Research portfolio analysis and topic prominence

Journal of Informetrics

Volumn 11, Issue 4, 2017, Pages 1158-1174

  Klavans, Richard ^a   Boyack, Kevin W ^a  

^a SciTech Strategies Inc   (United States)

Author keywords

Direct citation; Project level grant data; Prominence; Research portfolio analysis; Research topics

Indexed keywords

TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER;

DIRECT CITATION; PORTFOLIO ANALYSIS; PROJECT LEVELS; PROMINENCE; RESEARCH TOPICS;

FINANCE;

EID: 85032296773     PISSN: 17511577     EISSN: 18755879     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.joi.2017.10.002     Document Type: Article

References (53)

1. Börner, K., Klavans, R., Patek, M., Zoss, A.M., Biberstine, J.R., Light, R.P., et al. Design and update of a classification system: the UCSD map of science. PLoS ONE, 7(7), 2012, e39464.
2. Boyack, K.W., Klavans, R., Co-citation analysis, bibliographic coupling, and direct citation: Which citation approach represents the research front most accurately?. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 61:12 (2010), 2389–2404.
3. Boyack, K.W., Klavans, R., Creation of a highly detailed, dynamic, global model and map of science. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 65:4 (2014), 670–685.
4. Boyack, K.W., Klavans, R., Including non-source items in a large-scale map of science: What difference does it make?. Journal of Informetrics 8 (2014), 569–580.
5. Boyack, K.W., Newman, D., Duhon, R.J., Klavans, R., Patek, M., Biberstine, J.R., et al. Clustering more than two million biomedical publications: Comparing the accuracies of nine text-based similarity approaches. PLoS ONE, 6(3), 2011, e18029.
6. Boyack, K.W., Klavans, R., Small, H., Ungar, L., Characterizing the emergence of two nanotechnology topics using a contemporaneous global micro-model of science. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management 32 (2014), 147–159.
7. Boyack, K.W., Investigating the effect of global data on topic detection. Scientometrics 111 (2017), 999–1015.
8. Chen, C., Ibekwe-SanJuan, F., Hou, J., The structure and dynamics of cocitation clusters: A multiple-perspective cocitation analysis. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 61:7 (2010), 1386–1409.
9. Clarivate, Research fronts 2016. 2016.
10. Crane, D., Invisible colleges. Diffusion of knowledge in scientific communities. 1972, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
11. Dalrymple, D.G., Setting the agenda for science and technology in the public sector: The case of international agricultural research. Science and Public Policy 33:4 (2006), 277–290.
12. Emmons, S., Kobourov, S., Gallant, M., Börner, K., Analysis of network clustering algorithms and cluster quality metrics at scale. PLoS ONE, 11(7), 2016, e0159161.
13. Evans, J.A., Shim, J.-M., Ioannidis, J.P.A., Attention to local health burden and the global disparity of health research. PLoS ONE, 9(4), 2014, e90147.
14. Fisher, R.L., The research productivity of scientists: How gender, organizational culture, and the problem choice process influence the productivity of scientists. 2005, University Press of America, Lanham.
15. Foster, J.G., Rzhetsky, A., Evans, J.A., Tradition and innovation in scientists' research strategies. American Sociological Review 80:5 (2015), 875–908.
16. Glänzel, W., Heeffer, S., Cross-national preferences and similarities in downloads and citations of scientific articles: a pilot study. Science and technology indicators conference 2014, Leiden, 2014, 207–215.
17. Gläser, J., Glänzel, W., Scharnhorst, A., Same data – different results? Towards a comparative approach to the identification of thematic structures in science. Scientometrics 111 (2017), 981–998.
18. Grandjean, P., Eriksen, M.L., Ellegaard, O., Wallin, J.A., The Matthew effect in environmental science publication: A bibliometric analysis of chemical substances in journal articles. Environmental Health, 11, 2011, 96.
19. Herbert, D.L., Barnett, A.G., Clarke, P., Graves, N., On the time spent preparing grant proposals: An observational study of Australian researchers. BMJ Open, 3, 2013, e002800.
20. Hicks, D., Wouters, P., Waltman, L., de Rijcke, S., Rafols, I., Bibliometrics: The Leiden Manifesto for research metrics. Nature 520 (2015), 429–431.
21. Hicks, D., The four literatures of the social science. Moed, H.F., Glänzel, W., Schmoch, U., (eds.) Handbook of quantitative science and technology research: The use of publication and patent statistics in studies of S&T systems, 2004, Springer, Dordrecht, 473–495.
22. Klavans, R., Boyack, K.W., Thought leadership: A new indicator for national and institutional comparison. Scientometrics 75:2 (2008), 239–250.
23. Klavans, R., Boyack, K.W., Toward a consensus map of science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 60:3 (2009), 455–476.
