IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v104y2015i1d10.1007_s11192-015-1599-1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A bilateral comparison of research performance at an institutional level

Author

Listed:
  • Jiancheng Guan

    (University of Chinese Academy of Sciences
    Fudan University)

  • He Wei

    (University of Chinese Academy of Sciences)

Abstract

An extensive body of research indicated that the USA and China were the first two largest producers in the nanoscience and nanotechnology field while China performed better than USA in terms of quantity; it had produced inferior quality publications. Yet, no studies investigated whether the specific institutions are consistent with these conclusions or not. In this study, we identify two institutions National Center for Nanoscience and Technology (NCNST) from China and University of California Los Angeles-California Nanosystems Institute (CNSI) from the USA) and compare their scientific research. Further, we develop and exploit a novel and updated dataset on paper co-authorship to assess their scientific research. Our analysis reveals NCNST has many advantages in regards to author and paper quantities, growth rate and the strength of collaborations but loses dominance with respect to research quality. We do find that the collaboration networks of both NCNST and CNSI have small-world and scale-free properties. Besides, the analysis of knowledge networks shows that they have similar research interests or hotspots. Using statistical models, we test and discover that degree centrality has a significant inverted-U shape effect on scientific output and influence. However, we fail to find any significant effect of structural holes.

Suggested Citation

  • Jiancheng Guan & He Wei, 2015. "A bilateral comparison of research performance at an institutional level," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 104(1), pages 147-173, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:104:y:2015:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-015-1599-1
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-015-1599-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-015-1599-1
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11192-015-1599-1?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
    ---><---

