluation of research. Research Evaluation, 8(2), 125-132.
25. Sancho, R. (1992). Misjudgments and shortcomings in the measurement of scientific activities in less developed countries. Scientometrics, 23(1), 221-233.
26. Sciencewatch A. http://sciencewatch. com/about/met/fielddef/.
27. Sciencewatch B. http://ip-science. thomsonreuters. com/mjl/.
28. Seind10. (2010). Science and engineering indicators, published by the National Science Board. http://www. nsf. gov/statistics/seind10/.
29. TERSTI. (2003) Third european report on science and technology indicators. ftp://ftp. cordis. europa. eu/pub/indicators/docs/3rd_report. pdf.
30. Testa, J. (2011). The globalization of Web of Science 2005-2010. http://wokinfo. com/media/pdf/globalwos-essay. pdf.
31. van Aken, J. E. (2005). Management research as a design science: Articulating the research products of mode 2 knowledge production in management. British Journal of Management, 16, 19-36.
32. van Raan A. F. J. (2004). Measuring science. Capita selecta of current main issues. In: H. F. Moed, W. Glänzel & U. Schmoch (Eds.), Handbook of quantitative science and technology research. The use of publication and patent statistics in studies of S& T systems (pp. 19-50). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
33. van Raan, T., van Leeuwen, T., & Visser, M. (2011). Non-English papers decrease rankings. Nature, 469, 34.
34. Vinkler, P. (1999). Ratio of short term and long term impact factors and similarities of chemistry journals represented by references. Scientometrics, 46(3), 621-633.
35. Vinkler, P. (2008). Correlation between the structure of scientific research, scientometric indicators and GDP in EU and non-EU countries. Scientometrics, 74(2), 237-254.
36. Yuan, S., & Masamitsu, N. (2010). Measuring the relationships among university, industry and other sectors in Japan's national innovation system: a comparison of new approaches with mutual information indicators. Scientometrics, 82(3), 677-685.