IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v126y2021i5d10.1007_s11192-021-03916-z.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Developing a measure of innovation from research in higher education data

Author

Listed:
  • Marlo M. Vernon

    (Augusta University)

  • C. Makenzie Danley

    (University of Kansas Medical Center)

  • Frances M. Yang

    (University of Kansas Medical Center)

Abstract

The benefit of science is often limited to the contribution to general knowledge. The definition of innovation of research is complex and multidimensional. Size of research expenditure budget and publication and citation metrics are most often used to measure innovation of institutional research. This project aims to construct a measure for innovation of institutional research that has convergent validity with societal benefit from university research. The sample included 143 institutions in the US who responded to the 2014 Association of University Technology Managers (AUTM) Licensing Survey Data on faculty size, research expenditure, publications, citations, intellectual property outcomes, clinical trials registration and results, and contributions to clinical practice guidelines were included. Exploratory Structural Equation Modeling (ESEM) was used to determine the most parsimonious model with all available indicators from the AUTM Licensing Survey Data. A Second-Order Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) was used to validate the ESEM results. Second order CFA confirmed hypothesis of an overall latent factor of research innovation. These results indicate that innovation of institutional research can be evaluated on three factors: contributions to knowledge, public health innovation, and economic impact. There have been no previous efforts to empirically measure the multidimensionality of innovation of institutional research with the inclusion of public health impact.

Suggested Citation

  • Marlo M. Vernon & C. Makenzie Danley & Frances M. Yang, 2021. "Developing a measure of innovation from research in higher education data," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(5), pages 3919-3928, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:126:y:2021:i:5:d:10.1007_s11192-021-03916-z
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-021-03916-z
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-021-03916-z
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11192-021-03916-z?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
    ---><---

    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. Alison Abbott & David Cyranoski & Nicola Jones & Brendan Maher & Quirin Schiermeier & Richard Van Noorden, 2010. "Metrics: Do metrics matter?," Nature, Nature, vol. 465(7300), pages 860-862, June.
    2. Lutz Bornmann & Rüdiger Mutz & Hans‐Dieter Daniel, 2008. "Are there better indices for evaluation purposes than the h index? A comparison of nine different variants of the h index using data from biomedicine," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 59(5), pages 830-837, March.
    3. Thursby, Jerry & Fuller, Anne W. & Thursby, Marie, 2009. "US faculty patenting: Inside and outside the university," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 14-25, February.
    4. Carolyn J. Heinrich & Gerald Marschke, 2010. "Incentives and their dynamics in public sector performance management systems," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(1), pages 183-208.
    5. Kjell Hausken & John F. Moxnes, 2019. "Innovation, Development and National Indices," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 141(3), pages 1165-1188, February.
    6. Kjell HAUSKEN, 2016. "The Ranking of Researchers by Publications and Citations: Using RePEc Data," Journal of Economics Bibliography, KSP Journals, vol. 3(4), pages 530-558, December.
    7. Hicks, Diana, 2012. "Performance-based university research funding systems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 251-261.
    8. Hausken, Kjell, 2016. "The Ranking of Researchers by Publications and Citations," UiS Working Papers in Economics and Finance 2016/11, University of Stavanger.
    9. Janet Bercovitz & Maryann Feldman, 2006. "Entpreprenerial Universities and Technology Transfer: A Conceptual Framework for Understanding Knowledge-Based Economic Development," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 31(1), pages 175-188, January.
    10. Rasmussen, Einar & Borch, Odd Jarl, 2010. "University capabilities in facilitating entrepreneurship: A longitudinal study of spin-off ventures at mid-range universities," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(5), pages 602-612, June.
    11. Jean O. Lanjouw & Mark Schankerman, 2004. "Patent Quality and Research Productivity: Measuring Innovation with Multiple Indicators," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 114(495), pages 441-465, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Marlo M. Vernon & Frances M. Yang, 2023. "Use of Latent Profile Analysis to Model the Translation of University Research into Health Practice and Policy: Exploration of Proposed Metrics," Research in Higher Education, Springer;Association for Institutional Research, vol. 64(7), pages 1058-1070, November.
    2. Ole Ellegaard, 2018. "The application of bibliometric analysis: disciplinary and user aspects," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(1), pages 181-202, July.
    3. Nadia Simoes & Nuno Crespo, 2020. "A flexible approach for measuring author-level publishing performance," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 122(1), pages 331-355, January.
    4. Vîiu, Gabriel-Alexandru, 2016. "A theoretical evaluation of Hirsch-type bibliometric indicators confronted with extreme self-citation," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 552-566.
    5. Catalina Martínez & Valerio Sterzi, 2021. "The impact of the abolishment of the professor’s privilege on European university-owned patents," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 28(3), pages 247-282, March.
    6. Pu Liu & Yingying Shao, 2022. "Innovation and new business formation: the role of innovative large firms," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 59(2), pages 691-720, August.
    7. Roberta Piergiovanni & Enrico Santarelli, 2013. "The more you spend, the more you get? The effects of R&D and capital expenditures on the patenting activities of biotechnology firms," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 94(2), pages 497-521, February.
    8. Du Jian & Tang Xiaoli, 2013. "Perceptions of author order versus contribution among researchers with different professional ranks and the potential of harmonic counts for encouraging ethical co-authorship practices," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 96(1), pages 277-295, July.
    9. Perkmann, Markus & King, Zella & Pavelin, Stephen, 2011. "Engaging excellence? Effects of faculty quality on university engagement with industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(4), pages 539-552, May.
    10. 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.
    11. Francisco Javier Miranda & Antonio Chamorro & Sergio Rubio, 2018. "Re-thinking university spin-off: a critical literature review and a research agenda," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(4), pages 1007-1038, August.
    12. Mingers, John & Yang, Liying, 2017. "Evaluating journal quality: A review of journal citation indicators and ranking in business and management," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 257(1), pages 323-337.
    13. Francesco Lissoni & Fabio Montobbio, 2015. "The Ownership of Academic Patents and Their Impact. Evidence from Five European Countries," Revue économique, Presses de Sciences-Po, vol. 66(1), pages 143-171.
    14. Nasir Ahmad Aziz & Maarten Pieter Rozing, 2013. "Profit (p)-Index: The Degree to Which Authors Profit from Co-Authors," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(4), pages 1-8, April.
    15. Ali Palali & Roel van Elk & Jonneke Bolhaar & Iryna Rud, 2017. "Are good researchers also good teachers? The relationship between research quality and teaching quality," CPB Discussion Paper 347, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    16. 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.
    17. Perkmann, Markus & Walsh, Kathryn, 2008. "Engaging the scholar: Three types of academic consulting and their impact on universities and industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(10), pages 1884-1891, December.
    18. Stuart J. H. Graham & Alan C. Marco & Amanda F. Myers, 2018. "Patent transactions in the marketplace: Lessons from the USPTO Patent Assignment Dataset," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(3), pages 343-371, September.
    19. Ali Palali & Roel van Elk & Jonneke Bolhaar & Iryna Rud, 2017. "Are good researchers also good teachers? The relationship between research quality and teaching quality," CPB Discussion Paper 347.rdf, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    20. Seokbeom Kwon & Kazuyuki Motohashi & Kenta Ikeuchi, 2022. "Chasing two hares at once? Effect of joint institutional change for promoting commercial use of university knowledge and scientific research," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 47(4), pages 1242-1272, August.

    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:spr:scient:v:126:y:2021:i:5:d:10.1007_s11192-021-03916-z. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.