IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/rseval/v20y2011i5p365-375.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Systematic grant and funding body acknowledgement data for publications: new dimensions and new controversies for research policy and evaluation

Author

Listed:
  • John Rigby

Abstract

Bibliographic databases are now providing systematic funding acknowledgement data for their indexed publications. This paper considers how such new data might be used for policy purposes and some key issues arising. While provision of such comprehensive data is recent, there is already sufficient data in the Web of Science to examine a controversy in research policy in which funding acknowledgement data is involved, namely the relationship between the count of a paper's funding sources and its citation impact. Analyses of publications from 2009 from journals Cell and Physical Review Letters suggests understanding of the relationship between impact of a publication and its count of funding sources is not complete and may be more complicated than previously believed. It is proposed that research findings are packaged by researchers into papers in a variety of ways and for a variety of purposes. Individual funding quanta from whatever source are not therefore inputs to papers directly; rather, such funding supports a process that has among its outcomes the production of papers. Copyright , Beech Tree Publishing.

Suggested Citation

  • John Rigby, 2011. "Systematic grant and funding body acknowledgement data for publications: new dimensions and new controversies for research policy and evaluation," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 20(5), pages 365-375, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:rseval:v:20:y:2011:i:5:p:365-375
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.3152/095820211X13164389670392
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    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:oup:rseval:v:20:y:2011:i:5:p:365-375. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/rev .

    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.