IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/rseval/v8y1999i1p60-67.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Trends in publication output and impact of universities in the Netherlands

Author

Listed:
  • H F Moed
  • Th N van Leeuwen
  • M S Visser

Abstract

Trends in the research output and impact of universities in the Netherlands are examined, as reflected in scientific articles in journals pro-cessed for the Science Citation Index. At the level of sub fields in the natural, technical and life sciences, there has been hardly any concentration of research activities among Dutch universities during the 80s and 90s. In the 80s and to a lesser extent in the 90s, levelling of universities' research output in natural and life sciences is a dominant trend. Changes in distribution of students among the universities and the outcomes of evaluation studies conducted in the past probably have affected this trend positively towards uniformity in output. The academic systems in Sweden, Italy, Germany, Spain, Denmark and particularly Great Britain show a stronger concentration of research articles among universities than the Dutch academic system. Copyright , Beech Tree Publishing.

Suggested Citation

  • H F Moed & Th N van Leeuwen & M S Visser, 1999. "Trends in publication output and impact of universities in the Netherlands," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 8(1), pages 60-67, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:rseval:v:8:y:1999:i:1:p:60-67
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.3152/147154499781777711
    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.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Robert J. W. Tijssen & Martijn S. Visser & Thed N. van Leeuwen, 2002. "Benchmarking international scientific excellence: Are highly cited research papers an appropriate frame of reference?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 54(3), pages 381-397, July.
    2. Carmen Osuna & Laura Cruz Castro & Luis Sanz Menéndez, 2010. "Knocking down some Assumptions about the Effects of Evaluation Systems on Publications," Working Papers 1010, Instituto de Políticas y Bienes Públicos (IPP), CSIC.
    3. Joonha Jeon & So Young Kim, 2018. "Is the gap widening among universities? On research output inequality and its measurement in the Korean higher education system," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 52(2), pages 589-606, March.
    4. Luis A. N. Amaral & P. Gopikrishnan & Kaushik Matia & Vasiliki Plerou & H. E. Stanley, 2001. "Application of statistical physics methods and conceptsto the study of science & technology systems," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 51(1), pages 9-36, April.
    5. Carmen Osuna & Laura Cruz-Castro & Luis Sanz-Menéndez, 2011. "Overturning some assumptions about the effects of evaluation systems on publication performance," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 86(3), pages 575-592, March.
    6. Sandström, Ulf & Van den Besselaar, Peter, 2018. "Funding, evaluation, and the performance of national research systems," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 12(1), pages 365-384.
    7. Carmen López-Illescas & Félix Moya-Anegón & Henk F. Moed, 2011. "A ranking of universities should account for differences in their disciplinary specialization," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 88(2), pages 563-574, August.

    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:8:y:1999:i:1:p:60-67. 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.