THE EXTENT OF MULTIDISCIPLINARY AUTHORSHIP OF ARTICLES ON SCIENTOMETRICS AND BIBLIOMETRICS IN BRAZIL

The publications in scientometrics and bibliometrics with Brazilian authorship expanded exponentially in the 1990-2006 period, reaching 13 times in the Web of Science database and 19.5 times in the Google Scholar database. This increase is rather superior to that of the total Brazilian scientific production in the same time period (5.6 times in the Web of Science). Some characteristics to be noticed in this rise are: 1) The total number of articles during this period was 197; in that, 78% were published in 57 Brazilian journals and 22% in 13 international journals. 2) The national and international articles averaged 4.3 and 5.9 citations/article, respectively; two journals stood out among these, the national Ciencia da Informacao (44 articles averaging 6.7 citations/article) and the international Scientometrics (32 articles averaging 6.2 citations/article). 3) The articles encompass an impressive participation of authors from areas other than information science; only one-fourth of the authors are bound to the information science field, the remaining ones being distributed among the areas of humanities/business administration, biology/biomedicine, health and hard sciences. The occurrence of adventitious authors at this level of multidisciplinarity is uncommon in science. However, the possible benefits of such patterns are not clear in view of a fragmented intercommunication among the authors, as noticed through the citations. The advantages of changing this trend and of using other scientometric and bibliometric databases, such as SciELO, to avoid an almost exclusive use of the Web of Science database, are discussed.

Scientific knowledge and digital democracy in Brazil: how to assess public health policy debate with applied Scientometrics

Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES)

Visibilidade dos pesquisadores no periódico Scientometrics a partir da perspectiva brasileira: um estudo de cocitação

This research aims at verifying the authors who have given basis to the brazilian researches internationally inserted in the area of Bibliometrics and Scientometrics through the analysis of citation and co-citation of the brazilian articles published in the journal Scientometrics. We used the Scopus data base, with the terms Scientometrics in source title and Brasil or Brazil in affiliation country. We found 53 articles, with 741 references and 19 authors cited 3 or more times. In general, the researchers come from the biologic and health areas. Using the Ucinet software, we build the co-citation network and calculated its indicators. We calculated the co-citation normalized index. The density and average of normalized degree centrality were 65,5%. We concluded the research highlighting the significant presence of brazilians (32%) and the dialogicity occurring between cited Brazilians and foreigners within a balance, where brazilians already dialog with renowned international researchers of the Bibliometrics and Scientometrics area.

