The Brazilian scientific output published in journals: A study based on a large CV database

Journal of Informetrics

Volumn 11, Issue 1, 2017, Pages 18-31

  Perlin, Marcelo S ^a   Santos, André A P ^c   Imasato, Takeyoshi ^a   Borenstein, Denis ^a,b   Da Silva, Sergio ^c  

^a FEDERAL UNIVERSITY OF RIO GRANDE DO SUL   (Brazil)

^b UNIVERSIDAD DE CUENCA   (Ecuador)

^c FEDERAL UNIVERSITY OF SANTA CATARINA   (Brazil)

Author keywords

Brazilian researchers; Lattes platform; Scholarly publishing; Scientific productivity

Indexed keywords

PRODUCTIVITY;

BRAZILIAN RESEARCHERS; KEY VARIABLES; LATTES PLATFORM; RESEARCH IMPACTS; SCHOLARLY PUBLISHING; SCIENTIFIC OUTPUT; U-SHAPED;

PUBLISHING;

EID: 84994841029     PISSN: 17511577     EISSN: 18755879     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.joi.2016.10.008     Document Type: Article

References (52)

1. Abramo, G., Cicero, T., Dangelo, C.A., Should the research performance of scientists be distinguished by gender?. Journal of Informetrics 9:1 (2015), 25–38.
2. Almeida, E.C., Guimarães, J.A., Brazil's growing production of scientific articles: How are we doing with review articles and other qualitative indicators?. Scientometrics 97:2 (2013), 287–315.
3. Analytics, R., Weston, S., doParallel: For each parallel adaptor for the parallel package. 2014 URL http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=doParallel, r package version 1.0.8.
4. Barrios, M., Villarroya, A., Borrego, A., Scientific production in psychology: A gender analysis. Scientometrics 95:1 (2013), 15–23.
5. Beets, S.D., Lewis, B.R., Browe, H.H., The quality of business ethics journals: An assessment based on application. Business & Society 55:2 (2016), 188–213.
6. Bin, A., Salles-Filho, S., Capanema, L.M., Colugnati, F.A.B., What difference does it make? Impact of peer-reviewed scholarships on scientific production. Scientometrics 102:2 (2015), 1167–1188.
7. Bollen, J., Van de Sompel, H., Hagberg, A., Chute, R., A principal component analysis of 39 scientific impact measures. PLoS One, 4(6), 2009, e6022.
8. Bonaccorsi, A., Daraio, C., Age effects in scientific productivity. Scientometrics 58:1 (2003), 49–90.
9. Bordons, M., Fernández, M.T., Gómez, I., Advantages and limitations in the use of impact factor measures for the assessment of research performance. Scientometrics 53:2 (2002), 195–206.
10. Bourke, P., Butler, L., Publication types, citation rates and evaluation. Scientometrics 37:3 (1996), 437–494.
11. Charyton, C., Elliott, J.O., Rahman, M.A., Woodard, J.L., DeDios, S., Gender and science: Women nobel laureates. The Journal of Creative Behavior 45:3 (2011), 203–214.
12. Chung, H.K., Cox, R.A.K., Patterns of productivity in the finance literature: A study of the bibliometric distributions. Journal of Finance 45:1 (1990), 301–309.
13. Coile, R.C., Lotka's frequency distribution of scientific productivity. Journal of the American Society for Information Science 28:6 (1977), 366–370.
14. Da Silva, S., Going parochial in the assessment of the Brazilian economics research output. Economics Bulletin 29:4 (2009), 2826–2846.
15. Dahl, D.B., xtable: Export tables to LaTeX or HTML. 2014 URL http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=xtable, r package version 1. 7–4.
16. Diniz-Filho, J.A., Fioravanti, M.C.S., Bini, L.M., Rangel, T.F., Drivers of academic performance in a Brazilian university under a government-restructuring program. Journal of Informetrics 10:1 (2016), 151–161.
17. Dowle, M., Srinivasan, A., Short, with contributions from R Saporta SL, T., Antonyan, E., Data.table: Extension of data.frame. 2015 URL http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=data.table, r package version 1.9.6.
18. Dundar, H., Lewis, D.R., Determinants of research productivity in higher education. Research in Higher Education 39:6 (1998), 607–631.
19. Falagas, M.E., Kouranos, V.D., Arencibia-Jorge, R., Karageorgopoulos, D.E., Comparison of SCImago journal rank indicator with journal impact factor. FASEB Journal 22:8 (2008), 2623–2628.
20. Frey, B.S., Rost, K., Do rankings reflect research quality?. Journal of Applied Economics 13:1 (2010), 1–38.
21. Genova, G., Astudillo, H., Fraga, A., The scientometric bubble considered harmful. Science and Engineering Ethics 22:1 (2016), 227–235.
22. Gonzalez-Pereira, B., Guerrero-Bote, V., Moya-Anegon, F., A new approach to the metric of journals scientific prestige: The SJR indicator. Journal of Informetrics 4:3 (2010), 379–391.
23. Guimarães, B., Qualis as a measuring stick for research output in economics. Brazilian Review of Econometrics 31:1 (2012), 3–18.
24. Hall, C.M., Publish and perish? Bibliometric analysis, journal ranking and the assessment of research quality in tourism. Tourism Management 32:1 (2011), 16–27.
