Applying bibliometric mapping in a high level science policy context

Bibliometric maps have the potential to become useful tools for science policy issues. The complexity of the structures, however, makes it often very difficult to interpret the results. In this study, we present a case study in which we use the bibliometric mapping results to address a high level science policy issue of research efficiency. By revealing the results in an alternative way, we increased the utility of bibliometric mapping within the science policy context. Moreover, by including additional information to the entities in the landscape, we provide useful input for the research potential.     

The role of South African researchers in intercontinental collaboration

Scientometrics - The analysis presented here focuses on mapping, based on publication output, the scientific collaboration of African based researchers and the role of the South African research...     

The role of editorial material in bibliometric research performance assessments

In this study, the possibilities to extend the basis for research performance exercises with editorial material are explored. While this document type has been traditionally not considered as an important type of scientific communication in research performance assessment procedures, there is a perception from researchers that editorial materials should be considered as relevant document types as important sources for the dissemination of scientific knowledge. In a number of these cases, some of the mentioned editorial materials are actually ‘highly cited’. This lead to a thorough scrutiny of editorials or editorial material over the period 1992–2001, for all citation indexes of Thomson Scientific. The relevance of editorial materials through three quantitative bibliometric characteristics of scientific publications, namely page length, number of references, and the number of received citations, are thoroughly analyzed.     

What do university rankings by fields rank? Exploring discrepancies between the organizational structure of universities and bibliometric classifications

University rankings by fields are usually based on the research output of universities. However, research managers and rankings consumers expect to see in such fields a reflection of the structure of their own organizational institution. In this study we address such misinterpretation by developing the research profile of the organizational units of two Spanish universities: University of Granada and Pompeu Fabra University. We use two classification systems, the subject categories offered by Thomson Scientific which are commonly used on bibliometric studies, and the 37 disciplines displayed by the Spanish I-UGR Rankings which are constructed from an aggregation of the former. We also describe in detail problems encountered when working with address data from a top down approach and we show differences between universities structures derived from the interdisciplinary organizational forms of new managerialism at universities. We conclude by highlighting that rankings by fields should clearly state the methodology for the construction of such fields. We indicate that the construction of research profiles may be a good solution for universities for finding out levels of discrepancy between organizational units and subject fields.