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

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gert Sabidussi, 1966. "The centrality index of a graph," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 31(4), pages 581-603, December.
    2. Abbasi, Alireza & Hossain, Liaquat & Leydesdorff, Loet, 2012. "Betweenness centrality as a driver of preferential attachment in the evolution of research collaboration networks," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 6(3), pages 403-412.
    3. Kostoff, Ronald N., 2012. "China/USA nanotechnology research output comparison—2011 update," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 79(5), pages 986-990.
    4. Corey C. Phelps & Ralph Heidl & Anu Wadhwa, 2012. "Networks, knowledge, and knowledge networks: A critical review and research agenda," Post-Print hal-00715591, HAL.
    5. Simon Rodan & Charles Galunic, 2004. "More than network structure: how knowledge heterogeneity influences managerial performance and innovativeness," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(6), pages 541-562, June.
    6. Loet Leydesdorff & Caroline Wagner, 2009. "Is the United States losing ground in science? A global perspective on the world science system," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 78(1), pages 23-36, January.
    7. Ronald N. Kostoff & Raymond G. Koytcheff & Clifford G. Y. Lau, 2007. "Global nanotechnology research metrics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 70(3), pages 565-601, March.
    8. Jonathan Adams, 2012. "The rise of research networks," Nature, Nature, vol. 490(7420), pages 335-336, October.
    9. Réka Albert & Hawoong Jeong & Albert-László Barabási, 2000. "Error and attack tolerance of complex networks," Nature, Nature, vol. 406(6794), pages 378-382, July.
    10. Giulio Cainelli & Mario A. Maggioni & T. Erika Uberti & Annunziata Felice, 2015. "The strength of strong ties: How co-authorship affect productivity of academic economists?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(1), pages 673-699, January.
    11. Abbasi, Alireza & Altmann, Jörn & Hossain, Liaquat, 2011. "Identifying the effects of co-authorship networks on the performance of scholars: A correlation and regression analysis of performance measures and social network analysis measures," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 5(4), pages 594-607.
    12. Guan, Jiancheng & Ma, Nan, 2007. "China's emerging presence in nanoscience and nanotechnology: A comparative bibliometric study of several nanoscience `giants'," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(6), pages 880-886, July.
    13. Rotolo, Daniele & Messeni Petruzzelli, Antonio, 2013. "When does centrality matter? Scientific productivity and the moderating role of research specialization and cross-community ties," MPRA Paper 53406, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. Chen, Zifeng & Guan, Jiancheng, 2010. "The impact of small world on innovation: An empirical study of 16 countries," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 4(1), pages 97-106.
    15. Jonathan Adams, 2013. "The fourth age of research," Nature, Nature, vol. 497(7451), pages 557-560, May.
    16. Li Tang & Philip Shapira, 2011. "China–US scientific collaboration in nanotechnology: patterns and dynamics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 88(1), pages 1-16, July.
    17. Lee Fleming, 2001. "Recombinant Uncertainty in Technological Search," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(1), pages 117-132, January.
    18. Gonzalez-Brambila, Claudia N. & Veloso, Francisco M. & Krackhardt, David, 2013. "The impact of network embeddedness on research output," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(9), pages 1555-1567.
    19. Duk Hee Lee & Il Won Seo & Ho Chull Choe & Hee Dae Kim, 2012. "Collaboration network patterns and research performance: the case of Korean public research institutions," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 91(3), pages 925-942, June.
    20. Xianwen Wang & Shenmeng Xu & Di Liu & Yongxia Liang, 2012. "The role of Chinese–American scientists in China–US scientific collaboration: a study in nanotechnology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 91(3), pages 737-749, June.
    21. Kiran Savanur & R. Srikanth, 2010. "Modified collaborative coefficient: a new measure for quantifying the degree of research collaboration," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 84(2), pages 365-371, August.
    22. Xianwen Wang & Shenmeng Xu & Zhi Wang & Lian Peng & Chuanli Wang, 2013. "International scientific collaboration of China: collaborating countries, institutions and individuals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 95(3), pages 885-894, June.
    23. R. S. Bajwa & K. Yaldram & S. Rafique, 2013. "A scientometric assessment of research output in nanoscience and nanotechnology: Pakistan perspective," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 94(1), pages 333-342, January.
    24. Andrew V. Shipilov, 2009. "Firm Scope Experience, Historic Multimarket Contact with Partners, Centrality, and the Relationship Between Structural Holes and Performance," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(1), pages 85-106, February.
    25. R. Karpagam & S. Gopalakrishnan & M. Natarajan & B. Ramesh Babu, 2011. "Mapping of nanoscience and nanotechnology research in India: a scientometric analysis, 1990–2009," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 89(2), pages 501-522, November.
    26. Jiancheng Guan & Xia Gao, 2008. "Comparison and evaluation of Chinese research performance in the field of bioinformatics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 75(2), pages 357-379, May.
    27. Jeongsik “Jay” Lee, 2010. "Heterogeneity, Brokerage, and Innovative Performance: Endogenous Formation of Collaborative Inventor Networks," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(4), pages 804-822, August.
    28. Wang, Gangbo & Guan, Jiancheng, 2010. "The role of patenting activity for scientific research: A study of academic inventors from China's nanotechnology," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 4(3), pages 338-350.
    29. Zhou, Ping & Leydesdorff, Loet, 2006. "The emergence of China as a leading nation in science," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 83-104, February.
    30. Jiancheng Guan & Gangbo Wang, 2010. "A comparative study of research performance in nanotechnology for China’s inventor–authors and their non-inventing peers," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 84(2), pages 331-343, August.
    31. Tom Z. J. Fu & Qianqian Song & Dah Ming Chiu, 2014. "The academic social network," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 101(1), pages 203-239, October.
    32. Balconi, Margherita & Breschi, Stefano & Lissoni, Francesco, 2004. "Networks of inventors and the role of academia: an exploration of Italian patent data," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 127-145, January.
    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. Lei Shi & Shan Gao & Airong Xu & Kexin Zheng & Yuanpeng Ji & Xianlei Dong & Lizhi Xing, 2023. "Influence of Enterprise’s Factor Inputs and Co-Opetition Relationships to Its Innovation Output," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-23, January.
    2. Chen, Kaihua & Zhang, Yi & Zhu, Guilong & Mu, Rongping, 2020. "Do research institutes benefit from their network positions in research collaboration networks with industries or/and universities?," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 94.

