IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v126y2021i3d10.1007_s11192-020-03790-1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Quantifying the publication preferences of leading research universities

Author

Listed:
  • Barbara S. Lancho-Barrantes

    (University of Leeds)

  • Francisco J. Cantu-Ortiz

    (Tecnologico de Monterrey)

Abstract

Research universities have a strong devotion and advocacy for research in their core academic mission. This is why they are widely recognized for their excellence in research which make them take the most renowned positions in the different worldwide university leagues. In order to examine the uniqueness of this group of universities we analyze the scientific production of a sample of them in a 5 year period of time. On the one hand, we analyze their preferences in research measured with the relative percentage of publications in the different subject areas, and on the other hand, we calculate the similarity between them in research preferences. In order to select a set of research universities, we studied the leading university rankings of Shanghai, QS, Leiden, and Times Higher Education (THE). Although the four rankings own well established and developed methodologies and hold great prestige, we choose to use THE because data were readily available for doing the study we had in mind. Having done that, we selected the twenty academic institutions ranked with the highest score in the last edition of THE World University Rankings 2020 and to contrast their impact, we also, we compared them with the twenty institutions with the lowest score in this ranking. At the same time, we extracted publication data from Scopus database for each university and we applied bibliometrics indicators from Elsevier’s SciVal. We applied the statistical techniques cosine similarity and agglomerative hierarchical clustering analysis to examine and compare affinities in research preferences among them. Moreover, a cluster analysis through VOSviewer was done to classify the total scientific production in the four major fields (health sciences, physical sciences, life sciences and social sciences). As expected, the results showed that top universities have strong research profiles, becoming the leaders in the world in those areas and cosine similarity pointed out that some are more affine among them than others. The results provide clues for enhancing existing collaboration, defining and re-directing lines of research, and seeking for new partnerships to face the current pandemic to find was to tackle down the covid-19 outbreak.

Suggested Citation

  • Barbara S. Lancho-Barrantes & Francisco J. Cantu-Ortiz, 2021. "Quantifying the publication preferences of leading research universities," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(3), pages 2269-2310, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:126:y:2021:i:3:d:10.1007_s11192-020-03790-1
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-020-03790-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-020-03790-1
    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/s11192-020-03790-1?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. Ludo Waltman & Nees Eck, 2013. "A smart local moving algorithm for large-scale modularity-based community detection," The European Physical Journal B: Condensed Matter and Complex Systems, Springer;EDP Sciences, vol. 86(11), pages 1-14, November.
    2. Anthony F.J. van Raan, 2008. "Bibliometric statistical properties of the 100 largest European research universities: Prevalent scaling rules in the science system," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 59(3), pages 461-475, February.
    3. Giovanni Abramo & Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo, 2014. "How do you define and measure research productivity?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 101(2), pages 1129-1144, November.
    4. John Taylor, 2006. "Managing the Unmanageable: The Management of Research in Research-Intensive Universities," Higher Education Management and Policy, OECD Publishing, vol. 18(2), pages 1-25.
    5. Zhigang Hu & Fangqi Guo & Haiyan Hou, 2017. "Mapping research spotlights for different regions in China," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 110(2), pages 779-790, February.
    6. Nees Jan Eck & Ludo Waltman, 2017. "Citation-based clustering of publications using CitNetExplorer and VOSviewer," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 111(2), pages 1053-1070, May.
    7. Linda Butler, 2007. "Assessing university research: A plea for a balanced approach," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 34(8), pages 565-574, October.
    8. Loet Leydesdorff & Lutz Bornmann & John Mingers, 2019. "Statistical significance and effect sizes of differences among research universities at the level of nations and worldwide based on the leiden rankings," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 70(5), pages 509-525, May.
    9. Juan Zhang & Qi Yu & Fashan Zheng & Chao Long & Zuxun Lu & Zhiguang Duan, 2016. "Comparing keywords plus of WOS and author keywords: A case study of patient adherence research," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 67(4), pages 967-972, April.
    10. Bolli, Thomas & Olivares, Maria & Bonaccorsi, Andrea & Daraio, Cinzia & Aracil, Adela Garcia & Lepori, Benedetto, 2016. "The differential effects of competitive funding on the production frontier and the efficiency of universities," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 91-104.
    11. Atkinson, Richard C. & Blanpied, William A., 2008. "Research Universities: Core of the US science and technology system," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 30-48.
    12. Félix Moya-Anegón & Zaida Chinchilla-Rodríguez & Benjamín Vargas-Quesada & Elena Corera-Álvarez & Francisco José Muñoz-Fernández & Antonio González-Molina & Victor Herrero-Solana, 2007. "Coverage analysis of Scopus: A journal metric approach," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 73(1), pages 53-78, October.
    13. Waltman, Ludo & van Eck, Nees Jan & Noyons, Ed C.M., 2010. "A unified approach to mapping and clustering of bibliometric networks," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 4(4), pages 629-635.
    14. Mammadov, Rza & Aypay, Ahmet, 2020. "Efficiency analysis of research universities in Turkey," International Journal of Educational Development, Elsevier, vol. 75(C).
    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. Ruilu Yang & Qiang Wu & Yundong Xie, 2023. "Are scientific articles involving corporations associated with higher citations and views? an analysis of the top journals in business research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(10), pages 5659-5685, October.
    2. Ardit Sertolli & Zoltán Gabnai & Péter Lengyel & Attila Bai, 2022. "Biomass Potential and Utilization in Worldwide Research Trends—A Bibliometric Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-20, May.

