Journal of Informetrics最新文献_第10页

A comparative analysis of critical educational trajectories of academicians in China and Japan 中日学者批判教育轨迹之比较分析

IF 3.4 2区管理学 Q2 COMPUTER SCIENCE, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS

Journal of Informetrics

Pub Date : 2025-06-13 DOI: 10.1016/j.joi.2025.101689

Jinjing Guo , Fang Wang , Hong Wu , Jinxia Huang , Xiao Rui

Exploring the differences in the critical educational trajectories of academicians between China and Japan and identifying the influencing factors can provide valuable insights into the cultivation and growth of high-level domestic scientific talent. This study adopts the concept of ‘critical growth pathway’ to conduct a comparative analysis of academicians’ educational trajectories in China and Japan from the perspectives of educational continuity, educational institution diversity, and study abroad experience. Chinese academicians typically follow one of three education trajectories: (1) bachelor’s, (2) bachelor’s-master’s-doctorate, or (3) bachelor’s-work-master’s-work-doctorate, while Japanese academicians commonly follow: (1) bachelor’s-direct doctorate, (2) bachelor’s-master’s-doctorate, and (3) bachelor’s-work-doctorate. China tends to emphasise bachelor’s-master’s continuity and master’s-doctorate continuity, whereas Japan shows a stronger preference for direct doctoral continuity. Chinese academicians demonstrate greater diversity in their educational institutions compared to their Japanese counterparts. Most Chinese and Japanese academicians have no overseas study experience, although such experience is more common in Japan than China. Consistent and continuous scientific research training is a critical pathway for cultivating elite scientists, while maintaining coherence across educational stages supports their development. The role of overseas education in cultivating high-level domestic talent is important to reassess, attention should be placed on strengthening local talent development by enhancing mentorship, improving the effectiveness of domestic training systems, and addressing country-specific challenges, particularly as national research and education systems reach more advanced stages. The analytical model developed in this study provides valuable insights for institutional design in policy-driven latecomers and other developing countries.

探讨中日两国院士关键教育轨迹的差异及其影响因素，可以为国内高层次科技人才的培养与成长提供有价值的启示。本研究采用“关键成长路径”的概念，从教育连续性、教育机构多样性和留学经历三个方面对中日两国院士的教育轨迹进行比较分析。中国院士通常遵循以下三种教育轨迹之一：(1)学士，(2)学士-硕士-博士，或(3)学士-硕士-工作-博士，而日本院士通常遵循：(1)学士-直接博士，(2)学士-硕士-博士，(3)学士-工作-博士。中国倾向于强调学士-硕士和硕士-博士的连续性，而日本则更倾向于直接的博士连续性。与日本同行相比，中国院士在其教育机构中表现出更大的多样性。大多数中国和日本的院士都没有海外留学经历，尽管这种经历在日本比在中国更普遍。始终如一、持续不断的科研培训是培养精英科学家的重要途径，而保持各教育阶段的连贯性则有助于他们的发展。必须重新评估海外教育在培养国内高层次人才方面的作用，应重视通过加强师徒关系、提高国内培训体系的有效性和应对具体国家的挑战来加强当地人才的培养，特别是在国家研究和教育体系进入更先进阶段的情况下。本研究建立的分析模型为政策驱动的后发国家和其他发展中国家的制度设计提供了有价值的见解。

{"title":"A comparative analysis of critical educational trajectories of academicians in China and Japan","authors":"Jinjing Guo , Fang Wang , Hong Wu , Jinxia Huang , Xiao Rui","doi":"10.1016/j.joi.2025.101689","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.joi.2025.101689","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Exploring the differences in the critical educational trajectories of academicians between China and Japan and identifying the influencing factors can provide valuable insights into the cultivation and growth of high-level domestic scientific talent. This study adopts the concept of ‘critical growth pathway’ to conduct a comparative analysis of academicians’ educational trajectories in China and Japan from the perspectives of educational continuity, educational institution diversity, and study abroad experience. Chinese academicians typically follow one of three education trajectories: (1) bachelor’s, (2) bachelor’s-master’s-doctorate, or (3) bachelor’s-work-master’s-work-doctorate, while Japanese academicians commonly follow: (1) bachelor’s-direct doctorate, (2) bachelor’s-master’s-doctorate, and (3) bachelor’s-work-doctorate. China tends to emphasise bachelor’s-master’s continuity and master’s-doctorate continuity, whereas Japan shows a stronger preference for direct doctoral continuity. Chinese academicians demonstrate greater diversity in their educational institutions compared to their Japanese counterparts. Most Chinese and Japanese academicians have no overseas study experience, although such experience is more common in Japan than China. Consistent and continuous scientific research training is a critical pathway for cultivating elite scientists, while maintaining coherence across educational stages supports their development. The role of overseas education in cultivating high-level domestic talent is important to reassess, attention should be placed on strengthening local talent development by enhancing mentorship, improving the effectiveness of domestic training systems, and addressing country-specific challenges, particularly as national research and education systems reach more advanced stages. The analytical model developed in this study provides valuable insights for institutional design in policy-driven latecomers and other developing countries.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48662,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Informetrics","volume":"19 3","pages":"Article 101689"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2025-06-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144279367","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Quantifying delayed recognition of scientists 量化科学家的延迟识别

