IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jpubli/v9y2021i2p21-d554174.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Factors to Improve Publication Productivity in Russian Universities

Author

Listed:
  • Мarina V. Vasiljeva

    (Top Management, Atlantic Science and Technology Academic Press, Boston, MA 01233, USA
    Autonomous Non-Profit Organization “Publishing House Scientific Review” (Nauchnoe Obozrenie), 127051 Moscow, Russia)

  • Gennady V. Osipov

    (Joint Center for Sociology and Economics of Knowledge, Institute of Socio-Political Research of the Federal Center of Theoretical and Applied Sociology of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 6 Fotieva St., bld. 1, 119333 Moscow, Russia)

  • Vadim V. Ponkratov

    (Department of Public Finance, Faculty of Finance, Financial University under the Government of the Russian Federation, 49 Leningradsky Ave., 125993 Moscow, Russia)

  • Vitali Ju. Ivlev

    (Philosophy Department, Social Sciences and Humanities Faculty, Bauman Moscow State Technical University, 5 Baumanskaya 2-ya St., 105005 Moscow, Russia)

  • Marina I. Ivleva

    (Humanitarian Training Center, History and Philosophy Department, Plekhanov Russian University of Economics, 36 Stremyanny lane, 117997 Moscow, Russia)

  • Svetlana G. Karepova

    (Operational Research Department, Institute of Socio-Political Research of the Federal Center of Theoretical and Applied Sociology of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 6 Fotieva St., bld. 1, 119333 Moscow, Russia)

  • Zhanna R. Gardanova

    (Department of Psychotherapy, Pirogov Russian National Research Medical University, 1 Ostrovityanova St., 117997 Moscow, Russia)

  • Olesya V. Dudnik

    (Department of Pediatric Dentistry and Orthodontics, I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University (Sechenov University), 8-2 Trubetskaya St., 119991 Moscow, Russia)

Abstract

One of the most important conditions for the effectiveness of science is the motivation of academic staff of universities as key and direct producers of new knowledge. The purpose of the article was to substantiate the factors of efficiency in managing the publication activity of Russian universities. The nature and density of the relationship between the number of scientific publications and the level of citation of 19 leading countries in the world, including Russia, were determined by means of statistical analysis and the method of clusters. It has been empirically proven that the priority model for the development of publication activity should be an intensive model, which aims at improving the quality of scientific publications and the level of their citation. Moreover, a survey of 1573 young scientists (under the age of 39) and 2461 senior scientists from 14 universities in Russia was conducted. It investigated the factors of effective management of the publication activity at Russian universities. The results contribute to a better understanding on how Russian universities can activate and foster the flow of high-quality publication outputs by their researchers.

