Are citation-based quantitative techniques adequate for measuring science on the periphery?

Abstract

The inadequacies of citation analysis-based quatitative techniques in the context of developing countries owe their origins to the rather small size of most peripheral country scientific enterprises, the poor coverage of Third World journals in bibliographic databases, (and in particularSCI), the cognitive limitations of citation analysis pointed out by microsociologists, and the non-normative nature of the scientific enterprise in these countries. Much of peripheral science is derivative and imitative of science done in the centre, rather than ‘original’ or ‘path-breaking’, and there is hardly any indigenous ‘scientific community’. And yet, citation analysis-based quantitative measures can be applied to characterise different aspects of peripheral science. These techniques assume great importance, especially in view of the massive inadequacies of the peer review process prevailing in these countries. The application of such citation-based quantification to units of different levels of aggregation such as a journal, an institution and a country as a whole has been demonstrated taking India as the example. Our results show that levels of funding have no correlation with the quality or international citation impact of the literature output resulting from a project. Almost all Indian journals have a very low impact on world literature, and the relatively better performance ofJournal of Astrophysics and Astronomy (and Indian astronomical research in general) owes it to favourable factors, both social and cognitive.