IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Scientific publication performance in post-communist countries: still lagging far behind


  • Štěpán Jurajda

    (CERGE-EI, a joint workplace of Charles University and the Economics Institute of the Czech Academy of Sciences)

  • Stanislav Kozubek

    (Institute of Biophysics of the Czech Academy of Sciences)

  • Daniel Münich

    () (CERGE-EI, a joint workplace of Charles University and the Economics Institute of the Czech Academy of Sciences)

  • Samuel Škoda

    (CERGE-EI, a joint workplace of Charles University and the Economics Institute of the Czech Academy of Sciences)


Abstract We present a bibliometric comparison of publication performance in 226 scientific disciplines in the Web of Science (WoS) for six post-communist EU member states relative to six EU-15 countries of a comparable size. We compare not only overall country-level publication counts, but also high quality publication output where publication quality is inferred from the journal Article Influence Scores. As of 2010–2014, post-communist countries are still lagging far behind their EU counterparts, with the exception of a few scientific disciplines mainly in Slovenia. Moreover, research in post-communist countries tends to focus relatively more on quantity rather than quality. The relative publication performance of post-communist countries in the WoS is strongest in natural sciences and engineering. Future research is needed to reveal the underlying causes of these performance differences, which may include funding and productivity gaps, the historical legacy of the communist ideology, and Web of Science coverage differences.

Suggested Citation

  • Štěpán Jurajda & Stanislav Kozubek & Daniel Münich & Samuel Škoda, 2017. "Scientific publication performance in post-communist countries: still lagging far behind," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 112(1), pages 315-328, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:112:y:2017:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-017-2389-8
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-017-2389-8

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    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 search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Giovanni Abramo & Ciriaco Andrea D'Angelo & Flavia Di Costa, 2008. "Assessment of sectoral aggregation distortion in research productivity measurements," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 17(2), pages 111-121, June.
    2. Abramo, Giovanni & D’Angelo, Ciriaco Andrea, 2014. "Assessing national strengths and weaknesses in research fields," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 8(3), pages 766-775.
    3. Bornmann, Lutz & Leydesdorff, Loet & Wang, Jian, 2014. "How to improve the prediction based on citation impact percentiles for years shortly after the publication date?," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 8(1), pages 175-180.
    4. Boyle Glenn, 2008. "Pay Peanuts and Get Monkeys? Evidence from Academia," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 8(1), pages 1-26, July.
    5. Moed, H. F. & Burger, W. J. M. & Frankfort, J. G. & Van Raan, A. F. J., 1985. "The use of bibliometric data for the measurement of university research performance," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 14(3), pages 131-149, June.
    6. repec:hrv:faseco:33077922 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. 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.
    8. Teemu Makkonen & Timo Mitze, 2016. "Scientific collaboration between ‘old’ and ‘new’ member states: Did joining the European Union make a difference?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 106(3), pages 1193-1215, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


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

    Cited by:

    1. Peter Vinkler, 2018. "Structure of the scientific research and science policy," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 114(2), pages 737-756, February.
    2. Gangan Prathap, 2018. "A bibliometric tale of two cities: Hong Kong and Singapore," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 117(3), pages 2169-2175, December.
    3. Yves Gingras & Mahdi Khelfaoui, 2018. "Assessing the effect of the United States’ “citation advantage” on other countries’ scientific impact as measured in the Web of Science (WoS) database," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 114(2), pages 517-532, February.
    4. Jielan Ding & Per Ahlgren & Liying Yang & Ting Yue, 2018. "Disciplinary structures in Nature, Science and PNAS: journal and country levels," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(3), pages 1817-1852, September.
    5. Maja Jokić, 2020. "Productivity, visibility, authorship, and collaboration in library and information science journals: Central and Eastern European authors," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 122(2), pages 1189-1219, February.

    More about this item


    Bibliometrics; National comparison; Scientometric indicators; Article Influence Score; Web of Science; Post-communist Europe;

    JEL classification:

    • I23 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Higher Education; Research Institutions
    • I29 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Other


    Access and download statistics


    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:112:y:2017:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-017-2389-8. 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 (Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing). General contact details of provider: .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.