IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

Explaining the transatlantic gap in research excellence

Listed author(s):
  • Andrea Bonaccorsi

    ()

    (University of Pisa
    IRVAPP-FBK, Istituto per la Ricerca Valutativa sulle Politiche Pubbliche)

  • Tindaro Cicero

    (Italian Agency for the Evaluation of Universities and Research Institutes ANVUR)

  • Peter Haddawy

    (Mahidol University)

  • Saeed-UL Hassan

    (Information Technology University of the Punjab)

Registered author(s):

    Abstract The paper exploits a newly created dataset offering several detailed bibliometric data and indicators on 251 subject categories for a large sample of universities in Europe, North America and Asia. In particular, it addresses the controversial issue of the distance between Europe and USA in research excellence (so called “transatlantic gap”). By building up indicators of objective excellence (top 10% worldwide in publications and citations) and subjective excellence (top 10% in the distribution of share of top journals out of total production at university level), it is shown that European universities fail to achieve objective measures of global excellence, while being competitive only in few fields. The policy implications of this state of affairs are discussed.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-016-2180-2
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Article provided by Springer & Akadémiai Kiadó in its journal Scientometrics.

    Volume (Year): 110 (2017)
    Issue (Month): 1 (January)
    Pages: 217-241

    as
    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:110:y:2017:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-016-2180-2
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-016-2180-2
    Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.springer.com

    Web page: http://akkrt.hu/

    Order Information: Web: http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/11192

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

    as
    in new window


    1. Albarrán, Pedro & Ortuño, Ignacio & Ruiz-Castillo, Javier, 2011. "High- and low-impact citation measures: Empirical applications," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 5(1), pages 122-145.
    2. Lin, Chi-Shiou & Huang, Mu-Hsuan & Chen, Dar-Zen, 2013. "The influences of counting methods on university rankings based on paper count and citation count," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 7(3), pages 611-621.
    3. Ruiz-Castillo, Javier & Ortuño, Ignacio & Crespo, Juan A. & Albarrán, Pedro, 2010. "The skewness of science in 219 sub-fields and a number of aggregates," UC3M Working papers. Economics we1038, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid. Departamento de Economía.
    4. Pedro Albarrán & Ignacio Ortuño & Javier Ruiz-Castillo, 2011. "Average-based versus high- and low-impact indicators for the evaluation of scientific distributions," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 20(4), pages 325-339, October.
    5. Andrea Bonaccorsi, 2007. "Explaining poor performance of European science: Institutions versus policies," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 34(5), pages 303-316, June.
    6. Ahlgren, Per & Waltman, Ludo, 2014. "The correlation between citation-based and expert-based assessments of publication channels: SNIP and SJR vs. Norwegian quality assessments," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 8(4), pages 985-996.
    7. Loet Leydesdorff & Lutz Bornmann & Rüdiger Mutz & Tobias Opthof, 2011. "Turning the tables on citation analysis one more time: Principles for comparing sets of documents," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 62(7), pages 1370-1381, 07.
    8. Mingers, John & Leydesdorff, Loet, 2015. "A review of theory and practice in scientometrics," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 246(1), pages 1-19.
    9. Kaur, Jasleen & Radicchi, Filippo & Menczer, Filippo, 2013. "Universality of scholarly impact metrics," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 7(4), pages 924-932.
    10. Albarrán, Pedro & Ortuño, Ignacio & Ruiz-Castillo, Javier, 2011. "The measurement of low- and high-impact in citation distributions: Technical results," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 5(1), pages 48-63.
    11. Dosi, Giovanni & Llerena, Patrick & Labini, Mauro Sylos, 2006. "The relationships between science, technologies and their industrial exploitation: An illustration through the myths and realities of the so-called `European Paradox'," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(10), pages 1450-1464, December.
    12. Ruiz-Castillo, Javier & Ortuño, Ignacio & Crespo, Juan A. & Albarrán, Pedro, 2009. "A comparison of the scientific performance of the U. S. and the European Union at the turn of the XXI century," UC3M Working papers. Economics we095534, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid. Departamento de Economía.
    13. Andrea Bonaccorsi, 2011. "European competitiveness in information technology and long-term scientific performance," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 38(7), pages 521-540, August.
    14. Ludo Waltman & Clara Calero-Medina & Joost Kosten & Ed C.M. Noyons & Robert J.W. Tijssen & Nees Jan Eck & Thed N. Leeuwen & Anthony F.J. Raan & Martijn S. Visser & Paul Wouters, 2012. "The Leiden ranking 2011/2012: Data collection, indicators, and interpretation," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 63(12), pages 2419-2432, December.
    15. Robert H. Frank, 2016. "Success and Luck: Good Fortune and the Myth of Meritocracy," Economics Books, Princeton University Press, edition 1, number 10663, March.
    16. Haddawy, Peter & Hassan, Saeed-Ul & Asghar, Awais & Amin, Sarah, 2016. "A comprehensive examination of the relation of three citation-based journal metrics to expert judgment of journal quality," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 162-173.
    17. Waltman, Ludo, 2016. "A review of the literature on citation impact indicators," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 365-391.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:110:y:2017:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-016-2180-2. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Sonal Shukla)

    or (Rebekah McClure)

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.