Machine Learning in Scientometrics

El aprendizaje automático y la cienciometría son las disciplinas científicas que se tratan en esta tesis. El aprendizaje automático trata sobre la construcción y el estudio de algoritmos que puedan aprender a partir de datos, mientras que la cienciometría se ocupa principalmente del análisis de la ciencia desde una perspectiva cuantitativa. Hoy en día, los avances en el aprendizaje automático proporcionan las herramientas matemáticas y estadísticas para trabajar correctamente con la gran cantidad de datos cienciométricos almacenados en bases de datos bibliográficas. En este contexto, el uso de nuevos métodos de aprendizaje automático en aplicaciones de cienciometría es el foco de atención de esta tesis doctoral. Esta tesis propone nuevas contribuciones en el aprendizaje automático que podrían arrojar luz sobre el área de la cienciometría. Estas contribuciones están divididas en tres partes: Varios modelos supervisados (in)sensibles al coste son aprendidos para predecir el éxito científico de los artículos y los investigadores. Los modelos sensibles al coste no están interesados en maximizar la precisión de clasificación, sino en la minimización del coste total esperado derivado de los errores ocasionados. En este contexto, los editores de revistas científicas podrían disponer de una herramienta capaz de predecir el número de citas de un artículo en el fututo antes de ser publicado, mientras que los comités de promoción podrían predecir el incremento anual del índice h de los investigadores en los primeros años. Estos modelos predictivos podrían allanar el camino hacia nuevos sistemas de evaluación. Varios modelos gráficos probabilísticos son aprendidos para explotar y descubrir nuevas relaciones entre el gran número de índices bibliométricos existentes. En este contexto, la comunidad científica podría medir cómo algunos índices influyen en otros en términos probabilísticos y realizar propagación de la evidencia e inferencia abductiva para responder a preguntas bibliométricas. Además, la comunidad científica podría descubrir qué índices bibliométricos tienen mayor poder predictivo. Este es un problema de regresión multi-respuesta en el que el papel de cada variable, predictiva o respuesta, es desconocido de antemano. Los índices resultantes podrían ser muy útiles para la predicción, es decir, cuando se conocen sus valores, el conocimiento de cualquier valor no proporciona información sobre la predicción de otros índices bibliométricos. Un estudio bibliométrico sobre la investigación española en informática ha sido realizado bajo la cultura de publicar o morir. Este estudio se basa en una metodología de análisis de clusters que caracteriza la actividad en la investigación en términos de productividad, visibilidad, calidad, prestigio y colaboración internacional. Este estudio también analiza los efectos de la colaboración en la productividad y la visibilidad bajo diferentes circunstancias. ABSTRACT Machine learning and scientometrics are the scientific disciplines which are covered in this dissertation. Machine learning deals with the construction and study of algorithms that can learn from data, whereas scientometrics is mainly concerned with the analysis of science from a quantitative perspective. Nowadays, advances in machine learning provide the mathematical and statistical tools for properly working with the vast amount of scientometrics data stored in bibliographic databases. In this context, the use of novel machine learning methods in scientometrics applications is the focus of attention of this dissertation. This dissertation proposes new machine learning contributions which would shed light on the scientometrics area. These contributions are divided in three parts: Several supervised cost-(in)sensitive models are learned to predict the scientific success of articles and researchers. Cost-sensitive models are not interested in maximizing classification accuracy, but in minimizing the expected total cost of the error derived from mistakes in the classification process. In this context, publishers of scientific journals could have a tool capable of predicting the citation count of an article in the future before it is published, whereas promotion committees could predict the annual increase of the h-index of researchers within the first few years. These predictive models would pave the way for new assessment systems. Several probabilistic graphical models are learned to exploit and discover new relationships among the vast number of existing bibliometric indices. In this context, scientific community could measure how some indices influence others in probabilistic terms and perform evidence propagation and abduction inference for answering bibliometric questions. Also, scientific community could uncover which bibliometric indices have a higher predictive power. This is a multi-output regression problem where the role of each variable, predictive or response, is unknown beforehand. The resulting indices could be very useful for prediction purposes, that is, when their index values are known, knowledge of any index value provides no information on the prediction of other bibliometric indices. A scientometric study of the Spanish computer science research is performed under the publish-or-perish culture. This study is based on a cluster analysis methodology which characterizes the research activity in terms of productivity, visibility, quality, prestige and international collaboration. This study also analyzes the effects of collaboration on productivity and visibility under different circumstances.

Trend analysis in scientometrics

The thesis investigates the properties of two trends or time series which formed a:part of the Co-Citation bibliometric model "X~Ray Crystallography and Protein Determination in 1978, 1980 and 1982". This model was one of several created for the 1983 ABRC Science Policy Study which aimed to test the utility of bibliometric models in a national science policy context. The outcome of the validation part of that study proved to be especially favourable concerning the utility of trend data, which purport to model the development of speciality areas in science over time. This assessment could have important implications for the use of such data in policy formulation. However one possible problem with the Science Policy Study's conclusions was that insufficient time was available in the study for an in-depth analysis of the data. The thesis aims to continue the validation begun in the ABRC study by providing a detailed.examination of the characteristics of the data contained in the Trends numbered 11 and 44 in the model. A novel methodology for the analysis of the properties of the trends with respect to their literature content is presented. This is followed by an assessment based on questionnaire and interview data, of the ability of Trend 44 to realistically model the historical development of the field of mobile genetic elements research over time, with respect to its scientific content and the activities of its community of researchers. The results of these various analyses are then used to evaluate the strenghts and weaknesses of a trend or time series approach to the modelling of the activities of scientifiic fields. A critical evaluation of the origins of the discovered strengths and weaknesses.in the assumptions underlying the techniques used to generate trends from co-citation data is provided. Possible improvements. to the modelling techniques are discussed.

