Advertisement

Scientometrics

, Volume 31, Issue 1, pp 97–122 | Cite as

Research output and transnational cooperation in physics subfields: A multidimensional analysis

  • P. S. Nagpaul
  • Lalita Sharma
Article

Abstract

This paper compares the profiles of research output and transnational cooperation (as revealed through multicountry publications) of thirty six countries in ten subfields of Physics during the period 1981–1985. The data for comparative analysis were taken fromBraun et al. Since raw counts of publications are confounded by the size of the countries and the size of the research fields, this comparison is made, using relative indicators — activity index and collaboration index. The structures of research output and transnational cooperation are analyzed through Correspondence Analysis, which leads to the identification of countries with similar profiles (of research output and transnational cooperation) and the spatial representation of countries and Physics subfields. The configurations of research output and transnational cooperation are compared to assess the concordance between the policies of these countries for research and transnational cooperation in Physics.

Keywords

Comparative Analysis Research Field Correspondence Analysis Activity Index Research Output 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes and references

  1. 1.
    T. Braun, E. Gomez, A. Mendez, A. Schubert, International coauthorship patterns in Physics and its subfields: 1981–1985,Scientometrics, 24 (1992) 181–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    T. Luukkonen, O. Persson, G. Sivertsen, Understanding patterns of international scientific collaboration,Science, Technology and Human Values, 17 (1992) 101–126.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Measuring Internationalization of Science, Laboratoire d'Evaluation et de Prospective Internationales (CNRS), Paris, 1993, p. 63.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    F. Narin, K. Stevens, E. S. Withlow, Scientific cooperation in Europe and the citation of multinationally authored papers,Scientometrics, 21 (1991) 313–323.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    For example, Science Indicator Series of USA, France, Japan, etc. incorporate data and analyses on internationally coauthored publications.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    See for example,op. cit. Refs. 2, 3 ;R. J. W. Tijssen, Literature based statistical analysis of international scientific cooperation: An exploratory case study of the Netherlands, In:R. J. W. Tijssen,Cartography of Science: Scientometric Mapping with Multidimensional Scaling Methods, DSWO Press, Leiden University Leiden, 1992, pp. 145–159.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    T. Braun, E. Gomez, A. Mendez, A. Schubert,op. cit. Ref. 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    G. Salton, D. Beergmar, A citation study of computer science literature,IEEE Transaction in Professional Communication, PC-22, 3 (1979) 393–440.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    L. Lebart, A. Morineau, K. M. Warwick,Multivariate Descriptive Statistical Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1984.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    This methodology has been used by several researchers, for example,R. J. W. Tijssen,op. cit. Ref. 5 For example, Science Indicator Series of USA, France, Japan, etc. incorporate data and analyses on internationally coauthored publications; see also papers in Ref. 3Measuring Internationalization of Science, Laboratoire d'Evaluation et de Prospective Internationales (CNRS), Paris, 1993, p. 63.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    F. Narin, et al.,op. cit., Ref. 4.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    See for example,T. Luukkonen, O. Persson, G. Siversen,op. cit., 1 ;P. Cabo, T. H. A. Bijmolt, International R & D networks: the Eureka map, paper presented at the Fourth International Conference on Bibliometrics, Informetrics and Scientometrics, Berlin, 11–16 September, 1993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    J. D. Frame, Mainstream research in Latin America and Caribbean,Interciencia, 2 (1977) 143–148.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    A. Schubert, T. Braun, Relative indicators and relational charts for comparative assessment of publication output and citation impact,Scientometrics, 9 (1986) 281–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    M. P. Carpenter, F. Gibb, M. Harris, J. Irvine, B. R. Martin, F. Narin, Bibliometrics profile for British academic institutions; An experiment to develop research output indicators,Scientometrics, 14 (1988) 213–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    P. S. Nagpaul, N. Pant, Crossnational assessment of specialization patterns in Chemistry,Scientometrics, 27 (1993) 215–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    L. Lebart, A. Morineau, K. M. Warwick,op. cit., Ref. 9 193–222.Google Scholar
  18. 19.
    Fmatch is a module of the computer program ‘Multidimensional Statistical Package’ (PC-MDS) developed byS. M. Smith, Institute of Business Management, Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah, USA.Google Scholar
  19. 20.
    N. Cliff, Orthogonal rotation to congruence,Psychometrika, 31 (1968) 33–42.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • P. S. Nagpaul
    • 1
  • Lalita Sharma
    • 1
  1. 1.Technology and Development Studies Dr. K. S. Krishnan MargNational Institute of ScienceNew DelhiIndia

Personalised recommendations