Search

This study asks the question on which national "shoulders" the world's top-level research stands. Traditionally, the number of citations to national papers has been the evaluative measures of national scientific standings. We raise a different question: instead of analyzing the citations to a countries' articles (the forward view), we examine references to prior publications from specific countries cited in the most elite publications (the backward-citing-view). "Elite publications" are operationalized as the top-1% most-highly cited articles. Using the articles published from 2004 to 2013, we examine the research referenced in these works. Our results confirm the well-known fact that China has emerged to become a major player in science. However, China still belongs to the low contributors when countries are ranked as contributors to the cited references in top-1% articles. Using this perspective, the results do not support a decreasing trend for the USA; in fact, the USA exceeds expectations (compared to its publication share) in terms of references in the top-1% articles. Switzerland, Sweden, and the Netherlands also appear at the top of the list. However, the results for Germany are lower than statistically expected.

Understanding how economies change through interactions with science and government as different spheres of activity requires both new conceptual tools and methodologies. In this paper, the evolution of the metaphor of a Triple Helix of university-industry-government relations is elaborated into an evolutionary model, and positioned within the context of global economic changes. We highlight how Triple Helix relations are both continuing and mutating, and the conditions under which a Triple Helix might be seen to be unraveling in the face of pressures on each of the three helices – university, industry, and government. The reciprocal dynamics of innovation both in the Triple Helix thesis and in the global economy are empirically explored: we find that footlooseness of high technology manufacturing and knowledge-intensive services counteract the embeddedness prevailing in medium technology manufacturing. The geographical level at which synergy in Triple Helix relations can be expected and sustained varies among nations and regions.

In order to improve the citation impact of Chinese journals, relevant Chinese government agencies have launched a program entitled Citation Impact Upgrading Plan (CIUP) with financial support. Only a few journals that perform better have been screened out for CIUP support. This study tries to figure out if the screening results reflect the bibliometric status of the journals. We compare journals being supported by CIUP with unsupported ones. Journals supported by the CIUP have made progress in raising their journal impact factor (JIF) values and perform better in terms of JIF values. Journals citing CIUP journals have a spectrum of higher JIF values. Journals in a cited network of a CIUP journal are better integrated with one another. However, wide gaps still exist between Chinese and leading international journals. A network visualization of being-cited patterns can be used to measure a journal’s citation impact in relation to the JIF values of journals in the network. Policy suggestions on improving citation impact of Chinese journals will be proposed.

We argue that citation is a composed indicator: short-term citations can be considered as currency at the research front, whereas long-term citations can contribute to the codification of knowledge claims into concept symbols. Knowledge claims at the research front are more likely to be transitory and are therefore problematic as indicators of quality. Citation impact studies focus on short-term citation, and therefore tend to measure not epistemic quality, but involvement in current discourses in which contributions are positioned by referencing. We explore this argument using three case studies: (1) citations of the journal Soziale Welt as an example of a venue that tends not to publish papers at a research front, unlike, for example, JACS; (2) Robert K. Merton as a concept symbol across theories of citation; and (3) the Multi-RPYS (“Multi-Referenced Publication Year Spectroscopy”) of the journals Scientometrics, Gene, and Soziale Welt. We show empirically that the measurement of “quality” in terms of citations can further be qualified: short-term citation currency at the research front can be distinguished from longer term processes of incorporation and codification of knowledge claims into bodies of knowledge. The recently introduced Multi-RPYS can be used to distinguish between short-term and long-term impacts.

In this study, university-industry collaborations in China and the USA are analyzed in terms of co-authored publications indexed in the Web of Science (WoS). Results show a wide gap between China and the USA: Chinese universities are much less active in collaborations with industry in terms of either publication productivity or collaboration intensity. In selecting local and foreign industrial partners, however, more variation exists among Chinese universities than among US universities. The US system is domestically oriented more than that of China. In the USA, the intensity of university-industry collaboration is determined by research quality, whereas in China this is not the case. In both China and the USA, distance is not critical for the establishment of domestic university-industry collaboration. A high correlation is found between productivity indicators including total publications and university-industry co-authored publications. However, the productivity indicators are less correlated with the intensity of university-industry collaboration. Large research universities with strong ties to domestic industry play critical roles in both national publication systems.