Mapping the dynamic of Project Management field : Project Management in action

Focusing on the role within and between organizations of the project management discipline to design and implement strategy, as source of competitive advantage, leads us to question the scientific field behind this discipline. This science should be the basis for the development and use of bodies of knowledge, standards, certification programs, education, and competencies, and beyond this as a source of value for people, organizations, and society. Thus the importance to characterize, define, and understand this field and its underlying strength, basis, and development is paramount. For this purpose we propose to give some insights on the current situation. This will lead us to clarify our epistemological position and demonstrate that both constructivism and positivist approaches are required to seize the full dimension and dynamics of the field.We will referee to sociology of actor-networks and qualitative scientometrics leading to the choice of the co-word analysis method in enabling us to capture the project management field and its dynamics.Results of a study based on the analysis of ABI Inform database will be presented and some future trends and scenarios proposed.

Investigating the future of project management : a co-word analysis approach

If Project Management (PM) is a well-accepted mode of managing organizations, more and more organizations are adopting PM in order to satisfy the diversified needs of application areas within a variety of industries and organizations. Concurrently, the number of PM practitioners and people involved at various level of qualification is vigorously rising. Thus the importance to characterize, define and understand this field and its underlying strength, basis and development is paramount. For this purpose we will referee to sociology of actor-networks and qualitative scientometrics leading to the choice of the co-word analysis method in enabling us to capture the project management field and its dynamics. Results of a study based on the analysis of EBSCO Business Source Premier Database will be presented and some future trends and scenarios proposed. The main following trends are confirmed, in alignment with previous studies: continuous interest for the “cost engineering” aspects, on going interest for Economic aspects and contracts, how to deal with various project types (categorizations), the integration with Supply Chain Management and Learning and Knowledge Management. Furthermore besides these continuous trends, we can note new areas of interest: the link between strategy and project, Governance, the importance of maturity (organizational performance and metrics, control) and Change Management. We see the actors (Professional Bodies, Governmental Bodies, Agencies, Universities, Industries, Researchers, and Practitioners) reinforcing their competing/cooperative strategies in the development of standards and certifications and moving to more “business oriented” relationships with their members and main stakeholders (Governments, Institutions like European Community, Industries, Agencies, NGOs…), at least at central level.

Citation success over time : theory or empirics?

This study investigates the citation patterns of theoretical and empirical papers published in a top economics journal, namely American Economic Review, over a period of almost 30 years, while also exploring the determinants of citation success. The results indicate that empirical papers attract more citation success than theoretical studies. However, the pattern over time is very similar. Moreover, among empirical papers it appears that the cross-country studies are more successful than single country studies focusing on North America data or other regions.

Do the best scholars attract the highest speaking fees? An exploration of internal and external influence

This study investigates whether academics can capitalize on their external prominence (measured by the number of pages indexed on Google, TED talk invitations or New York Times bestselling book successes) and internal success within academia (measured by publication and citation performance) in the speakers’ market. The results indicate that the larger the number of web pages indexing a particular scholar, the higher the minimum speaking fee. Invitations to speak at a TED event, or making the New York Times Best Seller list is also positively correlated with speaking fees. Scholars with a stronger internal impact or success also achieve higher speaking fees. However, once external impact is controlled, most metrics used to measure internal impact are no longer statistically significant.

