IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v95y2013i2d10.1007_s11192-012-0804-8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Second order indicators for evaluating international scientific collaboration

Author

Listed:
  • Gangan Prathap

    () (CSIR National Institute of Science Communication and Information Resources)

Abstract

We propose an indicator to “measure” the extent to which co-publication through international collaboration enhances the value of scientific output of an organisation or agency performing academic research. A second order approach is used which combines a quality proxy (impact) and a quantity or size proxy (number of papers published) to yield a trinity of energy like scalar proxies. From these it is possible to define an index of foreign collaboration and another evenness indicator that shows the size and unevenness of the role foreign collaboration plays in the total academic output of the organization.

Suggested Citation

  • Gangan Prathap, 2013. "Second order indicators for evaluating international scientific collaboration," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 95(2), pages 563-570, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:95:y:2013:i:2:d:10.1007_s11192-012-0804-8
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-012-0804-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-012-0804-8
    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

    as
    1. Aparna Basu & Ritu Aggarwal, 2001. "International Collaboration in Science in India and its Impact on Institutional Performance," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 52(3), pages 379-394, November.
    2. Gangan Prathap, 2011. "The Energy–Exergy–Entropy (or EEE) sequences in bibliometric assessment," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 87(3), pages 515-524, June.
    3. Loet Leydesdorff & Lutz Bornmann, 2011. "Integrated impact indicators compared with impact factors: An alternative research design with policy implications," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 62(11), pages 2133-2146, November.
    4. P. Nishy & Yatish Panwar & Suresh Prasad & G. K. Mandal & Gangan Prathap, 2012. "An impact-citations-exergy (iCX) trajectory analysis of leading research institutions in India," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 91(1), pages 245-251, April.
    5. David A. Pendlebury & Jonathan Adams, 2012. "Comments on a critique of the Thomson Reuters journal impact factor," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 92(2), pages 395-401, August.
    6. Jerome K. Vanclay, 2012. "Impact factor: outdated artefact or stepping-stone to journal certification?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 92(2), pages 211-238, August.
    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. Wah Yun Low & Kwan Hoong Ng & M. A. Kabir & Ai Peng Koh & Janaki Sinnasamy, 2014. "Trend and impact of international collaboration in clinical medicine papers published in Malaysia," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 98(2), pages 1521-1533, February.
    2. Zewen Hu & Angela Lin & Peter Willett, 2019. "Identification of research communities in cited and uncited publications using a co-authorship network," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 118(1), pages 1-19, January.
    3. Vivek Kumar Singh & Ashraf Uddin & David Pinto, 2015. "Computer science research: the top 100 institutions in India and in the world," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 104(2), pages 529-553, August.

    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. Gangan Prathap, 2012. "Evaluating journal performance metrics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 92(2), pages 403-408, August.
    2. Gangan Prathap, 2014. "A three-dimensional bibliometric evaluation of research in polymer solar cells," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 101(1), pages 889-898, October.
    3. Gangan Prathap, 2014. "Single parameter indices and bibliometric outliers," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 101(3), pages 1781-1787, December.
    4. Gangan Prathap, 2012. "Energy indicators and percentile ranking normalization," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 91(3), pages 997-1003, June.
    5. Fang Xu & Wenbin Liu & Ronald Rousseau, 2015. "Introducing sub-impact factor (SIF-) sequences and an aggregated SIF-indicator for journal ranking," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(2), pages 1577-1593, February.
    6. Rogheyeh Eskrootchi & Nadia Sanee, 2018. "Comparison of medical research performance by thermodynamic and citation analysis methods," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 117(3), pages 2159-2168, December.
    7. Loet Leydesdorff & Lutz Bornmann & Jonathan Adams, 2019. "The integrated impact indicator revisited (I3*): a non-parametric alternative to the journal impact factor," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 119(3), pages 1669-1694, June.
    8. Peter Jacso, 2012. "Grim tales about the impact factor and the h-index in the Web of Science and the Journal Citation Reports databases: reflections on Vanclay’s criticism," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 92(2), pages 325-354, August.
    9. Ronald Rousseau, 2012. "Updating the journal impact factor or total overhaul?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 92(2), pages 413-417, August.
    10. David A. Pendlebury & Jonathan Adams, 2012. "Comments on a critique of the Thomson Reuters journal impact factor," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 92(2), pages 395-401, August.
    11. Stuart Brody, 2013. "Impact factor: Imperfect but not yet replaceable," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 96(1), pages 255-257, July.
    12. Deming Lin & Tianhui Gong & Wenbin Liu & Martin Meyer, 2020. "An entropy-based measure for the evolution of h index research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(3), pages 2283-2298, December.
    13. Lando, Tommaso & Bertoli-Barsotti, Lucio, 2017. "Measuring the citation impact of journals with generalized Lorenz curves," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 11(3), pages 689-703.
    14. Wah Yun Low & Kwan Hoong Ng & M. A. Kabir & Ai Peng Koh & Janaki Sinnasamy, 2014. "Trend and impact of international collaboration in clinical medicine papers published in Malaysia," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 98(2), pages 1521-1533, February.
    15. Juan A Crespo & Ignacio Ortuño-Ortín & Javier Ruiz-Castillo, 2012. "The Citation Merit of Scientific Publications," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(11), pages 1-9, November.
    16. Hamid Bouabid & Vincent Larivière, 2013. "The lengthening of papers’ life expectancy: a diachronous analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 97(3), pages 695-717, December.
    17. Yinian Gu, 2004. "Global knowledge management research: A bibliometric analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 61(2), pages 171-190, October.
    18. George A. Lozano & Vincent Larivière & Yves Gingras, 2012. "The weakening relationship between the impact factor and papers' citations in the digital age," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 63(11), pages 2140-2145, November.
    19. Shunshun Shi & Wenyu Zhang & Shuai Zhang & Jie Chen, 2018. "Does prestige dimension influence the interdisciplinary performance of scientific entities in knowledge flow? Evidence from the e-government field," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 117(2), pages 1237-1264, November.
    20. Robert Lehmann & Klaus Wohlrabe, 2017. "An Elo ranking for economics journals," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 37(4), pages 2282-2291.

    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:95:y:2013:i:2:d:10.1007_s11192-012-0804-8. 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: http://www.springer.com .

    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.