We present scientometric results about worldwide centers of excellence in psychology. Based on Web of Science data, scientific excellence can be identified for cities from where highly-cited papers originate. Data refer to all psychology articles published in 2007 which are documented in the Social Science Citation Index and to their citation frequencies from 2007 to May 2011. 218 cities are visualized with an article output of at least 50 in 2007. Statistical z tests are used for the evaluation of the degree to which an observed number of top-cited papers (top-10%) for a city differs from the number expected on the basis of randomness in the selection of papers. The map points at excellence centers in cities at the East and West Coast of the USA as well as in Great Britain, Germany, the Netherlands, Ireland, Belgium, Sweden, Finland, Australia, and Taiwan. These results indicate that highly-cited psychological research articles come from the Anglo-American countries and some of the non-English European countries in which the number of English-language publications has increased during the last decades. Implications of the results for the publication strategies of psychologists in non-English speaking countries are discussed as well as the neccessity to care for qualitative criteria in evaluations in addition to quantitative, scientometric criteria.

Mutual information among three or more dimensions (μ* = –Q) has been considered as interaction information. However, Krippendorff [1,2] has shown that this measure cannot be interpreted as a unique property of the interactions and has proposed an alternative measure of interaction information based on iterative approximation of maximum entropies. Q can then be considered as a measure of the difference between interaction information and redundancy generated in a model entertained by an observer. I argue that this provides us with a measure of the imprint of a second-order observing system—a model entertained by the system itself—on the underlying information processing. The second-order system communicates meaning hyper-incursively; an observation instantiates this meaning-processing within the information processing. The net results may add to or reduce the prevailing uncertainty. The model is tested empirically for the case where textual organization can be expected to contain intellectual organization in terms of distributions of title words, author names, and cited references.

Configurational information is generated when three or more sources of variance interact. The variations not only disturb each other relationally, but by selecting upon each other, they are also positioned in a configuration. A configuration can be stabilized and/or globalized. Different stabilizations can be considered as second-order variation, and globalization as a second-order selection. The positive manifestations and the negative selections operate upon one another by adding and reducing uncertainty, respectively. Reduction of uncertainty in a configuration can be measured in bits of information. The variables can also be considered as dimensions of the probabilistic entropy in the system(s) under study. The configurational information then provides us with a measure of synergy within a complex system. For example, the knowledge base of an economy can be considered as such a synergy in the otherwise virtual (that is, fourth) dimension of a regime

The number of papers published in journals indexed by the Web of Science core collection is steadily increasing. In recent years, nearly two million new papers were published each year; somewhat more than one million papers when primary research papers are considered only (articles and reviews are the document types where primary research is usually reported or reviewed). However, who reads these papers? More precisely, which groups of researchers from which (self-assigned) scientific disciplines and countries are reading these papers? Is it possible to visualize readership patterns for certain countries, scientific disciplines, or academic status groups? One popular method to answer these questions is a network analysis. In this study, we analyze Mendeley readership data of a set of 1,133,224 articles and 64,960 reviews with publication year 2012 to generate three different networks: (1) The network based on disciplinary affiliations of Mendeley readers contains four groups: (i) biology, (ii) social sciences and humanities (including relevant computer sciences), (iii) bio-medical sciences, and (iv) natural sciences and engineering. In all four groups, the category with the addition “miscellaneous” prevails. (2) The network of co-readers in terms of professional status shows that a common interest in papers is mainly shared among PhD students, Master’s students, and postdocs. (3) The country network focusses on global readership patterns: a group of 53 nations is identified as core to the scientific enterprise, including Russia and China as well as two thirds of the OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) countries.

Global collaboration continues to grow as a share of all scientific cooperation, measured as coauthorships of peer-reviewed, published papers. The percent of all scientific papers that are internationally coauthored has more than doubled in 20 years, and they account for all the growth in output among the scientifically advanced countries. Emerging countries, particularly China, have increased their participation in global science, in part by doubling their spending on R&D; they are increasingly likely to appear as partners on internationally coauthored scientific papers. Given the growth of connections at the international level, it is helpful to examine the phenomenon as a communications network and to consider the network as a new organization on the world stage that adds to and complements national systems. When examined as interconnections across the globe over two decades, a global network has grown denser but not more clustered, meaning there are many more connections but they are not grouping into exclusive 'cliques'. This suggests that power relationships are not reproducing those of the political system. The network has features an open system, attracting productive scientists to participate in international projects. National governments could gain efficiencies and influence by developing policies and strategies designed to maximize network benefits-a model different from those designed for national systems.

