IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0101698.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Estimates of the Continuously Publishing Core in the Scientific Workforce

Author

Listed:
  • John P A Ioannidis
  • Kevin W Boyack
  • Richard Klavans

Abstract

Background: The ability of a scientist to maintain a continuous stream of publication may be important, because research requires continuity of effort. However, there is no data on what proportion of scientists manages to publish each and every year over long periods of time. Methodology/Principal Findings: Using the entire Scopus database, we estimated that there are 15,153,100 publishing scientists (distinct author identifiers) in the period 1996–2011. However, only 150,608 ( 1000 citations in the same period. Skipping even a single year substantially affected the average citation impact. We also studied the birth and death dynamics of membership in this influential UCP core, by imputing and estimating UCP-births and UCP-deaths. We estimated that 16,877 scientists would qualify for UCP-birth in 1997 (no publication in 1996, UCP in 1997–2012) and 9,673 scientists had their UCP-death in 2010. The relative representation of authors with UCP was enriched in Medical Research, in the academic sector and in Europe/North America, while the relative representation of authors without UCP was enriched in the Social Sciences and Humanities, in industry, and in other continents. Conclusions: The proportion of the scientific workforce that maintains a continuous uninterrupted stream of publications each and every year over many years is very limited, but it accounts for the lion’s share of researchers with high citation impact. This finding may have implications for the structure, stability and vulnerability of the scientific workforce.

Suggested Citation

  • John P A Ioannidis & Kevin W Boyack & Richard Klavans, 2014. "Estimates of the Continuously Publishing Core in the Scientific Workforce," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(7), pages 1-10, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0101698
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0101698
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0101698
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0101698&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0101698?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sharon M. Oster & Daniel S. Hamermesh, 1998. "Aging And Productivity Among Economists," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 80(1), pages 154-156, February.
    2. K. Brad Wray, 2004. "An examination of the contributions of young scientists in new fields," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 61(1), pages 117-128, September.
    3. Paula Stephan & Shiferaw Gurmu & Albert Sumell & Grant Black, 2007. "Who'S Patenting In The University? Evidence From The Survey Of Doctorate Recipients," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(2), pages 71-99.
    4. John P. A. Ioannidis, 2011. "Fund people not projects," Nature, Nature, vol. 477(7366), pages 529-531, September.
    5. Kevin W. Boyack & Richard Klavans, 2014. "Creation of a highly detailed, dynamic, global model and map of science," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 65(4), pages 670-685, April.
    6. Neal S Young & John P A Ioannidis & Omar Al-Ubaydli, 2008. "Why Current Publication Practices May Distort Science," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 5(10), pages 1-5, October.
    7. Adams, James D. & Black, Grant C. & Clemmons, J. Roger & Stephan, Paula E., 2005. "Scientific teams and institutional collaborations: Evidence from U.S. universities, 1981-1999," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 259-285, April.
    8. Levin, Sharon G & Stephan, Paula E, 1991. "Research Productivity over the Life Cycle: Evidence for Academic Scientists," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 81(1), pages 114-132, March.
    9. Carolin Michels & Ulrich Schmoch, 2012. "The growth of science and database coverage," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 93(3), pages 831-846, December.
    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. Cathelijn J F Waaijer & Benoît Macaluso & Cassidy R Sugimoto & Vincent Larivière, 2016. "Stability and Longevity in the Publication Careers of U.S. Doctorate Recipients," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(4), pages 1-15, April.
    2. King, Molly M. & Frederickson, Megan, 2020. "The Pandemic Penalty: The gendered effects of COVID-19 on scientific productivity," SocArXiv 8hp7m, Center for Open Science.
    3. Aurora González-Teruel & Gregorio González-Alcaide & Maite Barrios & María-Francisca Abad-García, 2015. "Mapping recent information behavior research: an analysis of co-authorship and co-citation networks," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 103(2), pages 687-705, May.
    4. Mario Karlovčec & Borut Lužar & Dunja Mladenić, 2016. "Core-periphery dynamics in collaboration networks: the case study of Slovenia," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(3), pages 1561-1578, December.
    5. Jinseok Kim, 2018. "Evaluating author name disambiguation for digital libraries: a case of DBLP," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(3), pages 1867-1886, September.
    6. Sergey Kolesnikov & Eriko Fukumoto & Barry Bozeman, 2018. "Researchers’ risk-smoothing publication strategies: Is productivity the enemy of impact?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(3), pages 1995-2017, September.
    7. Shen, Hongquan & Xie, Juan & Ao, Weiyi & Cheng, Ying, 2022. "The continuity and citation impact of scientific collaboration with different gender composition," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(1).
    8. Kovács, Kármen, 2017. "A nyílt hozzáférésű publikálás finanszírozási kérdései [The financial issues of open-access scholarly publishing]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(2), pages 185-207.
    9. Ruiz-Castillo, Javier & Costas, Rodrigo, 2014. "The skewness of scientific productivity," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 8(4), pages 917-934.
    10. Vincent Gengnagel & Katharina Zimmermann & Sebastian M. Büttner, 2022. "‘Closer to the Market’: EU Research Governance and Symbolic Power," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(6), pages 1573-1591, November.
    11. Yi Bu & Dakota S. Murray & Ying Ding & Yong Huang & Yiming Zhao, 2018. "Measuring the stability of scientific collaboration," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 114(2), pages 463-479, February.
    12. Wang, Wei & Ren, Jing & Alrashoud, Mubarak & Xia, Feng & Mao, Mengyi & Tolba, Amr, 2020. "Early-stage reciprocity in sustainable scientific collaboration," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 14(3).
    13. Shengli Deng & Sudi Xia, 2020. "Mapping the interdisciplinarity in information behavior research: a quantitative study using diversity measure and co-occurrence analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(1), pages 489-513, July.
    14. Chinetti Simone, 2023. "The gender gap in academic productivity during the pandemic: Is childcare responsible?," IZA Journal of Labor Economics, Sciendo & Forschungsinstitut zur Zukunft der Arbeit GmbH (IZA), vol. 12(1), pages 1-35, January.
    15. Bornmann, Lutz & Williams, Richard, 2017. "Can the journal impact factor be used as a criterion for the selection of junior researchers? A large-scale empirical study based on ResearcherID data," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 11(3), pages 788-799.
    16. Li, Xin & Tang, Xuli, 2021. "Characterizing interdisciplinarity in drug research: A translational science perspective," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 15(4).
    17. Tuomas Höylä & Christoph Bartneck & Timo Tiihonen, 2016. "The consequences of competition: simulating the effects of research grant allocation strategies," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 108(1), pages 263-288, July.
    18. Betz, Ulrich A.K., 2018. "Is the force awakening?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 296-303.
    19. Hirotaka Kawashima & Hiroyuki Tomizawa, 2015. "Accuracy evaluation of Scopus Author ID based on the largest funding database in Japan," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 103(3), pages 1061-1071, June.

