IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v93y2012i1d10.1007_s11192-012-0659-z.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Research evaluation. Part I: productivity and citedness of a German medical research institution

Author

Listed:
  • A. Pudovkin

    (Russian Academy of Sciences)

  • H. Kretschmer

    (University of Applied Sciences)

  • J. Stegmann
  • E. Garfield

    (Thomson Reuters Professional, Formerly Institute for Scientific Information® (ISI®))

Abstract

An evaluation exercise was performed involving 313 papers of research staff (66 persons) of the Deutsche Rheuma-Forschungszentrum (DRFZ) published in 2004–2008. The records and citations to them were retrieved from the Web of Science (Thomson Reuters) in March 2010. The authors compared productivity and citedness of “group leaders” vs. “regular scientists”, of “male scientists” vs. “female scientists” using citation-based indexes. It was found that “group leaders” are more prolific and cited more often than “regular scientists”, the same is true considering “male” vs. “female scientists”. The greatest contrast is observed between “female leaders” and “female regular scientists”. The above mentioned differences are significant in indexes related to the number of papers, while values of indexes characterizing the quality of papers (average citation rate per paper and similar indexes) are not substantially different among the groups compared. The mean value of percentile rank index for all the 313 papers is 58.5, which is significantly higher than the global mean value of about 50. This fact is evidence of a higher citation status, on average, of the publications from the DRFZ.

Suggested Citation

  • A. Pudovkin & H. Kretschmer & J. Stegmann & E. Garfield, 2012. "Research evaluation. Part I: productivity and citedness of a German medical research institution," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 93(1), pages 3-16, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:93:y:2012:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-012-0659-z
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-012-0659-z
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-012-0659-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/s11192-012-0659-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. Bar-Ilan, Judit, 2008. "Informetrics at the beginning of the 21st century—A review," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 2(1), pages 1-52.
    2. Robert J W Tijssen & Thed N van Leeuwen & Erik van Wijk, 2009. "Benchmarking university-industry research cooperation worldwide: performance measurements and indicators based on co-authorship data for the world's largest universities," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 18(1), pages 13-24, March.
    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. Frank Havemann & Birger Larsen, 2015. "Bibliometric indicators of young authors in astrophysics: Can later stars be predicted?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(2), pages 1413-1434, February.
    2. Zhang, Lin & Sivertsen, Gunnar & Du, Huiying & HUANG, Ying & Glänzel, Wolfgang, 2021. "Gender differences in the aims and impacts of research," SocArXiv 9n347, Center for Open Science.
    3. Lin Zhang & Gunnar Sivertsen & Huiying Du & Ying Huang & Wolfgang Glänzel, 2021. "Gender differences in the aims and impacts of research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(11), pages 8861-8886, November.
    4. Hildrun Kretschmer & Theo Kretschmer, 2013. "Gender bias and explanation models for the phenomenon of women’s discriminations in research careers," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 97(1), pages 25-36, October.
    5. Svein Kyvik & Ingvild Reymert, 2017. "Research collaboration in groups and networks: differences across academic fields," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 113(2), pages 951-967, November.
    6. Hajar Sotudeh & Nahid Khoshian, 2014. "Gender differences in science: the case of scientific productivity in Nano Science & Technology during 2005–2007," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 98(1), pages 457-472, January.
    7. Kretschmer Hildrun & Pudovkin Alexander & Stegmann Johannes, 2012. "Research evaluation. Part II: gender effects of evaluation: are men more productive and more cited than women?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 93(1), pages 17-30, October.
    8. Amalia Más-Bleda & Isidro F. Aguillo, 2013. "Can a personal website be useful as an information source to assess individual scientists? The case of European highly cited researchers," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 96(1), pages 51-67, July.
    9. Hajar Sotudeh & Nahid Khoshian, 2014. "Gender, web presence and scientific productivity in nanoscience and nanotechnology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 99(3), pages 717-736, June.
    10. Zewen Hu & Angela Lin & Peter Willett, 2019. "Identification of research communities in cited and uncited publications using a co-authorship network," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 118(1), pages 1-19, January.