25. Huang, D.W., Positive correlation between quality and quantity in academic journals. Journal of Informetrics 10:2 (2016), 329–335.
26. Isfandyari-Moghaddam, A., Hasanzadeh, M., Ghayoori, Z., A study of factors affecting research productivity of Iranian women in ISI. Scientometrics 91:1 (2012), 159–172.
27. Kyvik, S., Changing trends in publishing behaviour among university faculty, 1980–2000. Scientometrics 58:1 (2003), 35–48.
28. Lane, J., Let's make science metrics more scientific. Nature 464:7288 (2010), 488–489.
29. Larivire, V., Vignola-Gagn, E., Villeneuve, C., Glinas, P., Gingras, Y., Sex differences in research funding, productivity and impact: An analysis of Quebec university professors. Scientometrics 87:3 (2011), 483–498.
30. Laurance, W.F., Useche, D.C., Laurance, S.G., Bradshaw, C.J., Predicting publication success for biologists. Bioscience 63:10 (2013), 817–823.
31. Leifeld, P., texreg: Conversion of statistical model output in R to LATEX and HTML tables. Journal of Statistical Software 55:8 (2013), 1–24.
32. Leite, P., Mugnaini, R., Leta, J., A new indicator for international visibility: Exploring Brazilian scientific community. Scientometrics 88:1 (2011), 311–319.
33. Leta, J., Lewison, G., The contribution of women in Brazilian science: A case study in astronomy, immunology and oceanography. Scientometrics 57:3 (2003), 339–353.
34. Lotka, A.J., The frequency distribution of scientific productivity. Journal of the Washington Academy of Sciences 16:12 (1926), 317–324.
35. Moed, H.F., Citation analysis in research evaluation. 2005, Springer, Dordrecht.
36. Morganson, V.J., Jones, M.P., Major, D.A., Understanding women's underrepresentation in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics: The role of social coping. The Career Development Quarterly 59:2 (2010), 169–179.
37. Nelder, J.A., Baker, R.J., Generalized linear models. Encyclopedia of Statistical Sciences, 1972.
38. Piro, F., Aksnes, D.W., Rørstad, K., A macro analysis of productivity differences across fields: Challenges in the measurement of scientific publishing. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 64:2 (2013), 307–320.
39. Prpi, K., Gender and productivity differentials in science. Scientometrics 55:1 (2002), 27–58.
40. Puuska, H.M., Effects of scholars gender and professional position on publishing productivity in different publication types: Analysis of a Finnish university. Scientometrics 82:2 (2009), 419–437.
41. R Core Team, R: A language and environment for statistical computing. 2015, R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria URL https://www.R-project.org/.
42. Roos, D.H., Calabró, L., De Jesus, S.L., Souza, D.O., Barbosa, N.V., Da Rocha, J.B.T., Brazilian scientific production in areas of biological sciences: A comparative study on the modalities of full doctorate in Brazil or abroad. Scientometrics 98:1 (2014), 415–427.
43. Rorstad, K., Aksnes, D.W., Publication rate expressed by age, gender and academic position: A large-scale analysis of Norwegian academic staff. Journal of Informetrics 9:2 (2015), 317–333.
44. Ruiz-Castillo, J., Costas, R., The skewness of scientific productivity. Journal of Informetrics 8:4 (2014), 917–934.
45. Seglen, P.O., Aksnes, D.W., Scientific productivity and group size: A bibliometric analysis of Norwegian microbiological research. Scientometrics 49:1 (2000), 125–143.
46. Seglen, P.O., Why the impact factor of journals should not be used for evaluating research. British Medical Journal 314:7079 (1997), 498–502.
47. Shin, J.C., Cummings, W.K., Multilevel analysis of academic publishing across disciplines: Research preference, collaboration, and time on research. Scientometrics 85:2 (2010), 581–594.
48. Tuesta, E.F., Delgado, K.V., Mugnaini, R., Digiampietri, L.A., Mena-Chalco, J.P., Pérez-Alcázar, J.J., Analysis of an advisor-advisee relationship: An exploratory study of the area of exact and earth sciences in Brazil. PUBLIC LIBRARY OF SCIENCE, 10(5), 2015, e0129065.
49. van Arensbergen, P., van der Weijden, I., van den Besselaar, P., Gender differences in scientific productivity: A persisting phenomenon?. Scientometrics 93:3 (2012), 857–868.
50. Wickham, H., Francois, R., dplyr: A grammar of data manipulation. 2015 URL http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=dplyr, r package version 0.4.3.
51. Wickham, H., ggplot2: Elegant graphics for data analysis. 2009, Springer, New York URL http://had.co.nz/ggplot2/book.
52. Wickham, H., James, D.A., Falcon, S., RSQLite: SQLite interface for r. 2014 URL http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=RSQLite, r package version 1.0.0.