Britton Chance was a pioneer in many scientific fields such as enzymatic reaction kinetics, bioenergetics, metabolism, in vivo NMR, and biophotonics. As an engineer, physical chemist, physicist, physiologist, biophysicist, biochemist, innovator and educator, he had worked in diversified fields over extended periods between 1926 until his death in 2010, at the age of 97. In order to illustrate his scientific career and great impact on research from a new perspective, we employ scientometric analysis tools to analyze the publications of Britton Chance with data downloaded from the ISI Citation Indexes in April 2013. We included articles, reviews and proceeding papers but excluded meeting abstracts. In total, we obtained 1023 publication records with 1236 authors in 266 journals with 17,114 citations from 1945 to 2013. We show the annual publications and citations that Britton Chance received from 1945 to 2013, and generate HistCite maps on the basis of the global citations (GCS) and local (self) citations (LCS) to show the citation relationships among the top-30 publications of Britton Chance. Metabolism and the development of physical methods to probe it appear to be the connecting thread of the lifelong research of Britton Chance. Furthermore, we generate the journal map and co-authorship map to show the broad scope of research topics and collaborators and the high impacts of the scientific oeuvre of Britton Chance ranging from physics, engineering, chemistry and biology to medicine.

Using the InCites tool of Thomson Reuters, this study compares normalized citation impact values calculated for China, Japan, France, Germany, United States, and the UK throughout the time period from 1981 to 2010. InCites offers a unique opportunity to study the normalized citation impacts of countries using (i) a long publication window (1981 to 2010), (ii) a differentiation in (broad or more narrow) subject areas, and (iii) allowing for the use of statistical procedures in order to obtain an insightful investigation of national citation trends across the years. Using four broad categories, our results show significantly increasing trends in citation impact values for France, the UK, and especially Germany across the last thirty years in all areas. The citation impact of papers from China is still at a relatively low level (mostly below the world average), but the country follows an increasing trend line. The USA exhibits a stable pattern of high citation impact values across the years. With small impact differences between the publication years, the US trend is increasing in engineering and technology but decreasing in medical and health sciences as well as in agricultural sciences. Similar to the USA, Japan follows increasing as well as decreasing trends in different subject areas, but the variability across the years is small. In most of the years, papers from Japan perform below or approximately at the world average in each subject area.

BACKGROUND: In contrast to Newton's well-known aphorism that he had been able "to see further only by standing on the shoulders of giants," one attributes to the Spanish philosopher Ortega y Gasset the hypothesis saying that top-level research cannot be successful without a mass of medium researchers on which the top rests comparable to an iceberg. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: The Ortega hypothesis predicts that highly-cited papers and medium-cited (or lowly-cited) papers would equally refer to papers with a medium impact. The Newton hypothesis would be supported if the top-level research more frequently cites previously highly-cited work than that medium-level research cites highly-cited work. Our analysis is based on (i) all articles and proceedings papers which were published in 2003 in the life sciences, health sciences, physical sciences, and social sciences, and (ii) all articles and proceeding papers which were cited within these publications. The results show that highly-cited work in all scientific fields more frequently cites previously highly-cited papers than that medium-cited work cites highly-cited work. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: We demonstrate that papers contributing to the scientific progress in a field lean to a larger extent on previously important contributions than papers contributing little. These findings support the Newton hypothesis and call into question the Ortega hypothesis (given our usage of citation counts as a proxy for impact).

Recently, aggregated journal-journal citation networks were made accessible from the perspective of each journal included in the Science Citation Index (see http://www. leydesdorff. net/jcr05). The local matrices can be used to inspect the relevant citation environment of a journal using statistical analysis and visualization techniques from social network analysis. The inspection gives an answer to the question what the local impact of this and other journals in the environment is. In this study the citation environment of Angewandte Chemie was analyzed. Angewandte Chemie is one of the leading chemistry journals in the world. Its environment was compared with that of the Journal of the American Chemical Society. The results of the environment analyses give a detailed insight into the field-embeddedness of Angewandte Chemie. The impacts of the German and international editions of this journal are compared.