IF 3.4 2区管理学 Q2 COMPUTER SCIENCE, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS

Journal of Informetrics

Pub Date : 2025-06-10 DOI: 10.1016/j.joi.2025.101688

Alex J. Yang, Yiqin Zhang, Zuorong Wang, Hao Wang, Sanhong Deng

Delayed recognition is a significant phenomenon with implications for career advancement, funding opportunities, and the dissemination of scientific knowledge. Despite its importance, most studies have focused on delayed recognition at the paper level, leaving a gap in understanding how this phenomenon unfolds at the level of individual scientists. This paper presents a novel framework for quantifying delayed recognition in scientists by analyzing their career-level citation trajectories. The framework utilizes two key metrics—the author beauty coefficient (

AB

) and author career awakening time (

A_{t α}

)—to capture the temporal dynamics of a scientist’s citation impact over the course of their career. Our analysis demonstrates that these metrics reveal patterns distinct from paper-level measures, with no significant correlation to averaged paper delayed recognition scores. Fixed-effect regression analyses indicate that female scientists and those pursuing novel or disruptive research experience greater delays in recognition. Additionally, through Coarsened Exact Matching (CEM) analysis, we find that scientists in smaller groups exhibit higher survival rates in academia but also face more significant delayed recognition. This paper delivers a fresh methodological approach and critical insights into the demographic and research factors driving delayed recognition, enhancing our understanding of scientific impact at the individual level.

延迟认识是一种重要的现象，对职业发展、资助机会和科学知识的传播都有影响。尽管它很重要，但大多数研究都集中在论文层面的延迟识别上，在理解这一现象如何在科学家个人层面展开方面留下了空白。本文通过分析科学家职业水平的被引轨迹，提出了一个量化科学家延迟认知的新框架。该框架利用两个关键指标——作者美丽系数（AB）和作者职业觉醒时间（Atα）——来捕捉科学家在其职业生涯中被引用影响的时间动态。我们的分析表明，这些指标揭示的模式不同于纸张水平的测量，与平均纸张延迟识别分数没有显著的相关性。固定效应回归分析表明，女性科学家和从事新颖或颠覆性研究的科学家在认知上有更大的延迟。此外，通过粗化精确匹配（CEM）分析，我们发现较小群体的科学家在学术界表现出更高的存活率，但也面临更严重的延迟识别。本文提供了一种新的方法方法和对驱动延迟识别的人口统计学和研究因素的关键见解，增强了我们对个人层面的科学影响的理解。

{"title":"Quantifying delayed recognition of scientists","authors":"Alex J. Yang, Yiqin Zhang, Zuorong Wang, Hao Wang, Sanhong Deng","doi":"10.1016/j.joi.2025.101688","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.joi.2025.101688","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Delayed recognition is a significant phenomenon with implications for career advancement, funding opportunities, and the dissemination of scientific knowledge. Despite its importance, most studies have focused on delayed recognition at the paper level, leaving a gap in understanding how this phenomenon unfolds at the level of individual scientists. This paper presents a novel framework for quantifying delayed recognition in scientists by analyzing their career-level citation trajectories. The framework utilizes two key metrics—the author beauty coefficient (<span><math><mi>AB</mi></math></span>) and author career awakening time (<span><math><msub><mi>A</mi><mrow><mi>t</mi><mi>α</mi></mrow></msub></math></span>)—to capture the temporal dynamics of a scientist’s citation impact over the course of their career. Our analysis demonstrates that these metrics reveal patterns distinct from paper-level measures, with no significant correlation to averaged paper delayed recognition scores. Fixed-effect regression analyses indicate that female scientists and those pursuing novel or disruptive research experience greater delays in recognition. Additionally, through Coarsened Exact Matching (CEM) analysis, we find that scientists in smaller groups exhibit higher survival rates in academia but also face more significant delayed recognition. This paper delivers a fresh methodological approach and critical insights into the demographic and research factors driving delayed recognition, enhancing our understanding of scientific impact at the individual level.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48662,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Informetrics","volume":"19 3","pages":"Article 101688"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2025-06-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144255149","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Exploring the relationship between interdisciplinarity and scientific breakthrough speed: a study based on Nobel Prize-winning papers 探索跨学科与科学突破速度的关系——基于诺贝尔奖获奖论文的研究

IF 3.4 2区管理学 Q2 COMPUTER SCIENCE, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS

