IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v72y2007i3d10.1007_s11192-006-1733-1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Relative Superiority Coefficient of papers: A new dimension for institutional research performance in different fields

Author

Listed:
  • Xiaojun Hu

    (Zhejiang University)

Abstract

Cross-field comparison of citation measures of scientific achievement or research quality is severely hindered by the diversity of the stage of development and citation habits of different disciplines or fields. Based on the same principles of RCR (Relative Citation Rate) and RW (Relative Subfield Citedness), a new dimension — the Relative Superiority Coefficient (SC n ) in research quality was introduced. This can indicate clearly the relative research level for research groups at multiple levels in the respective field by consistent criteria in terms of research quality. Comparison of the SC n within or across 22 broad fields among 5 countries were presented as an application model. Hierarchical Cluster and One-Way ANOVA were applied and processed by the statistical program SPSS. All original data were from Essential Science Indicators (ESI) 1996–2006.

Suggested Citation

  • Xiaojun Hu, 2007. "Relative Superiority Coefficient of papers: A new dimension for institutional research performance in different fields," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 72(3), pages 389-402, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:72:y:2007:i:3:d:10.1007_s11192-006-1733-1
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-006-1733-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-006-1733-1
    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/s11192-006-1733-1?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. Maria Bordons & M. T. Fernández & Isabel Gómez, 2002. "Advantages and limitations in the use of impact factor measures for the assessment of research performance," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 53(2), pages 195-206, February.
    2. Herman Van den Berghe & Josee A. Houben & Renger E. de Bruin & Henk F. Moed & André Kint & Marc Luwel & Eric H. J. Spruyt, 1998. "Bibliometric indicators of university research performance in Flanders," Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 49(1), pages 59-67.
    3. Takayuki Hayashi & Yuko Fujigaki, 1999. "Differences in knowledge production between disciplines based on analysis of paper styles and citation patterns," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 46(1), pages 73-86, September.
    4. Henk F. Moed, 2002. "Measuring China"s research performance using the Science Citation Index," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 53(3), pages 281-296, March.
    5. Korhonen, Pekka & Tainio, Risto & Wallenius, Jyrki, 2001. "Value efficiency analysis of academic research," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 130(1), pages 121-132, April.
    6. Peter Vinkler, 2004. "Characterization of the impact of sets of scientific papers: The Garfield (impact) factor," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 55(5), pages 431-435, March.
    7. Thed N. Van Leeuwen & Henk F. Moed & Robert J. W. Tijssen & Martijn S. Visser & Anthony F. J. Van Raan, 2001. "Language biases in the coverage of the Science Citation Index and its consequencesfor international comparisons of national research performance," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 51(1), pages 335-346, April.
    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. Xiaojun Hu & Ronald Rousseau, 2009. "A comparative study of the difference in research performance in biomedical fields among selected Western and Asian countries," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 81(2), pages 475-491, November.

    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. Bar-Ilan, Judit, 2008. "Informetrics at the beginning of the 21st century—A review," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 2(1), pages 1-52.
    2. Xinning Su & Sanhong Deng & Si Shen, 2014. "The design and application value of the Chinese Social Science Citation Index," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 98(3), pages 1567-1582, March.
    3. Kostoff, Ronald N., 2008. "Comparison of China/USA science and technology performance," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 2(4), pages 354-363.
    4. Guan Jiancheng & Wang Junxia, 2004. "Evaluation and interpretation of knowledge production efficiency," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 59(1), pages 131-155, January.
    5. Waltman, Ludo, 2016. "A review of the literature on citation impact indicators," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 365-391.
    6. Jia Zhu & Saeed-Ul Hassan & Hamid Turab Mirza & Qing Xie, 2014. "Measuring recent research performance for Chinese universities using bibliometric methods," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 101(1), pages 429-443, October.
    7. 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.
    8. Maxim Kotsemir & Sergey Shashnov, 2017. "Measuring, analysis and visualization of research capacity of university at the level of departments and staff members," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 112(3), pages 1659-1689, September.
    9. Ephrance Abu Ujum & Sameer Kumar & Kuru Ratnavelu & Gangan Prathap, 2021. "A new journal power-weakness ratio to measure journal impact," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(11), pages 9051-9068, November.
    10. Min-Wei Lin & Jingjing Zhang, 2007. "Language trends in nanoscience and technology: The case of Chinese-language publications," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 70(3), pages 555-564, March.
    11. Radu Silaghi-Dumitrescu & Augusta Sabau, 2014. "Scientometric analysis of relative performance in a key university in Romania," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 99(2), pages 463-474, May.
    12. Goodall, Amanda H., 2009. "Highly cited leaders and the performance of research universities," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(7), pages 1079-1092, September.
    13. Domingo Docampo & Lawrence Cram, 2019. "Highly cited researchers: a moving target," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 118(3), pages 1011-1025, March.
    14. Ghaleb Alnahdi & Dimitris Anastasiou, 2020. "Recruitment Practices for Special Education Faculty: Implications for Saudi Universities," SAGE Open, , vol. 10(3), pages 21582440209, August.
    15. 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.
    16. Feng Li & Yong Yi & Xiaolong Guo & Wei Qi, 2012. "Performance evaluation of research universities in Mainland China, Hong Kong and Taiwan: based on a two-dimensional approach," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 90(2), pages 531-542, February.
    17. Henk F. Moed, 2000. "Bibliometric Indicators Reflect Publication and Management Strategies," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 47(2), pages 323-346, February.
    18. 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.
    19. Peter Vinkler, 2008. "Correlation between the structure of scientific research, scientometric indicators and GDP in EU and non-EU countries," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 74(2), pages 237-254, February.
    20. Henk F. Moed, 2002. "Measuring China"s research performance using the Science Citation Index," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 53(3), pages 281-296, March.

    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:72:y:2007:i:3:d:10.1007_s11192-006-1733-1. 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.