Suggested Citation

  • Мarina V. Vasiljeva & Gennady V. Osipov & Vadim V. Ponkratov & Vitali Ju. Ivlev & Marina I. Ivleva & Svetlana G. Karepova & Zhanna R. Gardanova & Olesya V. Dudnik, 2021. "Factors to Improve Publication Productivity in Russian Universities," Publications, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-22, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jpubli:v:9:y:2021:i:2:p:21-:d:554174
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2304-6775/9/2/21/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2304-6775/9/2/21/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Philip Ball, 2005. "Index aims for fair ranking of scientists," Nature, Nature, vol. 436(7053), pages 900-900, August.
    2. Vincent Larivière & Rodrigo Costas, 2016. "How Many Is Too Many? On the Relationship between Research Productivity and Impact," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(9), pages 1-10, September.
    3. Carayol, Nicolas & Matt, Mireille, 2006. "Individual and collective determinants of academic scientists' productivity," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 55-72, March.
    4. Birkmaier, Daniel & Wohlrabe, Klaus, 2014. "The Matthew effect in economics reconsidered," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 8(4), pages 880-889.
    5. Zhang, Mengya & Zhang, Gupeng & Liu, Yun & Zhai, Xiaorong & Han, Xinying, 2020. "Scientists’ genders and international academic collaboration: An empirical study of Chinese universities and research institutes," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 14(4).
    6. Ryan, James Christopher & Berbegal-Mirabent, Jasmina, 2016. "Motivational recipes and research performance: A fuzzy set analysis of the motivational profile of high performing research scientists," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(11), pages 5299-5304.
    7. Maria Bordons & M. T. Fernández & Isabel Gómez, 2002. "Advantages and limitations in the use of impact factor measures for the assessment of research performance," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 53(2), pages 195-206, February.
    8. Hicks, Diana, 2012. "Performance-based university research funding systems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 251-261.
    9. Yurij L. Katchanov & Natalia A. Shmatko, 2014. "Complexity-Based Modeling of Scientific Capital: An Outline of Mathematical Theory," International Journal of Mathematics and Mathematical Sciences, Hindawi, vol. 2014, pages 1-10, October.
    10. 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.
    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.
    12. Peter Weingart, 2005. "Impact of bibliometrics upon the science system: Inadvertent consequences?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 62(1), pages 117-131, January.
    13. Diana Hicks & Paul Wouters & Ludo Waltman & Sarah de Rijcke & Ismael Rafols, 2015. "Bibliometrics: The Leiden Manifesto for research metrics," Nature, Nature, vol. 520(7548), pages 429-431, April.
    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. Timur Narbaev & Diana Amirbekova, 2021. "Research Productivity in Emerging Economies: Empirical Evidence from Kazakhstan," Publications, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-19, November.
    2. Diana Amirbekova & Timur Narbaev & Meruyert Kussaiyn, 2022. "The Research Environment in a Developing Economy: Reforms, Patterns, and Challenges in Kazakhstan," Publications, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-19, 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. Konstantin Fursov & Yana Roschina & Oksana Balmush, 2016. "Determinants of Research Productivity: An Individual-level Lens," Foresight and STI Governance (Foresight-Russia till No. 3/2015), National Research University Higher School of Economics, vol. 10(2), pages 44-56.
    2. Eugenio Petrovich, 2022. "Bibliometrics in Press. Representations and uses of bibliometric indicators in the Italian daily newspapers," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(5), pages 2195-2233, May.
    3. Timur Gareev & Irina Peker, 2023. "Quantity versus quality in publication activity: knowledge production at the regional level," Papers 2311.08830, arXiv.org.
    4. Amara, Nabil & Rhaiem, Mehdi & Halilem, Norrin, 2020. "Assessing the research efficiency of Canadian scholars in the management field: Evidence from the DEA and fsQCA," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 296-306.
    5. Carillo, Maria Rosaria & Papagni, Erasmo & Sapio, Alessandro, 2013. "Do collaborations enhance the high-quality output of scientific institutions? Evidence from the Italian Research Assessment Exercise," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 25-36.
    6. Alexander Kalgin & Olga Kalgina & Anna Lebedeva, 2019. "Publication Metrics as a Tool for Measuring Research Productivity and Their Relation to Motivation," Voprosy obrazovaniya / Educational Studies Moscow, National Research University Higher School of Economics, issue 1, pages 44-86.
    7. Mehdi Rhaiem & Nabil Amara, 2020. "Determinants of research efficiency in Canadian business schools: evidence from scholar-level data," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(1), pages 53-99, October.
    8. Eliseo Reategui & Alause Pires & Michel Carniato & Sergio Roberto Kieling Franco, 2020. "Evaluation of Brazilian research output in education: confronting international and national contexts," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(1), pages 427-444, October.
    9. Sven Helmer & David B. Blumenthal & Kathrin Paschen, 2020. "What is meaningful research and how should we measure it?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(1), pages 153-169, October.
    10. Yu, Xiaoyao & Szymanski, Boleslaw K. & Jia, Tao, 2021. "Become a better you: Correlation between the change of research direction and the change of scientific performance," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 15(3).
    11. Auranen, Otto & Nieminen, Mika, 2010. "University research funding and publication performance--An international comparison," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 822-834, July.
    12. Torres-Salinas, Daniel & Valderrama-Baca, Pilar & Arroyo-Machado, Wenceslao, 2022. "Is there a need for a new journal metric? Correlations between JCR Impact Factor metrics and the Journal Citation Indicator—JCI," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(3).
    13. Migheli, Matteo & Zotti, Roberto, 2020. "The strange case of the Matthew effect and beauty contests: Research evaluation and specialisation in Italian universities," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    14. van den Besselaar, Peter & Heyman, Ulf & Sandström, Ulf, 2017. "Perverse effects of output-based research funding? Butler’s Australian case revisited," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 11(3), pages 905-918.
    15. Giovanni Abramo & Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo & Myroslava Hladchenko, 2023. "Assessing the effects of publication requirements for professorship on research performance and publishing behaviour of Ukrainian academics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(8), pages 4589-4609, August.
    16. Ole Ellegaard, 2018. "The application of bibliometric analysis: disciplinary and user aspects," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(1), pages 181-202, July.
    17. Maria Rosaria Carillo & Erasmo Papagni & Alessandro Sapio, 2012. "Do collaborations enhance the high-quality output of scientific institutions? Evidence from the Italian Research Assessment Exercise (2001-2003)," Discussion Papers 4_2012, CRISEI, University of Naples "Parthenope", Italy.
    18. Lutz Bornmann & Julian N. Marewski, 2019. "Heuristics as conceptual lens for understanding and studying the usage of bibliometrics in research evaluation," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 120(2), pages 419-459, August.
    19. Manuel Acosta & Daniel Coronado & Esther Ferrándiz & M. Dolores León, 2014. "Regional Scientific Production and Specialization in Europe: The Role of HERD," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(5), pages 949-974, May.
    20. Rodrigo Costas & María Bordons, 2008. "Is g-index better than h-index? An exploratory study at the individual level," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 77(2), pages 267-288, November.

    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:gam:jpubli:v:9:y:2021:i:2:p:21-:d:554174. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.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.