科学出版物的引用:它们对企业技术成果的影响

G. McMillan
{"title":"科学出版物的引用:它们对企业技术成果的影响","authors":"G. McMillan","doi":"10.1504/IJTIP.2013.052622","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Previous research appearing in International Journal of Technology Intelligence and Planning and other journals examined issues regarding openness vs. secrecy with scientific information. In particular, this research explored whether companies who are more open with their scientific findings (i.e., publish them in scientific journals) fare better in their innovation outcomes than those who are more secretive. The empirical findings were generally quite supportive of the hypothesised relationships. However, most of these efforts employed total publication counts as the primary predictor variable. The purpose of this current research effort is to extend this research stream by utilising citation-weighted publication counts to further refine the analysis. The findings are that citation analysis adds to the explanatory value of predicting technological outcomes.","PeriodicalId":52540,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Technology Intelligence and Planning","volume":"10 1","pages":"74"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-03-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Citations to scientific publications: their impact on firm technological outcomes\",\"authors\":\"G. McMillan\",\"doi\":\"10.1504/IJTIP.2013.052622\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Previous research appearing in International Journal of Technology Intelligence and Planning and other journals examined issues regarding openness vs. secrecy with scientific information. In particular, this research explored whether companies who are more open with their scientific findings (i.e., publish them in scientific journals) fare better in their innovation outcomes than those who are more secretive. The empirical findings were generally quite supportive of the hypothesised relationships. However, most of these efforts employed total publication counts as the primary predictor variable. The purpose of this current research effort is to extend this research stream by utilising citation-weighted publication counts to further refine the analysis. The findings are that citation analysis adds to the explanatory value of predicting technological outcomes.\",\"PeriodicalId\":52540,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Technology Intelligence and Planning\",\"volume\":\"10 1\",\"pages\":\"74\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2013-03-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Technology Intelligence and Planning\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1504/IJTIP.2013.052622\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Decision Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Technology Intelligence and Planning","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1504/IJTIP.2013.052622","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Decision Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

之前发表在《国际技术情报与规划杂志》和其他期刊上的研究考察了科学信息的公开与保密问题。这项研究特别探讨了那些对科学发现更公开(即在科学期刊上发表)的公司是否比那些更保密的公司在创新成果方面表现得更好。经验性的发现通常非常支持假设的关系。然而,这些研究大多采用总发表数作为主要预测变量。当前研究工作的目的是通过利用引用加权出版物计数来进一步完善分析,从而扩展这一研究流。研究发现,引文分析增加了预测技术成果的解释价值。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Citations to scientific publications: their impact on firm technological outcomes
Previous research appearing in International Journal of Technology Intelligence and Planning and other journals examined issues regarding openness vs. secrecy with scientific information. In particular, this research explored whether companies who are more open with their scientific findings (i.e., publish them in scientific journals) fare better in their innovation outcomes than those who are more secretive. The empirical findings were generally quite supportive of the hypothesised relationships. However, most of these efforts employed total publication counts as the primary predictor variable. The purpose of this current research effort is to extend this research stream by utilising citation-weighted publication counts to further refine the analysis. The findings are that citation analysis adds to the explanatory value of predicting technological outcomes.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
International Journal of Technology Intelligence and Planning
International Journal of Technology Intelligence and Planning Business, Management and Accounting-Management of Technology and Innovation
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
2
期刊介绍: The IJTIP is a refereed journal that provides an authoritative source of information in the field of technology intelligence, technology planning, R&D resource allocation, technology controlling, technology decision-making processes and related disciplines.
期刊最新文献
All for one, or one out of many An analysis of cryptocurrency returns and technological differentiation An introduction to the new challenges and promise of I-4.0 based commercialisation in the COVID-19-induced 'low-touch economy' ecosystem Innovation research knowledge accumulation in leading actors: a bibliometric analysis approach Innovation research knowledge accumulation in leading actors: A bibliometric analysis approach Artificial Intelligence in Project Management: Systematic Literature Review
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1