Journal of Informetrics

Pub Date : 2025-06-06 DOI: 10.1016/j.joi.2025.101687

Deng Cheng, Zhang Xue

In the context of increasing interdisciplinary research trends, this study explores the relationship between interdisciplinarity and scientific breakthrough speed (SBS). We employ a “text topics-multiple disciplines” approach to quantify interdisciplinarity and utilize three indicators for measuring SBS: Highest degree to Significant contribution time (HSt), Significant contribution to Nobel Prize winning time (SNt), and Highest degree to Nobel Prize winning time (HNt). Focusing on Nobel laureates in the natural sciences from 1901 to 2023 and their Nobel Prize-winning research (NPw), we construct negative binomial regression models to analyze these variables. Our findings reveal that interdisciplinarity has no significant effect on HSt, but it significantly and positively affects SNt and HNt. This suggests that while interdisciplinary approaches do not delay the initial discovery process, they substantially extend the time required for scientific recognition and award. We also discuss the moderating role of Nobel Prize laureates’ imprint characteristics. Postdoctoral experience plays a negative moderating role in the above relationships, while the moderating effect of overseas experience is not significant.

在跨学科研究趋势日益增强的背景下，本研究探讨了跨学科与科学突破速度（SBS）的关系。我们采用“文本主题-多学科”的方法来量化跨学科性，并利用三个指标来衡量SBS：对显著贡献时间的最高程度（HSt）、对诺贝尔奖获奖时间的显著贡献（SNt）和对诺贝尔奖获奖时间的最高程度（HNt）。以1901 - 2023年自然科学领域的诺贝尔奖获得者及其诺贝尔获奖研究为研究对象，构建负二项回归模型对这些变量进行分析。我们的研究结果表明，跨学科对HSt没有显著影响，但对SNt和HNt有显著的正向影响。这表明，虽然跨学科方法不会延迟最初的发现过程，但它们大大延长了获得科学认可和奖励所需的时间。本文还讨论了诺贝尔奖得主印记特征的调节作用。博士后经历在上述关系中起负向调节作用，海外经历的调节作用不显著。

{"title":"Exploring the relationship between interdisciplinarity and scientific breakthrough speed: a study based on Nobel Prize-winning papers","authors":"Deng Cheng, Zhang Xue","doi":"10.1016/j.joi.2025.101687","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.joi.2025.101687","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>In the context of increasing interdisciplinary research trends, this study explores the relationship between interdisciplinarity and scientific breakthrough speed (SBS). We employ a “text topics-multiple disciplines” approach to quantify interdisciplinarity and utilize three indicators for measuring SBS: Highest degree to Significant contribution time (HSt), Significant contribution to Nobel Prize winning time (SNt), and Highest degree to Nobel Prize winning time (HNt). Focusing on Nobel laureates in the natural sciences from 1901 to 2023 and their Nobel Prize-winning research (NPw), we construct negative binomial regression models to analyze these variables. Our findings reveal that interdisciplinarity has no significant effect on HSt, but it significantly and positively affects SNt and HNt. This suggests that while interdisciplinary approaches do not delay the initial discovery process, they substantially extend the time required for scientific recognition and award. We also discuss the moderating role of Nobel Prize laureates’ imprint characteristics. Postdoctoral experience plays a negative moderating role in the above relationships, while the moderating effect of overseas experience is not significant.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48662,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Informetrics","volume":"19 3","pages":"Article 101687"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2025-06-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144221919","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Do male leading authors retract more articles than female leading authors? 男性主要作者是否比女性主要作者撤回更多的文章？

IF 3.4 2区管理学 Q2 COMPUTER SCIENCE, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS

Journal of Informetrics

Pub Date : 2025-05-20 DOI: 10.1016/j.joi.2025.101682

Er-Te Zheng , Hui-Zhen Fu , Mike Thelwall , Zhichao Fang

Scientific retractions reflect issues within the scientific record, arising from human error or misconduct. Although gender differences in retraction rates have been previously observed in various contexts, no comprehensive study has explored this issue across all fields of science. This study examines gender disparities in scientific misconduct or errors, specifically focusing on differences in retraction rates between male and female first authors in relation to their research productivity. Using a dataset comprising 11,622 retracted articles and 19,475,437 non-retracted articles from the Web of Science and Retraction Watch, we investigate gender differences in retraction rates from the perspectives of retraction reasons, subject fields, and countries. Our findings indicate that male first authors have higher retraction rates, particularly for scientific misconduct such as plagiarism, authorship disputes, ethical issues, duplication, and fabrication/falsification. No significant gender differences were found in retractions attributed to mistakes. Furthermore, male first authors experience significantly higher retraction rates in biomedical and health sciences, as well as in life and earth sciences, whereas female first authors have higher retraction rates in mathematics and computer science. Similar patterns are observed for corresponding authors. Understanding these gendered patterns of retraction may contribute to strategies aimed at reducing their prevalence.

