IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jamist/v64y2013i11p2310-2316.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Do Universities or Research Institutions With a Specific Subject Profile Have an Advantage or a Disadvantage in Institutional Rankings? A Latent Class Analysis With Data From the SCImago Ranking

Author

Listed:
  • Lutz Bornmann
  • Felix de Moya Anegón
  • Rüdiger Mutz

Abstract

Using data compiled for the SCImago Institutions Ranking, we look at whether the subject area type an institution (university or research‐focused institution) belongs to (in terms of the fields researched) has an influence on its ranking position. We used latent class analysis to categorize institutions based on their publications in certain subject areas. Even though this categorization does not relate directly to scientific performance, our results show that it exercises an important influence on the outcome of a performance measurement: Certain subject area types of institutions have an advantage in the ranking positions when compared with others. This advantage manifests itself not only when performance is measured with an indicator that is not field‐normalized but also for indicators that are field‐normalized.

Suggested Citation

  • Lutz Bornmann & Felix de Moya Anegón & Rüdiger Mutz, 2013. "Do Universities or Research Institutions With a Specific Subject Profile Have an Advantage or a Disadvantage in Institutional Rankings? A Latent Class Analysis With Data From the SCImago Ranking," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 64(11), pages 2310-2316, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:jamist:v:64:y:2013:i:11:p:2310-2316
    DOI: 10.1002/asi.22923
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.22923
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/asi.22923?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
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Bornmann, Lutz & Haunschild, Robin, 2016. "Normalization of Mendeley reader impact on the reader- and paper-side: A comparison of the mean discipline normalized reader score (MDNRS) with the mean normalized reader score (MNRS) and bare reader ," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(3), pages 776-788.
    2. Daraio, Cinzia & Bonaccorsi, Andrea & Simar, Léopold, 2015. "Rankings and university performance: A conditional multidimensional approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 244(3), pages 918-930.
    3. Manganote, Edmilson J.T. & Araujo, Mariana S. & Schulz, Peter A., 2014. "Visualization of ranking data: Geographical signatures in international collaboration, leadership and research impact," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 8(3), pages 642-649.
    4. Hamdi A. Al-Jamimi & Galal M. BinMakhashen & Lutz Bornmann & Yousif Ahmed Al Wajih, 2023. "Saudi Arabia research: academic insights and trend analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(10), pages 5595-5627, October.
    5. Klaus Wohlrabe & Félix de Moya Anegon & Lutz Bornmann, 2019. "How Efficiently Do Elite US Universities Produce Highly Cited Papers?," Publications, MDPI, vol. 7(1), pages 1-15, January.
    6. Bornmann, Lutz & Haunschild, Robin, 2016. "Citation score normalized by cited references (CSNCR): The introduction of a new citation impact indicator," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(3), pages 875-887.
    7. Waltman, Ludo & van Eck, Nees Jan, 2015. "Field-normalized citation impact indicators and the choice of an appropriate counting method," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 9(4), pages 872-894.
    8. Ruben Miranda & Esther Garcia-Carpintero, 2019. "Comparison of the share of documents and citations from different quartile journals in 25 research areas," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 121(1), pages 479-501, October.
    9. Klaus Wohlrabe & Felix de Moya Anegon & Lutz Bornmann, 2018. "How efficiently produce elite US universities highly cited papers? A case study based on input and output data," ifo Working Paper Series 264, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich.
    10. Bornmann, Lutz & Marx, Werner, 2018. "Critical rationalism and the search for standard (field-normalized) indicators in bibliometrics," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 12(3), pages 598-604.
    11. Bornmann, Lutz, 2019. "Does the normalized citation impact of universities profit from certain properties of their published documents – such as the number of authors and the impact factor of the publishing journals? A mult," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 170-184.

    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:bla:jamist:v:64:y:2013:i:11:p:2310-2316. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.asis.org .

    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.