    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. Hildrun Kretschmer & Theo Kretschmer, 2013. "Gender bias and explanation models for the phenomenon of women’s discriminations in research careers," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 97(1), pages 25-36, October.
    2. Daniel Torres-Salinas & Nicolás Robinson-García & Álvaro Cabezas-Clavijo & Evaristo Jiménez-Contreras, 2014. "Analyzing the citation characteristics of books: edited books, book series and publisher types in the book citation index," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 98(3), pages 2113-2127, March.
    3. Ying Guo & Xiantao Xiao, 2022. "Author-level altmetrics for the evaluation of Chinese scholars," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(2), pages 973-990, February.
    4. Hans Pohl, 2021. "Internationalisation, innovation, and academic–corporate co-publications," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(2), pages 1329-1358, February.
    5. Yves Gingras & Mahdi Khelfaoui, 2018. "Assessing the effect of the United States’ “citation advantage” on other countries’ scientific impact as measured in the Web of Science (WoS) database," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 114(2), pages 517-532, February.
    6. Juan Miguel Campanario, 2018. "Are leaders really leading? Journals that are first in Web of Science subject categories in the context of their groups," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 115(1), pages 111-130, April.
    7. Annamaria Demarinis Loiotile & Francesco De Nicolò & Adriana Agrimi & Loredana Bellantuono & Marianna La Rocca & Alfonso Monaco & Ester Pantaleo & Sabina Tangaro & Nicola Amoroso & Roberto Bellotti, 2022. "Best Practices in Knowledge Transfer: Insights from Top Universities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-23, November.
    8. Perc, Matjaž, 2010. "Zipf’s law and log-normal distributions in measures of scientific output across fields and institutions: 40 years of Slovenia’s research as an example," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 4(3), pages 358-364.
    9. Mike Thelwall, 2017. "Judit Bar-Ilan: information scientist, computer scientist, scientometrician," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 113(3), pages 1235-1244, December.
    10. Jinyuan Ma & Fan Jiang & Liujian Gu & Xiang Zheng & Xiao Lin & Chuanyi Wang, 2020. "Patterns of the Network of Cross-Border University Research Collaboration in the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macau Greater Bay Area," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-17, August.
    11. Yunwei Chen & Katy Börner & Shu Fang, 2013. "Evolving collaboration networks in Scientometrics in 1978–2010: a micro–macro analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 95(3), pages 1051-1070, June.
    12. Ana María Fernández-Maldonado & Arie Romein, 2012. "The Sustainability of Knowledge-related Policies in Technology-based Cities in the Netherlands," Chapters, in: Marina van Geenhuizen & Peter Nijkamp (ed.), Creative Knowledge Cities, chapter 3, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    13. Xia Fan & Xiaowan Yang & Liming Chen, 2015. "Diversified resources and academic influence: patterns of university–industry collaboration in Chinese research-oriented universities," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 104(2), pages 489-509, August.
    14. Chan-Yuan Wong & Hon-Ngen Fung, 2017. "Science-technology-industry correlative indicators for policy targeting on emerging technologies: exploring the core competencies and promising industries of aspirant economies," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 111(2), pages 841-867, May.
    15. Hürlimann, Werner, 2015. "On the uniform random upper bound family of first significant digit distributions," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 9(2), pages 349-358.
    16. Gali Halevi, 2020. "The scientific legacy of Judit Bar-Ilan," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 123(3), pages 1201-1209, June.
    17. Chun-Ting Zhang, 2009. "The e-Index, Complementing the h-Index for Excess Citations," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 4(5), pages 1-4, May.
    18. J. A. García & Rosa Rodriguez-Sánchez & J. Fdez-Valdivia & Nicolas Robinson-García & Daniel Torres-Salinas, 2013. "Benchmarking research performance at the university level with information theoretic measures," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 95(1), pages 435-452, April.
    19. Sabrina L. Woltmann & Lars Alkærsig, 2018. "Tracing university–industry knowledge transfer through a text mining approach," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 117(1), pages 449-472, October.
    20. Sándor Soós & Anna Kiss, 2020. "Informetrics and the study of science–society communications: a bibliometric scoping review," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(2), pages 825-842, 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:93:y:2012:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-012-0659-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.