科学撤回反映了科学记录中的问题，由人为错误或不当行为引起。虽然先前已经在各种情况下观察到撤稿率的性别差异，但还没有全面的研究在所有科学领域探讨这个问题。本研究考察了科学不端行为或错误中的性别差异，特别关注了男性和女性第一作者在研究生产力方面的撤稿率差异。使用来自Web of Science和Retraction Watch的包含11,622篇撤稿文章和19,475,437篇未撤稿文章的数据集，我们从撤稿原因、学科领域和国家的角度调查了撤稿率的性别差异。我们的研究结果表明，男性第一作者的撤稿率更高，特别是在科学不端行为方面，如抄袭、作者争议、伦理问题、重复和伪造/伪造。在错误导致的撤稿中，没有发现显著的性别差异。此外，男性第一作者在生物医学和健康科学以及生命和地球科学领域的论文撤稿率要高得多，而女性第一作者在数学和计算机科学领域的论文撤稿率要高得多。通信作者也观察到类似的模式。了解这些撤稿的性别模式可能有助于制定旨在减少撤稿发生率的策略。

{"title":"Do male leading authors retract more articles than female leading authors?","authors":"Er-Te Zheng , Hui-Zhen Fu , Mike Thelwall , Zhichao Fang","doi":"10.1016/j.joi.2025.101682","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.joi.2025.101682","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Scientific retractions reflect issues within the scientific record, arising from human error or misconduct. Although gender differences in retraction rates have been previously observed in various contexts, no comprehensive study has explored this issue across all fields of science. This study examines gender disparities in scientific misconduct or errors, specifically focusing on differences in retraction rates between male and female first authors in relation to their research productivity. Using a dataset comprising 11,622 retracted articles and 19,475,437 non-retracted articles from the Web of Science and Retraction Watch, we investigate gender differences in retraction rates from the perspectives of retraction reasons, subject fields, and countries. Our findings indicate that male first authors have higher retraction rates, particularly for scientific misconduct such as plagiarism, authorship disputes, ethical issues, duplication, and fabrication/falsification. No significant gender differences were found in retractions attributed to mistakes. Furthermore, male first authors experience significantly higher retraction rates in biomedical and health sciences, as well as in life and earth sciences, whereas female first authors have higher retraction rates in mathematics and computer science. Similar patterns are observed for corresponding authors. Understanding these gendered patterns of retraction may contribute to strategies aimed at reducing their prevalence.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48662,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Informetrics","volume":"19 3","pages":"Article 101682"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2025-05-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144089393","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Measuring the university–industry–government relations synthesized by the Triple Helix and the diversity 三螺旋合成的校企关系及其多样性测度

IF 3.4 2区管理学 Q2 COMPUTER SCIENCE, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS

Journal of Informetrics

Pub Date : 2025-05-19 DOI: 10.1016/j.joi.2025.101686

Shelia X. Wei , Howell Y. Wang , Sanhong Deng , Wanru Wang , Fred Y. Ye

Synthesizing the triple helix model and diversity, we introduce two novel indicators, involvement (IV) and interaction (IA), which are established upon the fusion of the triple helix concept and three extended attributes of diversity: proportion, balance, and disparity. These indicators are designed to evaluate one-dimensional involvement and two-dimensional and three-dimensional interaction within university-industry-government (U-I-G) relations. The empirical examination is conducted using two datasets related to CRISPR and fullerene, derived from the Web of Science. Our findings highlight a markedly higher level of involvement within universities compared to industries and governments, attributed to the dominant proportion of universities. We observe that different two-dimensional interactions render distinct performances on the three attributes. The interaction within U-I-G remains relatively low due to the low proportion. We further contrast IV and IA with the triple helix and transmission efficiency metrics, observing distinct differences among them. Consequently, we suggest that through the synthesis of the triple helix and diversity, IV and IA provide a more thorough understanding of involvement and interaction within U-I-G relations, and can inform strategies for their enhancement. The application of IV and IA can potentially extend to examining varying collaborative innovations within other triple or quadruple relations.

综合三螺旋模型和多样性，引入了两个新的指标，即参与（IV）和交互（IA），这两个指标是在三螺旋概念和多样性的三个扩展属性：比例、平衡和差异的融合基础上建立的。这些指标旨在评估大学-产业-政府（U-I-G）关系中的一维参与以及二维和三维互动。实证检验使用了两个与CRISPR和富勒烯相关的数据集，这些数据集来自科学网。我们的研究结果强调，由于大学占主导地位，大学内部的参与程度明显高于行业和政府。我们观察到，不同的二维相互作用对这三个属性的表现是不同的。由于比例较低，U-I-G内部的相互作用相对较低。我们进一步将IV和IA与三螺旋和传输效率指标进行对比，观察到它们之间存在明显差异。因此，我们建议通过三螺旋结构和多样性的综合，IV和IA提供了对U-I-G关系中参与和相互作用的更彻底的理解，并可以为增强U-I-G关系提供策略。IV和IA的应用可以潜在地扩展到检查其他三重或四重关系中的各种协作创新。