24. Klavans, R., Boyack, K.W., Using global mapping to create more accurate document-level maps of research fields. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 62:1 (2011), 1–18.
25. Klavans, R., Boyack, K.W., The research focus of nations: Economic vs. altruistic motivations. PLoS ONE, 12, 2017, e169383.
26. Klavans, R., Boyack, K.W., Which type of citation analysis generates the most accurate taxonomy of scientific and technical knowledge?. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 68:4 (2017), 984–998.
27. Kuhn, T.S., The structure of scientific revolutions. 2nd ed., 1970, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
28. Kurtz, M.J., Bollen, J., Usage bibliometrics. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology 44 (2010), 3–64.
29. Larivière, V., Gingras, Y., Sugimoto, C.R., Tsou, A., Team size matters: Collaboration and scientific impact. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 66:7 (2015), 1323–1332.
30. Lewis, M.L., Moneyball: The art of winning an unfair game. 2003, W. W Norton & Company.
31. Martin, S., Brown, W.M., Klavans, R., Boyack, K.W., OpenOrd: An open-source toolbox for large graph layout. Proceedings of SPIE – The International Society for Optical Engineering, 7868, 2011, 786806.
32. Moed, H., Citation analysis in research evaluation. 2005, Springer, Dordrecht.
33. Moed, H.F., Halevi, G., On full text download and citation distributions in scientific-scholarly journals. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 67:2 (2016), 412–431.
34. Mullins, N.C., Theories and theory groups in contemporary American sociology. 1973, Harper & Row, New York.
35. National Science Board, Science and Engineering Indicators 2016. 2016, National Science Foundation (NSB 2016-1), Arlington, VA.
36. Price, D.J.D., Gürsey, S., Studies in scientometrics I: Transience and continuance in scientific authorship. Ci. Inf. Rio de Janeiro 4:1 (1975), 27–40.
37. Price, D.J.D., Little science, big science. 1963, Columbia University Press, New York.
38. Rafols, I., Ciarli, T., Chavarro, D., Under-reporting research relevant to local needs in the global south. Database biases in the representation of knowledge on rice. 15th international conference of the international society on scientometrics and informetrics, Istanbul, Turkey, 2015.
39. Ruiz-Castillo, J., Waltman, L., Field-normalized citation impact indicators using algorithmically constructed classification systems of science. Journal of Informetrics 9 (2015), 102–117.
40. Sarewitz, D., Pielke, R.A. Jr., The neglected heart of science policy: Reconciling supply of and demand for science. Environmental Science & Policy 10 (2007), 5–16.
41. Schulz, C., Mazloumian, A., Petersen, A.M., Penner, O., Helbing, D., Exploiting citation networks for large-scale author name disambiguation. EPJ Data Science, 1, 2014, 11.
42. Small, H., Boyack, K.W., Klavans, R., Identifying emerging topics in science and technology. Research Policy 43 (2014), 1450–1467.
43. Small, H., Structural dynamics of scientific literature. International Classification 3:2 (1976), 67–74.
44. Small, H., Critical threshold for co-citation clusters and emergence of the giant component. Journal of Informetrics 3 (2009), 332–340.
45. Sparck Jones, K., Walker, S., Robertson, S.E., A probabilistic model of information retrieval: development and comparative experiments. Part 1. Information Processing & Management 36:6 (2000), 779–808.
46. Von Hippel, T., Von Hippel, C., To apply or not to apply: A survey analysis of grant writing costs and benefits. PLoS ONE, 10(3), 2015, e0118494.
47. Wallace, M.L., Rafols, I., Research portfolio analysis in science policy: Moving from financial returns to societal benefits. Minerva, 53(89–115), 2015.
48. Waltman, L., van Eck, N.J., A new methodology for constructing a publication-level classification system of science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 63:12 (2012), 2378–2392.
49. Waltman, L., van Eck, N.J., A smart local moving algorithm for large-scale modularity-based community detection. European Physical Journal B, 86, 2013, 471.
50. Waltman, L., Boyack, K.W., Colavizza, G., Van Eck, N.J., A principled approach for comparing relatedness measures for clustering publications. 16th international conference of the international society on scientometrics and informetrics, Wuhan, China, 2017.
51. Waltman, L., A review of the literature on citation impact indicators. Journal of Informetrics 10 (2016), 365–391.
52. Wang, J., Shapira, P., Is there a relationship between research sponsorship and publication impact? An analysis if funding acknowledgments in nanotechnology papers. PLoS ONE, 10(2), 2015, e0117727.
53. Zuckerman, H., Theory choice and problem choice in science. Sociological Inquiry 48:3–4 (1978), 65–95.