IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i13p7679-d846215.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

VisualRPI: Visualizing Research Productivity and Impact

Author

Listed:
  • Chihli Hung

    (Department of Information Management, Chung Yuan Christian University, Taoyuan 320, Taiwan)

  • Wei-Chao Lin

    (Department of Information Management, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan 333, Taiwan
    Center for Institutional Research, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan 333, Taiwan
    Department of Thoracic Surgery, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital at Linkou, Taoyuan 333, Taiwan)

Abstract

Research productivity and impact (RPI) is commonly measured through citation analysis, such as the h-index. Despite the popularity and objectivity of this type of method, it is still difficult to effectively compare a number of related researchers in terms of various citation-related statistics at the same time, such as average cites per year/paper, the number of papers/citations, h-index, etc. In this work, we develop a method that employs information visualization technology, and examine its applicability for the assessment of researchers’ RPI. Specifically, our prototype, a visualizing research productivity and impact (VisualRPI) system, is introduced, which is composed of clustering and visualization components. The clustering component hierarchically clusters similar research statistics into the same groups, and the visualization component is used to display the RPI in a clear manner. A case example using information for 85 information systems researchers is used to demonstrate the usefulness of VisualRPI. The results show that this method easily measures the RPI for various performance indicators, such as cites/paper and h-index.

Suggested Citation

  • Chihli Hung & Wei-Chao Lin, 2022. "VisualRPI: Visualizing Research Productivity and Impact," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-11, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:13:p:7679-:d:846215
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/13/7679/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/13/7679/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Qing Cheng & Xin Lu & Zhong Liu & Jincai Huang, 2015. "Mining research trends with anomaly detection models: the case of social computing research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 103(2), pages 453-469, May.
    2. Blaise Cronin & Lokman Meho, 2006. "Using the h‐index to rank influential information scientistss," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 57(9), pages 1275-1278, July.
    3. Madiha Ameer & Muhammad Tanvir Afzal, 2019. "Evaluation of h-index and its qualitative and quantitative variants in Neuroscience," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 121(2), pages 653-673, November.
    4. Vivek Kumar Singh & Ashraf Uddin & David Pinto, 2015. "Computer science research: the top 100 institutions in India and in the world," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 104(2), pages 529-553, August.
    5. J Mingers, 2009. "Measuring the research contribution of management academics using the Hirsch-index," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 60(9), pages 1143-1153, September.
    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. Deming Lin & Tianhui Gong & Wenbin Liu & Martin Meyer, 2020. "An entropy-based measure for the evolution of h index research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(3), pages 2283-2298, December.
    2. Muhammad Usman & Ghulam Mustafa & Muhammad Tanvir Afzal, 2021. "Ranking of author assessment parameters using Logistic Regression," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(1), pages 335-353, January.
    3. Lee, So-Eun & Kim, Seongcheol & Lim, Chulmin, 2019. "Special issues have got something? An overview of research trends in Telecommunications Policy special issues," 30th European Regional ITS Conference, Helsinki 2019 205192, International Telecommunications Society (ITS).
    4. Lu, Wei & Ren, Yan & Huang, Yong & Bu, Yi & Zhang, Yuehan, 2021. "Scientific collaboration and career stages: An ego-centric perspective," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 15(4).
    5. Hengyu Gu & Hanchen Yu & Mehak Sachdeva & Ye Liu, 2021. "Analyzing the distribution of researchers in China: An approach using multiscale geographically weighted regression," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(1), pages 443-459, March.
    6. Hasan, Syed Akif & Subhani, Muhammad Imtiaz & Osman, Ms. Amber, 2012. "H-Index: The key to research output assessment," MPRA Paper 39097, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Zhenbin Yan & Qiang Wu & Xingchen Li, 2016. "Do Hirsch-type indices behave the same in assessing single publications? An empirical study of 29 bibliometric indicators," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(3), pages 1815-1833, December.
    8. Claus-Christian Carbon, 2011. "The Carbon_h-Factor: Predicting Individuals' Research Impact at Early Stages of Their Career," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(12), pages 1-7, December.
    9. R J Ormerod, 2010. "Research contribution: Citation and content analysis," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 61(4), pages 705-707, April.
    10. Christian Mühlroth & Michael Grottke, 2018. "A systematic literature review of mining weak signals and trends for corporate foresight," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 88(5), pages 643-687, July.
    11. Mingkun Wei, 2020. "Research on impact evaluation of open access journals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 122(2), pages 1027-1049, February.
    12. Bornmann, Lutz & Marx, Werner, 2012. "HistCite analysis of papers constituting the h index research front," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 6(2), pages 285-288.
    13. Brady Lund, 2019. "Examination of correlates of H-index as a measure of research productivity for library and information science faculty in the United States and Canada," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 120(2), pages 897-915, August.
    14. Vivek Kumar Singh & Sumit Kumar Banshal & Khushboo Singhal & Ashraf Uddin, 2015. "Scientometric mapping of research on ‘Big Data’," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 105(2), pages 727-741, November.
    15. Ashraf Uddin & Vivek Kumar Singh & David Pinto & Ivan Olmos, 2015. "Scientometric mapping of computer science research in Mexico," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 105(1), pages 97-114, October.
    16. Fiorenzo Franceschini & Domenico Maisano, 2011. "Bibliometric positioning of scientific manufacturing journals: a comparative analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 86(2), pages 463-485, February.
    17. Linhong Xu & Kun Ding & Yuan Lin, 2022. "Do negative citations reduce the impact of cited papers?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(2), pages 1161-1186, February.
    18. Franceschini, Fiorenzo & Maisano, Domenico, 2010. "The Hirsch spectrum: A novel tool for analyzing scientific journals," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 4(1), pages 64-73.
    19. Marta Cardin & Marco Corazza & Stefania Funari & Silvio Giove, 2011. "A fuzzy-based scoring rule for author ranking," Working Papers 2011_11, Department of Economics, University of Venice "Ca' Foscari".
    20. Wieslawa Gryncewicz & Monika Sitarska-Buba, 2021. "Leading Research by Institutions and Authors: A Modern Research Analysis," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(3B), pages 1012-1026.

    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:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:13:p:7679-:d:846215. 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.