{"title":"Measuring the university–industry–government relations synthesized by the Triple Helix and the diversity","authors":"Shelia X. Wei , Howell Y. Wang , Sanhong Deng , Wanru Wang , Fred Y. Ye","doi":"10.1016/j.joi.2025.101686","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.joi.2025.101686","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Synthesizing the triple helix model and diversity, we introduce two novel indicators, <em>involvement</em> (<em>IV</em>) and <em>interaction</em> (<em>IA</em>), which are established upon the fusion of the triple helix concept and three extended attributes of diversity: proportion, balance, and disparity. These indicators are designed to evaluate one-dimensional involvement and two-dimensional and three-dimensional interaction within university-industry-government (U-I-G) relations. The empirical examination is conducted using two datasets related to CRISPR and fullerene, derived from the Web of Science. Our findings highlight a markedly higher level of involvement within universities compared to industries and governments, attributed to the dominant proportion of universities. We observe that different two-dimensional interactions render distinct performances on the three attributes. The interaction within U-I-G remains relatively low due to the low proportion. We further contrast <em>IV</em> and <em>IA</em> with the triple helix and transmission efficiency metrics, observing distinct differences among them. Consequently, we suggest that through the synthesis of the triple helix and diversity, <em>IV</em> and <em>IA</em> provide a more thorough understanding of involvement and interaction within U-I-G relations, and can inform strategies for their enhancement. The application of <em>IV</em> and <em>IA</em> can potentially extend to examining varying collaborative innovations within other triple or quadruple relations.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48662,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Informetrics","volume":"19 3","pages":"Article 101686"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2025-05-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144083992","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Determination and characteristics of the most visible authors in multi-author publications 多作者出版物中最引人注目的作者的决定和特征

IF 3.4 2区管理学 Q2 COMPUTER SCIENCE, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS

Journal of Informetrics

Pub Date : 2025-05-19 DOI: 10.1016/j.joi.2025.101683

Xian Li , Ronald Rousseau , Tao Jia

Scientific collaboration is an effective approach to tackling complex challenges, with the most visible authors emerging as impactful contributors. This study analyzes over 21 million multi-authored papers in the social sciences, natural sciences, and engineering published between 1983 and 2012. We propose using Nonlinear Visibility Determination with a Modified Sigmoid Function (NVDMS) to identify the most visible authors and investigate their individual (byline order, academic age, gender), organizational (occupations), and national (affiliated country) characteristics across different years and team sizes. Our findings are: (1) From the individual point of view we find that the most visible authors in the social sciences are typically listed first or last, whereas in the natural sciences and engineering, they occupy middle positions. The proportion of those in middle positions increases with time and team sizes. The academic age of the most visible authors rises in the natural sciences and engineering but remains stable over time in the social sciences. While male authors continue to dominate, the gender imbalance decreases with time and team size. (2) From the organizational point of view, the most visible authors are affiliated with universities. A higher proportion of authors in the natural and engineering sciences are employed in the facility sector across various team sizes. (3) Finally, from a regional point of view, the most visible authors are predominantly from the U.S., U.K., Japan, and Germany, with a gradual shift toward eastern regions over time. Our findings offer insight into the structure of scientific teams and valuable implications for stakeholders to support promising scholars.

科学合作是解决复杂挑战的有效方法，最引人注目的作者成为有影响力的贡献者。这项研究分析了1983年至2012年间发表的社会科学、自然科学和工程领域的2100多万篇多作者论文。我们建议使用改进的s型函数（NVDMS）的非线性可见性确定来确定最可见的作者，并调查他们的个人（署名顺序、学术年龄、性别）、组织（职业）和国家（附属国家）在不同年份和团队规模中的特征。我们发现：(1)从个人角度来看，我们发现社会科学领域最引人注目的作者通常排在第一或最后，而在自然科学和工程领域，他们占据中间位置。处于中间位置的比例随着时间和团队规模的增加而增加。在自然科学和工程领域，最引人注目的作者的学术年龄上升，但在社会科学领域，随着时间的推移，他们的学术年龄保持稳定。虽然男性作者继续占据主导地位，但性别失衡随着时间和团队规模的增加而减少。(2)从组织的角度来看，最引人注目的作者隶属于大学。在不同规模的团队中，自然科学和工程科学领域的作者受雇于设施部门的比例更高。(3)最后，从地区来看，最著名的作者主要来自美国、英国、日本和德国，并随着时间的推移逐渐向东部地区转移。我们的研究结果提供了对科学团队结构的洞察，并为利益相关者支持有前途的学者提供了有价值的启示。