The implications of educational and methodological background for the career success of Nobel Laureates : an investigation of major awards

Nobel laureates have achieved the highest recognition in academia, reaching the boundaries of human knowledge and understanding. Owing to past research, we have a good understanding of the career patterns behind their performance. Yet, we have only limited understanding of the factors driving their recognition with respect to major institutionalized scientific honours. We therefore look at the award life cycle achievements of the 1901–2000 Nobel laureates in physics, chemistry, and physiology or medicine. The results show that Nobelists with a theoretical orientation achieved more awards than laureates with an empirical orientation. Moreover, it seems their educational background shapes their future recognition. Researchers educated in Great Britain and the US tend to attract more awards than other Nobelists, although there are career pattern differences. Among those, laureates educated at Cambridge or Harvard are more successful in Chemistry, those from Columbia and Cambridge excel in Physics, while Columbia educated laureates dominate in Physiology or Medicine.

The inner quality of an article: Will time tell?

In this paper, we assess whether quality survives the test of time in academia by comparing up to 80 years of academic journal article citations from two top journals, Econometrica and the American Economic Review. The research setting under analysis is analogous to a controlled real world experiment in that it involves a homogeneous task (trying to publish in top journals) by individuals with a homogenous job profile (academics) in a specific research environment (economics and econometrics). Comparing articles published concurrently in the same outlet at the same time (same issue) indicates that symbolic capital or power due to institutional affiliation or connection does seem to boost citation success at the beginning, giving those educated at or affiliated with leading universities an initial comparative advantage. Such advantage, however, does not hold in the long run: at a later stage,the publications of other researchers become as or even more successful.

Do great minds appear in batches?

Despite much scholarly fascination with the question of whether great minds appear in cycles, together with some empirical evidence that historical cycles exist, prior studies mostly disregard the ‘‘great minds’’ hypothesis as it relates to scientists. Rather, researchers assume a linear relation based on the argument that science is allied with the development of technology. To probe this issue further, this study uses a ranking of over 5600 scientists based on number of appearances in Google Books over a period of 200 years (1800–2000). The results point to several peak periods, particularly for scientists born in the 1850–1859, 1897–1906, or 1900–1909 periods, suggesting overall cycles of around 8 years and a positive trend in distinction that lasts around 100 years. Nevertheless,a non-parametric test to determine whether randomness can be rejected indicates that nonrandomness is less apparent, although once we analyse the greatest minds overall, rejection is more likely.

Do Nobel laureates change their patterns of collaboration following prize reception?

We investigate whether Nobel laureates’ collaborative activities undergo a negative change following prize reception by using publication records of 198 Nobel laureates and analyzing their coauthorship patterns before and after the Nobel Prize. The results overall indicate less collaboration with new coauthors post award than pre award. Nobel laureates are more loyal to collaborations that started before the Prize: looking at coauthorship drop-out rates, we find that these differ significantly between coauthorships that started before the Prize and coauthorships after the Prize. We also find that the greater the intensity of pre-award cooperation and the longer the period of pre-award collaboration, the higher the probability of staying in the coauthor network after the award, implying a higher loyalty to the Nobel laureate.

The first cut is the deepest: Repeated interactions of co-authorship and academic productivity in Nobel laureate teams

Despite much in-depth investigation of factors influencing the co-authorship evolution in various scientific fields, our knowledge about how efficiency or creativity is linked to the longevity of collaborative relationships remains very limited. We explore what Nobel laureates’ co-authorship patterns reveal about the nature of scientific collaborations looking at the intensity and success of scientific collaborations across fields and across laureates’ collaborative lifecycles in physics, chemistry, and physiology/medicine. We find that more collaboration with the same researcher is actually no better for advancing creativity: publications produced early in a sequence of repeated collaborations with a given coauthor tend to be published better and cited more than papers that come later in the collaboration with the same coauthor. Our results indicate that scientific collaboration involves conceptual complementarities that may erode over a sequence of repeated interactions.