Advertisement

Scientometrics

, Volume 109, Issue 1, pp 447–462 | Cite as

Application of bibliometrics in analysis of output differences among countries under International Ocean Discovery Program

  • Yunfei WangEmail author
  • Siming Tan
  • Yanyan Ma
  • Xia Zhao
  • Zhiling Wang
  • Zhiyong Chu
  • Honghua Qin
Article
  • 410 Downloads

Abstract

International Ocean Discovery Program (IODP 2013–2023) and its predecessors is the largest and longest international cooperation research program in earth science. It requires a strong financial support from government. Therefore, a study to compare research achievements among main IODP members was carried out. All peer-reviewed publications related with IODP can be acquired through database built by American geosciences institute. Comparisons of research directions and focus among the United States, Japan, Germany and P. R. China were studied using term frequency-inverse document frequency matrix, co-word, co-citation cluster and overlay analysis methods. Publication numbers, collaboration network, annual variation and expedition achievements among IODP main members were analyzed at the meantime. Research output differences in ocean science among IODP main members were also covered and compared with IODP outputs.US has emerged as absolutely the leader of IODP. Japan, Germany, UK and France are close followers, and these countries also have their own research topics. P. R. China ranks six with publication number and ranks ten with first authors and corresponding authors. There is a large gap between P. R. China and other countries such as US and Japan, which lies in expedition chief scientists’ percentage, basic researches and activeness in research focus. Besides, researches output performance of P. R. China in ocean science is better it ranks 2 in ocean science publications. What is more, Japan has a trend to catch US, however, P. R. China doesn’t have any sign of increasing. Sustained fiscal effort is still necessary for P. R. China.

Keywords

IODP Differences among countries Bibliometrics Co-cited analysis Overlay analysis 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This paper was funded by the Qingdao Science Fund for Young Scholars (14-2-4-38-Jch) for Y. Wang and the United Fund of Institute of Scientific and Technical information of P. R. China (ISTIC)-Thomson Reuters for Y. Wang. Thanks to Dr. Ma from Ocean University of P. R. China for her professional assistance in IODP research. The authors would also like to thank to anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments.

References

  1. Blackman, D., et al. (2013). IODP expedition 340T: borehole logging at Atlantis Massif oceanic core complex. Sci. Drill., 15, 31–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Breuker, A., et al. (2013). Microbial community analysis of deeply buried marine sediments of the New Jersey shallow shelf (IODP Expedition 313). FEMS Microbiology Ecology, 85(3), 578–592.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Camoin, G. F., et al. (2005). The last deglacial sea level rise in the South Pacific: offshore drilling in Tahiti (French Polynesia). Prosp.: IODP Sci. 310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chen, C. (2006). CiteSpace II: Detecting and visualizing emerging trends and transient patterns in scientific literature. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 57(3), 359–377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chen, C., et al. (2010). The structure and dynamics of co-citation clusters: A multiple-perspective co-citation analysis. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 61(7), 1386–1409.Google Scholar
  6. Egghe, L., & Rousseau, R. (2002). Co-citation, bibliographic coupling and a characterization of lattice citation networks. Scientometrics, 55(3), 349–361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Glanzel, W. (2001). National characteristics in international scientific co-authorship relations. Scientometrics, 51(1), 69–115.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Glänzel, W., Leta, J., & Thijs, B. (2006). Science in Brazil. Part 1: A macro-level comparative study. Scientometrics, 67(1), 67–86.Google Scholar
  9. Henig, A. S., et al. (2012). Downward continued multichannel seismic refraction analysis of Atlantis Massif oceanic core complex, 30 degrees N. Geochemistry Geophysics Geosystems: Mid-Atlantic Ridge. 13.Google Scholar
  10. Kanamatsu, T., et al. (2005). North Atlantic climate II addendum. Prosp.: IODP Sci. 306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. PAJEK. (2009). Pajek: Program for large network analysis. http://vlado.fmf.uni-lj.si/pub/networks/pajek/.
  12. Persson, O. (1994). The intellectual base and research fronts of JASIS 1986–1990. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 45(1), 31–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Persson, O. (2010). Identifying research themes with weighted direct citation links. Journal of Informetrics, 4, 415–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Robertson, S. (2004). Understanding inverse document frequency: on theoretical arguments for IDF. Journal of documentation, 60(5), 503–520.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Sakaguchi, A., et al. (2011). Seismic slip propagation to the updip end of plate boundary subduction interface faults: Vitrinite reflectance geothermometry on Integrated Ocean Drilling Program NanTro SEIZE cores. Geology, 93(4), 395–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Science Committee of IODP. (2014). Illuminating Earth’s Past, Present and Future The Science Plan for the International Ocean Discovery Program, Science Plan, pp. 6–7.Google Scholar
  17. Shibata, N., Kajikawa, Y., Takeda, Y., & Matsushima, K. (2009). Comparative study on methods of detecting research fronts using different types of citation. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60(3), 571–580.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Small, H. (1999). Visualizing science by citation mapping. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 50(9), 799–813.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Small, H. (2006). Tracking and predicting growth areas in science. Scientometrics, 68(3), 595–610.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Small, H., & Upham, P. (2009). Citation structure of an emerging research area on the verge of application. Scientometrics, 79(2), 365–375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Su, H. N. (2010). Mapping knowledge structure by keyword co-occurrence: A first look at journal papers in technology foresight. Scientometrics, 85(1), 65–79.Google Scholar
  22. Zhao, D. Z. (2006). Towards all-author co-citation analysis. Information Processing and Management, 42(6), 1578–1591.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yunfei Wang
    • 1
    Email author
  • Siming Tan
    • 1
  • Yanyan Ma
    • 2
  • Xia Zhao
    • 1
  • Zhiling Wang
    • 1
  • Zhiyong Chu
    • 1
  • Honghua Qin
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of Scientific and Technical Information of QingdaoQingdaoPeople’s Republic of China
  2. 2.Ocean University of P. R. ChinaQingdaoPeople’s Republic of China

Personalised recommendations