{"title":"Determination and characteristics of the most visible authors in multi-author publications","authors":"Xian Li , Ronald Rousseau , Tao Jia","doi":"10.1016/j.joi.2025.101683","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.joi.2025.101683","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Scientific collaboration is an effective approach to tackling complex challenges, with the most visible authors emerging as impactful contributors. This study analyzes over 21 million multi-authored papers in the social sciences, natural sciences, and engineering published between 1983 and 2012. We propose using <u>N</u>onlinear <u>V</u>isibility <u>D</u>etermination with a <u>M</u>odified <u>S</u>igmoid <u>F</u>unction (NVDMS) to identify the most visible authors and investigate their individual (byline order, academic age, gender), organizational (occupations), and national (affiliated country) characteristics across different years and team sizes. Our findings are: (1) From the individual point of view we find that the most visible authors in the social sciences are typically listed first or last, whereas in the natural sciences and engineering, they occupy middle positions. The proportion of those in middle positions increases with time and team sizes. The academic age of the most visible authors rises in the natural sciences and engineering but remains stable over time in the social sciences. While male authors continue to dominate, the gender imbalance decreases with time and team size. (2) From the organizational point of view, the most visible authors are affiliated with universities. A higher proportion of authors in the natural and engineering sciences are employed in the facility sector across various team sizes. (3) Finally, from a regional point of view, the most visible authors are predominantly from the U.S., U.K., Japan, and Germany, with a gradual shift toward eastern regions over time. Our findings offer insight into the structure of scientific teams and valuable implications for stakeholders to support promising scholars.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48662,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Informetrics","volume":"19 3","pages":"Article 101683"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2025-05-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144089394","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Do OpenCitations and Dimensions serve as an alternative to Web of Science for calculating disruption indexes? openencitations and Dimensions是否可以替代Web of Science来计算中断指数？

IF 3.4 2区管理学 Q2 COMPUTER SCIENCE, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS

Journal of Informetrics

Pub Date : 2025-05-19 DOI: 10.1016/j.joi.2025.101685

Shuo Xu , Congcong Wang , Xin An , Yunkang Deng , Jianhua Liu

As open access repositories become more prevalent worldwide, scholarly interests in comparative analysis of bibliographic databases are on the rise. Despite this, there is a remarkable scarcity of empirical studies evaluating the efficacy of open and restricted access databases as viable alternatives to traditional closed access models. This study employs the Disruption Index (DI) to analyze three bibliographic databases (WoS, Dimensions, and OpenCitations) across four research fields: Synthetic Biology, Astronomy & Astrophysics as established fields, and Blockchain-based Information System Management and Socio-Economic Impacts of Biological Invasions as emerging ones. After extensive experiments, three main findings are observed as follows. (1) The articles with higher citation counts typically exhibit higher DI values across all fields. (2) The WoS and Dimensions consistently demonstrate closer alignment across established and emerging fields. More missing citations in the OpenCitations lead to significant deviations from the WoS in term of DI values. (3) Compared to the OpenCitations, the Dimensions emerges as a superior alternative to the WoS to some extent.

随着开放存取资源库在世界范围内的普及，对书目数据库比较分析的学术兴趣正在上升。尽管如此，评估开放和限制访问数据库作为传统封闭访问模型的可行替代方案的有效性的实证研究非常缺乏。本研究采用干扰指数（DI）分析三个书目数据库（WoS、Dimensions和OpenCitations），涵盖四个研究领域：合成生物学、天文学和天文学；天体物理学是已建立的领域，基于区块链的信息系统管理和生物入侵的社会经济影响是新兴领域。经过大量的实验，主要发现如下三点。(1)在所有领域中，被引频次高的文章通常表现出更高的DI值。(2) WoS和Dimensions在已有领域和新兴领域始终表现出更紧密的一致性。开放引文中缺失的引文较多，导致DI值与WoS存在较大偏差。(3)与开放引文相比，维度在某种程度上优于WoS。

{"title":"Do OpenCitations and Dimensions serve as an alternative to Web of Science for calculating disruption indexes?","authors":"Shuo Xu , Congcong Wang , Xin An , Yunkang Deng , Jianhua Liu","doi":"10.1016/j.joi.2025.101685","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.joi.2025.101685","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>As open access repositories become more prevalent worldwide, scholarly interests in comparative analysis of bibliographic databases are on the rise. Despite this, there is a remarkable scarcity of empirical studies evaluating the efficacy of open and restricted access databases as viable alternatives to traditional closed access models. This study employs the Disruption Index (DI) to analyze three bibliographic databases (<em>WoS, Dimensions</em>, and <em>OpenCitations</em>) across four research fields: Synthetic Biology, Astronomy & Astrophysics as established fields, and Blockchain-based Information System Management and Socio-Economic Impacts of Biological Invasions as emerging ones. After extensive experiments, three main findings are observed as follows. (1) The articles with higher citation counts typically exhibit higher DI values across all fields. (2) The <em>WoS</em> and <em>Dimensions</em> consistently demonstrate closer alignment across established and emerging fields. More missing citations in the <em>OpenCitations</em> lead to significant deviations from the <em>WoS</em> in term of DI values. (3) Compared to the <em>OpenCitations</em>, the <em>Dimensions</em> emerges as a superior alternative to the <em>WoS</em> to some extent.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48662,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Informetrics","volume":"19 3","pages":"Article 101685"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2025-05-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144089395","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

