IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/scippl/v43y2016i2p262-274..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

What determines researchers’ scientific impact? A case study of Quebec researchers

Author

Listed:
  • Seyed Reza Mirnezami
  • Catherine Beaudry
  • Vincent Larivière

Abstract

Using a data set integrating information about researchers’ funding and publications in Quebec (Canada), this paper identifies the main determinants of citation counts as one measure of research impact. Using two-stage least square regressions to control for endogeneity, the results confirm the significant and positive relationship between the number of articles and citation counts. Our results also show that scientists with more articles in higher impact factor journals generally receive more citations and so do scientists who publish with a larger team of authors. Hence the greater visibility provided by a more prolific scientific production, better journals, and more co-authors, all contribute to increasing the perceived impact of articles. All else being equal, male and female receive the same number of citations. These results suggest that the most important determinants of researchers’ citations are the journals in which they publish, as well the collaborative nature of their research.

Suggested Citation

  • Seyed Reza Mirnezami & Catherine Beaudry & Vincent Larivière, 2016. "What determines researchers’ scientific impact? A case study of Quebec researchers," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 43(2), pages 262-274.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:scippl:v:43:y:2016:i:2:p:262-274.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/scipol/scv038
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Johnes, Geraint, 1988. "Determinants of research output in economics departments in British universities," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 17(3), pages 171-178, June.
    2. Salter, Ammon J. & Martin, Ben R., 2001. "The economic benefits of publicly funded basic research: a critical review," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 509-532, March.
    3. Moed, H. F. & Burger, W. J. M. & Frankfort, J. G. & Van Raan, A. F. J., 1985. "The use of bibliometric data for the measurement of university research performance," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 14(3), pages 131-149, June.
    4. Beise, Marian & Stahl, Harald, 1999. "Public research and industrial innovations in Germany," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 397-422, April.
    5. Linda Butler, 2002. "A list of published papers is no measure of value," Nature, Nature, vol. 419(6910), pages 877-877, October.
    6. Mario Calderini & Chiara Franzoni, 2004. "Is academic patenting detrimental to high quality research? An empirical analysis of the relationship between scientific careers and patent applications," KITeS Working Papers 162, KITeS, Centre for Knowledge, Internationalization and Technology Studies, Universita' Bocconi, Milano, Italy, revised Oct 2004.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Lutz Bornmann & Adam Y. Ye & Fred Y. Ye, 2018. "Identifying “hot papers” and papers with “delayed recognition” in large-scale datasets by using dynamically normalized citation impact scores," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(2), pages 655-674, August.
    2. Mingyang Wang & Shijia Jiao & Kah-Hin Chai & Guangsheng Chen, 2019. "Building journal’s long-term impact: using indicators detected from the sustained active articles," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 121(1), pages 261-283, October.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Dirk Czarnitzki & Katrin Hussinger & Cédric Schneider, 2012. "The nexus between science and industry: evidence from faculty inventions," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 37(5), pages 755-776, October.
    2. Beck, Mathias & Junge, Martin & Kaiser, Ulrich, 2017. "Public Funding and Corporate Innovation," IZA Discussion Papers 11196, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    3. Bekkers, Rudi & Bodas Freitas, Isabel Maria, 2008. "Analysing knowledge transfer channels between universities and industry: To what degree do sectors also matter?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(10), pages 1837-1853, December.
    4. Isabel Freitas & Tommy Clausen & Roberto Fontana & Bart Verspagen, 2011. "Formal and informal external linkages and firms’ innovative strategies. A cross-country comparison," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 21(1), pages 91-119, February.
    5. Groot, Tom & Garcia-Valderrama, Teresa, 2006. "Research quality and efficiency: An analysis of assessments and management issues in Dutch economics and business research programs," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(9), pages 1362-1376, November.
    6. Lutz Bornmann, 2013. "What is societal impact of research and how can it be assessed? a literature survey," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 64(2), pages 217-233, February.
    7. Bruno S. Frey & Katja Rost, 2010. "Do rankings reflect research quality?," Journal of Applied Economics, Universidad del CEMA, vol. 13, pages 1-38, May.
    8. Chen, Sheng-Syan & Chen, Yan-Shing & Liang, Woan-lih & Wang, Yanzhi, 2020. "Public R&D spending and cross-sectional stock returns," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(1).
    9. Nelson, Andrew J., 2012. "Putting university research in context: Assessing alternative measures of production and diffusion at Stanford," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(4), pages 678-691.
    10. Gelves, Juan Alejandro & Heywood, John S., 2016. "How does a mixed ownership firm license a patent?," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 278-284.
    11. Isabel Maria Bodas Freitas & Aldo Geuna & Federica Rossi, 2011. "University–Industry Interactions: The Unresolved Puzzle," Chapters, in: Cristiano Antonelli (ed.), Handbook on the Economic Complexity of Technological Change, chapter 11, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    12. Holger Graf & Matthias Menter, 2022. "Public research and the quality of inventions: the role and impact of entrepreneurial universities and regional network embeddedness," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 58(2), pages 1187-1204, February.
    13. Andrea Borsato & Andre Lorentz, 2023. "Open Science vs. Mission-oriented Policies and the Long-run Dynamics of Integrated Economies: An Agent-based Model with a Kaldorian Flavour," Working Papers of BETA 2023-17, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    14. Rudi Bekkers & Bodas Freitas, 2008. "Analysing preferences for knowledge transfer channels between universities and industry: To what degree do sectors also matter?," Grenoble Ecole de Management (Post-Print) hal-01487467, HAL.
    15. Buenstorf, Guido & Schacht, Alexander, 2013. "We need to talk – or do we? Geographic distance and the commercialization of technologies from public research," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 465-480.
    16. Tzeremes, Nickolaos & Halkos, George, 2010. "A DEA approach for measuring university departments’ efficiency," MPRA Paper 24029, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Hird, Mackenzie D. & Pfotenhauer, Sebastian M., 2017. "How complex international partnerships shape domestic research clusters: Difference-in-difference network formation and research re-orientation in the MIT Portugal Program," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(3), pages 557-572.
    18. Toole, Andrew A., 2012. "The impact of public basic research on industrial innovation: Evidence from the pharmaceutical industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 1-12.
    19. Acosta, Manuel & Coronado, Daniel, 2003. "Science-technology flows in Spanish regions: An analysis of scientific citations in patents," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(10), pages 1783-1803, December.
    20. Daniel Ljungberg & Mattias Johansson & Maureen McKelvey, 2009. "Polarization of the Swedish University Sector: Structural Characteristics and Positioning," Chapters, in: Maureen McKelvey & Magnus Holmén (ed.), Learning to Compete in European Universities, chapter 6, Edward Elgar Publishing.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:scippl:v:43:y:2016:i:2:p:262-274.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/spp .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.