Quantifying the publication preferences of leading research universities

Research universities have a strong devotion and advocacy for research in their core academic mission. This is why they are widely recognized for their excellence in research which make them take the most renowned positions in the different worldwide university leagues. In order to examine the uniqueness of this group of universities we analyze the scientific production of a sample of them in a 5 year period of time. On the one hand, we analyze their preferences in research measured with the relative percentage of publications in the different subject areas, and on the other hand, we calculate the similarity between them in research preferences. In order to select a set of research universities, we studied the leading university rankings of Shanghai, QS, Leiden, and Times Higher Education (THE). Although the four rankings own well established and developed methodologies and hold great prestige, we choose to use THE because data were readily available for doing the study we had in mind. Having done that, we selected the twenty academic institutions ranked with the highest score in the last edition of THE World University Rankings 2020 and to contrast their impact, we also, we compared them with the twenty institutions with the lowest score in this ranking. At the same time, we extracted publication data from Scopus database for each university and we applied bibliometrics indicators from Elsevier’s SciVal. We applied the statistical techniques cosine similarity and agglomerative hierarchical clustering analysis to examine and compare affinities in research preferences among them. Moreover, a cluster analysis through VOSviewer was done to classify the total scientific production in the four major fields (health sciences, physical sciences, life sciences and social sciences). As expected, the results showed that top universities have strong research profiles, becoming the leaders in the world in those areas and cosine similarity pointed out that some are more affine among them than others. The results provide clues for enhancing existing collaboration, defining and re-directing lines of research, and seeking for new partnerships to face the current pandemic to find was to tackle down the covid-19 outbreak.

     

The iceberg hypothesis revisited

A study is described of the rank/JIF (Journal Impact Factor) distributions in the high-coverage Scopus database, using recent data and a three-year citation window. It includes a comparison with an older study of the Journal Citation Report categories and indicators, and a determination of the factors most influencing the distributions. While all the specific subject areas fit a negative logarithmic law fairly well, those with a greater External JIF have distributions with a more sharply defined peak and a longer tail—something like an iceberg. No S-shaped distributions, such as predicted by Egghe, were found. A strong correlation was observed between the knowledge export and import ratios. Finally, data from both Scopus and ISI were used to characterize the rank/JIF distributions by subject area.     

Science in Mexico: a bibliometric analysis

Scientometrics - We can find several studies analyzing the scientific production of Latin American countries, such as Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, Cuba, Guatemala, Peru, Venezuela etc throughout...     

Citation increments between collaborating countries

International collaboration enhances citation impact. Collaborating with a country increments the citations received from it. But some collaborating countries provide greater increments in this sense than others, and likewise some countries receive greater increments from their partner countries than others. We observed a certain tendency for these increments to be lower in countries with greater impacts. Also, all the countries studied had higher Domestic Impacts as a result of collaborating, although this increment was less than that obtained from other countries. Finally, there were differences in the behaviour of the countries between the various scientific disciplines, with the effects being greatest in Social Sciences, followed by Engineering.