The motivations for and effects of modified fractional counting 改进分数计数的动机和效果

IF 3.4 2区管理学 Q2 COMPUTER SCIENCE, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS

Journal of Informetrics

Pub Date : 2025-05-17 DOI: 10.1016/j.joi.2025.101681

Gunnar Sivertsen , Ronald Rousseau , Lin Zhang

A recent contribution to Journal of Informetrics (Donner, 2024) raised important questions about the properties and effects of bibliometric counting methods, mainly focusing on our contribution to the same journal five years ago (Sivertsen, Rousseau, and Zhang, 2019) where we developed and proposed a new counting method called modified fractional counting (MFC) for the measurement of scientific production at aggregate levels such as institutions or countries. Paul Donner identified four possible problems with the MFC indicator that have not been discussed before. Two of them raise fundamental questions about the object of study in scientometrics and research policy studies while the other two are related to the core discussions about responsible research assessment and funding. We respond to all four problems, both conceptually and with new empirical information.

最近对Journal of Informetrics （Donner, 2024）的贡献提出了关于文献计量计数方法的性质和影响的重要问题，主要集中在我们五年前对同一期刊的贡献（Sivertsen, Rousseau, and Zhang, 2019），我们开发并提出了一种新的计数方法，称为修正分数计数（MFC），用于测量机构或国家等总体水平的科学生产。保罗·唐纳（Paul Donner）指出了MFC指标可能存在的四个问题，这些问题以前没有讨论过。其中两个提出了科学计量学和研究政策研究中关于研究对象的基本问题，另外两个涉及负责任的研究评估和资助的核心讨论。我们从概念上和新的经验信息上回答了这四个问题。

引用次数: 0

Rank-based distributions in scientific papers affiliations: Different forms of Zipf's law with and without higher order inverse participation ratios 科学论文隶属关系中的排名分布：不同形式的齐夫定律有和没有高阶逆参与比

IF 3.4 2区管理学 Q2 COMPUTER SCIENCE, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS

Journal of Informetrics

Pub Date : 2025-05-16 DOI: 10.1016/j.joi.2025.101684

Malgorzata J. Krawczyk, Mateusz Libirt, Krzysztof Malarz

Although often difficult to define and parameterize, scientific collaboration between scientists from different centers and different countries or continents seems to be an interesting and important issue in an increasingly interconnected world. One natural source of such information is scientific papers that include the affiliations of the authors. They do not allow determining the origin of the authors (at least currently), but they can be used to show how large the participation of individual countries in the scientific world is. By analyzing a large set of publications, it is possible to collect chains covering countries and their multiplicity in the affiliations of the authors, and on this basis it is possible to show the most common patterns of collaborating scientific teams. Since in this article we are interested in a more general, statistical approach, the obtained chains are used to calculate an indicator (known as the inverse participation ratio) that expresses different patterns of the distribution of participation of individual countries. We show that the scientific world is another example of universal laws observed in the world because the obtained distribution of inverse participation ratio values obeys Zipf's law.

尽管通常难以定义和参数化，但在一个日益相互联系的世界中，来自不同中心、不同国家或大洲的科学家之间的科学合作似乎是一个有趣而重要的问题。这些信息的一个自然来源是包含作者所属关系的科学论文。它们不允许确定作者的来源（至少目前是这样），但是它们可以用来显示单个国家在科学界的参与程度。通过分析一大批出版物，就有可能收集到覆盖各国的文献链及其作者所属机构的多样性，并在此基础上有可能显示出科学团队合作的最常见模式。由于在本文中，我们感兴趣的是一种更一般的统计方法，因此使用获得的链来计算一个指标（称为逆参与率），该指标表示各个国家参与分布的不同模式。我们表明，科学世界是世界上观察到的普遍规律的另一个例子，因为获得的逆参与率值的分布服从齐夫定律。

{"title":"Rank-based distributions in scientific papers affiliations: Different forms of Zipf's law with and without higher order inverse participation ratios","authors":"Malgorzata J. Krawczyk, Mateusz Libirt, Krzysztof Malarz","doi":"10.1016/j.joi.2025.101684","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.joi.2025.101684","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Although often difficult to define and parameterize, scientific collaboration between scientists from different centers and different countries or continents seems to be an interesting and important issue in an increasingly interconnected world. One natural source of such information is scientific papers that include the affiliations of the authors. They do not allow determining the origin of the authors (at least currently), but they can be used to show how large the participation of individual countries in the scientific world is. By analyzing a large set of publications, it is possible to collect chains covering countries and their multiplicity in the affiliations of the authors, and on this basis it is possible to show the most common patterns of collaborating scientific teams. Since in this article we are interested in a more general, statistical approach, the obtained chains are used to calculate an indicator (known as the inverse participation ratio) that expresses different patterns of the distribution of participation of individual countries. We show that the scientific world is another example of universal laws observed in the world because the obtained distribution of inverse participation ratio values obeys Zipf's law.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48662,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Informetrics","volume":"19 3","pages":"Article 101684"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2025-05-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144070186","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