    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. Lutz Bornmann & Robin Haunschild & Sven E. Hug, 2018. "Visualizing the context of citations referencing papers published by Eugene Garfield: a new type of keyword co-occurrence analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 114(2), pages 427-437, February.
    2. Collins C. Okolie & Gideon Danso-Abbeam & Okechukwu Groupson-Paul & Abiodun A. Ogundeji, 2022. "Climate-Smart Agriculture Amidst Climate Change to Enhance Agricultural Production: A Bibliometric Analysis," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-23, December.
    3. Giovanni Abramo & Corrado Costa & Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo, 2015. "A multivariate stochastic model to assess research performance," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(2), pages 1755-1772, February.
    4. Agnieszka Janik & Adam Ryszko & Marek Szafraniec, 2020. "Scientific Landscape of Smart and Sustainable Cities Literature: A Bibliometric Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-39, January.
    5. Piccarozzi, Michela & Silvestri, Cecilia & Aquilani, Barbara & Silvestri, Luca, 2022. "Is this a new story of the ‘Two Giants’? A systematic literature review of the relationship between industry 4.0, sustainability and its pillars," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 177(C).
    6. Nina Sakinah Ahmad Rofaie & Seuk Wai Phoong & Muzalwana Abdul Talib & Ainin Sulaiman, 2023. "Light-emitting diode (LED) research: A bibliometric analysis during 2003–2018," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 57(1), pages 173-191, February.
    7. Giovanni Matteo & Pierfrancesco Nardi & Stefano Grego & Caterina Guidi, 2018. "Bibliometric analysis of Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment research," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 38(4), pages 508-516, December.
    8. Loredana Canfora & Corrado Costa & Federico Pallottino & Stefano Mocali, 2021. "Trends in Soil Microbial Inoculants Research: A Science Mapping Approach to Unravel Strengths and Weaknesses of Their Application," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-21, February.
    9. Evi Sachini & Nikolaos Karampekios & Pierpaolo Brutti & Konstantinos Sioumalas-Christodoulou, 2020. "Should I stay or should I go? Using bibliometrics to identify the international mobility of highly educated Greek manpower," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(1), pages 641-663, October.
    10. P. K. Priyan & Wakara Ibrahimu Nyabakora & Geofrey Rwezimula, 2023. "A bibliometric review of the knowledge base on financial inclusion," SN Business & Economics, Springer, vol. 3(2), pages 1-21, February.
    11. Mohammad Alqudah & Luis Ferruz & Emilio Martín & Hanan Qudah & Firas Hamdan, 2023. "The Sustainability of Investing in Cryptocurrencies: A Bibliometric Analysis of Research Trends," IJFS, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-25, July.
    12. Oleg E. Karpov & Elena N. Pitsik & Semen A. Kurkin & Vladimir A. Maksimenko & Alexander V. Gusev & Natali N. Shusharina & Alexander E. Hramov, 2023. "Analysis of Publication Activity and Research Trends in the Field of AI Medical Applications: Network Approach," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(7), pages 1-17, March.
    13. Theresa Velden & Kevin W. Boyack & Jochen Gläser & Rob Koopman & Andrea Scharnhorst & Shenghui Wang, 2017. "Comparison of topic extraction approaches and their results," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 111(2), pages 1169-1221, May.
    14. R. Fileto Maciel & P. Saskia Bayerl & Marta Macedo Kerr Pinheiro, 2019. "Technical research innovations of the US national security system," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 120(2), pages 539-565, August.
    15. Itsuki Kageyama & Karin Kurata & Shuto Miyashita & Yeongjoo Lim & Shintaro Sengoku & Kota Kodama, 2022. "A Bibliometric Analysis of Wearable Device Research Trends 2001–2022—A Study on the Reversal of Number of Publications and Research Trends in China and the USA," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(24), pages 1-19, December.
    16. Borazon, Elaine Quintana & Chuang, Hsueh-Hua, 2023. "Resilience in educational system: A systematic review and directions for future research," International Journal of Educational Development, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    17. Ana Lagos & Joaquín E. Caicedo & Gustavo Coria & Andrés Romero Quete & Maximiliano Martínez & Gastón Suvire & Jesús Riquelme, 2022. "State-of-the-Art Using Bibliometric Analysis of Wind-Speed and -Power Forecasting Methods Applied in Power Systems," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(18), pages 1-40, September.
    18. Lima, Pedro G. & Teixeira, Pedro N. & Silva, Sandra T., 2021. "Major Streams in the Economics of Inequality: A Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis of the Literature since 1950s," IZA Discussion Papers 14777, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    19. Tamara Poje & Maja Zaman Groff, 2022. "Mapping Ethics Education in Accounting Research: A Bibliometric Analysis," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 179(2), pages 451-472, August.
    20. Chiemela Victor Amaechi & Idris Ahmed Ja’e & Ahmed Reda & Xuanze Ju, 2022. "Scientometric Review and Thematic Areas for the Research Trends on Marine Hoses," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(20), pages 1-31, October.

    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:126:y:2021:i:3:d:10.1007_s11192-020-03790-1. 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.