IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v49y2000i3d10.1023_a1010541707878.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Publication Productivity of Young Scientists: An Empirical Study

Author

Listed:
  • Katarina Prpić

    (Institute for Social Research of Zagreb)

Abstract

This research was conducted on a sample of 840 respondents who represent half of the Croatian population of young scientists. There are three main features which define the publication productivity of young scientists. 1) Despite the worsened position of R & D, they publish more scientific papers than the young generations of scientists at the beginning of the nineties. 2) Differences between a highly-productive minority, which produces on average half of all scientific publications, and a low-productive majority is already apparent in young scientists. 3) The productivity of young scientists is formed according to productivity patterns typical of particular scientific fields and disciplines. With regard to the explanation of productivity, the following has been found. a) An expansion of the set of predictors resulted in an improvement in the explanation of the productivity of young scientists compared with previous surveys. b) Among the factors which contribute significantly to the explanation of the quantity of scientific publications, the most powerful predictor is attendance at conferences abroad, followed by scientific qualifications and some gatekeeping variables. c) Besides certain similarities, scientific fields also show a specific structure of determinants of young scientists' productivity.

Suggested Citation

  • Katarina Prpić, 2000. "The Publication Productivity of Young Scientists: An Empirical Study," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 49(3), pages 453-490, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:49:y:2000:i:3:d:10.1023_a:1010541707878
    DOI: 10.1023/A:1010541707878
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1023/A:1010541707878
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1023/A:1010541707878?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.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Ali Uzun, 2002. "Productivity ratings of institutions based on publication in Scientometrics, Informetrics, and Bibliometrics, 1981–2000," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 53(3), pages 297-307, March.
    2. Katarina Prpić, 2007. "Changes of scientific knowledge production and research productivity in a transitional society," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 72(3), pages 487-511, September.
    3. Olav Sorenson, 2018. "Innovation Policy in a Networked World," Innovation Policy and the Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 18(1), pages 53-77.
    4. Alireza Isfandyari-Moghaddam & Mohammad Hasanzadeh, 2013. "A study of factors inhibiting research productivity of Iranian women in ISI," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 95(2), pages 797-815, May.
    5. Katarina Prpić, 2002. "Gender and productivity differentials in science," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 55(1), pages 27-58, September.
    6. Radhamany Sooryamoorthy, 2014. "Publication productivity and collaboration of researchers in South Africa: new empirical evidence," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 98(1), pages 531-545, January.
    7. Rodrigo Costas & María Bordons, 2011. "Do age and professional rank influence the order of authorship in scientific publications? Some evidence from a micro-level perspective," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 88(1), pages 145-161, July.
    8. Andrada Elena Urda-Cîmpean & Sorana D. Bolboacă & Andrei Achimaş-Cadariu & Tudor Cătălin Drugan, 2016. "Knowledge Production in Two Types of Medical PhD Routes—What’s to Gain?," Publications, MDPI, vol. 4(2), pages 1-16, June.

    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:spr:scient:v:49:y:2000:i:3:d:10.1023_a:1010541707878. 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: 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.