    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. Benjamin Jones & E.J. Reedy & Bruce A. Weinberg, 2014. "Age and Scientific Genius," NBER Working Papers 19866, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Wang, Jian, 2016. "Knowledge creation in collaboration networks: Effects of tie configuration," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 68-80.
    3. Beaudry, Catherine & Allaoui, Sedki, 2012. "Impact of public and private research funding on scientific production: The case of nanotechnology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(9), pages 1589-1606.
    4. Stephan, Paula E., 2010. "The Economics of Science," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 217-273, Elsevier.
    5. Rajeev K. Goel & Devrim Göktepe-Hultén, 2020. "Drivers of innovation productivity of academic researchers through career advancement," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(2), pages 414-429, April.
    6. Cornelia Lawson, 2013. "Academic Inventions Outside the University: Investigating Patent Ownership in the UK," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(5), pages 385-398, July.
    7. Barthel, Jens, 2008. "Can age discrimination be justified with a lower productivity of older workers?," MPRA Paper 14682, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Rajeev K. Goel & Devrim Göktepe-Hultén, 2021. "Innovation by foreign researchers: relative influences of internal versus external human capital," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 46(1), pages 258-276, February.
    9. Ding, Waverly & Choi, Emily, 2008. "Divergent Paths or Stepping Stones: A Comparison of Scientists’ Advising and Founding Activities," Institute for Research on Labor and Employment, Working Paper Series qt4907j25p, Institute of Industrial Relations, UC Berkeley.
    10. Fabian Waldinger, 2012. "Peer Effects in Science: Evidence from the Dismissal of Scientists in Nazi Germany," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 79(2), pages 838-861.
    11. Munari, Federico & Toschi, Laura, 2021. "The impact of public funding on science valorisation: an analysis of the ERC Proof-of-Concept Programme," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(6).
    12. Myriam Mariani & Marzia Romanelli, 2006. ""Stacking" or "Picking" Patents? The Inventors' Choice Between Quantity and Quality," LEM Papers Series 2006/06, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.
    13. Daniel S. Hamermesh & Lea‐Rachel Kosnik, 2024. "Why do older scholars slow down?," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 62(1), pages 488-499, January.
    14. Thursby, Marie & Thursby, Jerry & Gupta-Mukherjee, Swasti, 2007. "Are there real effects of licensing on academic research? A life cycle view," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 63(4), pages 577-598, August.
    15. ONISHI Koichiro & NAGAOKA Sadao, 2012. "Life-cycle Productivity of Industrial Inventors: Education and other determinants," Discussion papers 12059, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    16. Guido Buenstorf, 2006. "Is Academic Entrepreneurship Good or Bad for Science? Empirical Evidence from the Max Planck Society," Papers on Economics and Evolution 2006-17, Philipps University Marburg, Department of Geography.
    17. Pierre Azoulay & Waverly Ding & Toby Stuart, 2009. "The Impact Of Academic Patenting On The Rate, Quality And Direction Of (Public) Research Output," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 57(4), pages 637-676, December.
    18. Maria Abreu & Vadim Grinevich, 2017. "Gender patterns in academic entrepreneurship," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 42(4), pages 763-794, August.
    19. Maaike Verbree & Edwin Horlings & Peter Groenewegen & Inge Weijden & Peter Besselaar, 2015. "Organizational factors influencing scholarly performance: a multivariate study of biomedical research groups," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(1), pages 25-49, January.
    20. Buenstorf, Guido, 2009. "Is commercialization good or bad for science? Individual-level evidence from the Max Planck Society," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 281-292, March.

    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:plo:pone00:0101698. 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.