    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. Stefano Scarazzati & Lili Wang, 2019. "The effect of collaborations on scientific research output: the case of nanoscience in Chinese regions," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 121(2), pages 839-868, November.
    2. Qinwei Cao & Manqing Tan & Peng Xie & Jian Huang, 2022. "Can emerging economies take advantage of their population size to gain international academic recognition? Evidence from key universities in China," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(2), pages 927-957, February.
    3. Guan, JianCheng & Zuo, KaiRui & Chen, KaiHua & Yam, Richard C.M., 2016. "Does country-level R&D efficiency benefit from the collaboration network structure?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(4), pages 770-784.
    4. Jiancheng Guan & Lanxin Pang, 2018. "Bidirectional relationship between network position and knowledge creation in Scientometrics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 115(1), pages 201-222, April.
    5. Guan, Jiancheng & Yan, Yan & Zhang, Jing Jing, 2017. "The impact of collaboration and knowledge networks on citations," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 11(2), pages 407-422.
    6. Yan Yan & Jiancheng Guan, 2018. "How multiple networks help in creating knowledge: evidence from alternative energy patents," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 115(1), pages 51-77, April.
    7. Lili Wang & Xianwen Wang & Niels J. Philipsen, 2017. "Network structure of scientific collaborations between China and the EU member states," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 113(2), pages 765-781, November.
    8. Yue Wang & Ning Li & Bin Zhang & Qian Huang & Jian Wu & Yang Wang, 2023. "The effect of structural holes on producing novel and disruptive research in physics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(3), pages 1801-1823, March.
    9. Jiancheng Guan & Yan Yan & Jingjing Zhang, 2015. "How do collaborative features affect scientific output? Evidences from wind power field," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(1), pages 333-355, January.
    10. Guan, Jiancheng & Zhang, Jingjing & Yan, Yan, 2015. "The impact of multilevel networks on innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(3), pages 545-559.
    11. Jia Zheng & Zhi-yun Zhao & Xu Zhang & Dar-zen Chen & Mu-hsuan Huang, 2014. "International collaboration development in nanotechnology: a perspective of patent network analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 98(1), pages 683-702, January.
    12. Xianwen Wang & Shenmeng Xu & Zhi Wang & Lian Peng & Chuanli Wang, 2013. "International scientific collaboration of China: collaborating countries, institutions and individuals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 95(3), pages 885-894, June.
    13. Krzysztof Klincewicz, 2016. "The emergent dynamics of a technological research topic: the case of graphene," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 106(1), pages 319-345, January.
    14. Anahita Hajibabaei & Andrea Schiffauerova & Ashkan Ebadi, 2023. "Women and key positions in scientific collaboration networks: analyzing central scientists’ profiles in the artificial intelligence ecosystem through a gender lens," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(2), pages 1219-1240, February.
    15. Wen, Jinyan & Qualls, William J. & Zeng, Deming, 2021. "To explore or exploit: The influence of inter-firm R&D network diversity and structural holes on innovation outcomes," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    16. Ehsan Mohammadi, 2012. "Knowledge mapping of the Iranian nanoscience and technology: a text mining approach," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 92(3), pages 593-608, September.
    17. Chen, Wei & Yan, Yan, 2023. "New components and combinations: The perspective of the internal collaboration networks of scientific teams," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 17(2).
    18. Eli Rudinow Saetnan & Richard Philip Kipling, 2016. "Evaluating a European knowledge hub on climate change in agriculture: Are we building a better connected community?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(2), pages 1057-1074, November.
    19. Zhang, Guiyang & Tang, Chaoying, 2017. "How could firm's internal R&D collaboration bring more innovation?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 299-308.
    20. Jingjing Zhang & Yan Yan & Jiancheng Guan, 2015. "Scientific relatedness in solar energy: a comparative study between the USA and China," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(2), pages 1595-1613, February.

    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:spr:scient:v:104:y:2015:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-015-1599-1. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.