The overrepresentation of the United States in the field of legal studies in the science-wide author databases of standardized citation indicators 在标准化引文指标的科学范围作者数据库中，美国在法律研究领域的代表性过高

IF 3.4 2区管理学 Q2 COMPUTER SCIENCE, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS

Journal of Informetrics

Pub Date : 2025-05-15 DOI: 10.1016/j.joi.2025.101680

Péter Sasvári , Gergely Ferenc Lendvai

This paper investigates the overrepresentation of U.S.-based scholars in legal studies, focusing on patterns observed in the 2024 Ioannidis Science-wide author databases of standardized citation indicators. The study examines key differences between U.S. and non-U.S. scholars regarding citation metrics, publication patterns, and journal selection, while also evaluating the broader implications of this dominance on the global dissemination of legal knowledge. Via data from Scopus, the study analyzes 766 scholars and their 50,463 publications across both single-year and career-long datasets. The results reveal a marked U.S. dominance, with U.S.-based scholars not only comprising a large share of the dataset but also achieving top-ranking positions across various metrics. U.S. scholars predominantly publish in prestigious American law journals tied to Ivy League institutions, often resulting in higher citation counts and visibility than their non-U.S. counterparts. Conversely, non-U.S. scholars are more likely to publish in international or European journals, which generally yield lower citation metrics. Our results suggest that American legal scholarship maintains a citation ecosystem that reinforces its central position in the field, often sidelining Global South perspectives. These findings should also be interpreted in light of the substantial U.S.-bias inherent in the Scopus-indexed data underpinning the Stanford list, which structurally privileges U.S.-based publication formats and legal venues.

本文调查了美国学者在法律研究中的过度代表性，重点关注了2024年Ioannidis science的标准化引文指标作者数据库中观察到的模式。该研究调查了美国和非美国之间的主要差异。学者关于引用指标，出版模式和期刊选择，同时也评估这种主导地位对全球法律知识传播的更广泛影响。通过Scopus的数据，该研究分析了766名学者及其50,463篇论文，包括一年和职业生涯的数据集。结果显示出明显的美国主导地位，美国学者不仅占数据集的很大份额，而且在各种指标上都名列前茅。美国学者主要在与常青藤盟校有关的著名美国法律期刊上发表文章，这往往导致他们的论文被引用次数和知名度高于非美国学者。同行。相反,美国。学者更有可能在国际或欧洲期刊上发表论文，这些期刊的引用率通常较低。我们的研究结果表明，美国法律学术维持着一个引文生态系统，巩固了其在该领域的中心地位，经常将全球南方的观点边缘化。这些发现也应该根据支撑斯坦福大学榜单的scopus索引数据固有的巨大美国偏见来解释，这些数据在结构上优先考虑美国的出版格式和法律场所。

{"title":"The overrepresentation of the United States in the field of legal studies in the science-wide author databases of standardized citation indicators","authors":"Péter Sasvári , Gergely Ferenc Lendvai","doi":"10.1016/j.joi.2025.101680","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.joi.2025.101680","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This paper investigates the overrepresentation of U.S.-based scholars in legal studies, focusing on patterns observed in the 2024 Ioannidis Science-wide author databases of standardized citation indicators. The study examines key differences between U.S. and non-U.S. scholars regarding citation metrics, publication patterns, and journal selection, while also evaluating the broader implications of this dominance on the global dissemination of legal knowledge. Via data from Scopus, the study analyzes 766 scholars and their 50,463 publications across both single-year and career-long datasets. The results reveal a marked U.S. dominance, with U.S.-based scholars not only comprising a large share of the dataset but also achieving top-ranking positions across various metrics. U.S. scholars predominantly publish in prestigious American law journals tied to Ivy League institutions, often resulting in higher citation counts and visibility than their non-U.S. counterparts. Conversely, non-U.S. scholars are more likely to publish in international or European journals, which generally yield lower citation metrics. Our results suggest that American legal scholarship maintains a citation ecosystem that reinforces its central position in the field, often sidelining Global South perspectives. These findings should also be interpreted in light of the substantial U.S.-bias inherent in the Scopus-indexed data underpinning the Stanford list, which structurally privileges U.S.-based publication formats and legal venues.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48662,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Informetrics","volume":"19 3","pages":"Article 101680"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2025-05-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144068077","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0