Abstract
In a context of increasingly limited resources, the demand for information from research funding bodies is growing. The exploitation of the funding acknowledgements collected in WoS publications can be useful for these sponsors, not only because it allows them to know the published results with their financial support, but also because it provides a framework to evaluate the efficiency of the different funding instruments. The present work adds to the knowledge of previous studies to offer a simple and efficient methodology that automatically identifies major sponsors, and their funded research, using keywords. To this end, articles with Spain in the address field and English in the language field are obtained (years 2010–2014), given that WoS only considers funding acknowledgements written in English. Subsequently, the Funding Agency field of these articles is treated, selecting funders’ variants that will serve as keywords in the Full-Text Search for the location of the research supported by major sponsors. In addition, a sample of reviewed documents is provided to evaluate the reliability of the proposed methodology, performing also some statistical tests. The results show a recall of 91.5% of the sample articles, with a precision of 99%. Notwithstanding, there are differences in the automatic identification of funders by institutional sector and/or area, being the Government sector the one with the highest precision and recall, and the area of Agriculture, Biology and Environment the one with the best degree of association between the automatic classification and the reviewed one. Finally, possible future developments are offered, paying special attention to increasing the automation of the standardisation of funders’ names.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Álvarez-Bornstein, B., Morillo, F., & Bordons, M. (2017). Funding acknowledgements in the Web of Science: Completeness and accuracy of collected data. Scientometrics, 112(3), 1793–1812. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2453-4.
Caron, E. A. M., & Daniels, H. A. M. (2016). Identification of organization name variants in large databases using rule-based scoring and clustering—With a case study on the Web of Science database. In Proceedings of the 18th international conference on enterprise information systems (Vol. 1, pp. 182–187). https://doi.org/10.5220/0005836701820187.
Costas, R., & van Leeuwen, T. N. (2012). Approaching the “reward triangle”: General analysis of the presence of funding acknowledgments and “peer interactive communication” in scientific publications. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 63(8), 1647–1661. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.22692.
Costas, R., & Yegros-Yegros, A. (2013). Possibilities of funding acknowledgement analysis for the bibliometric study of research funding organizations: Case study of the Austrian Science Fund (FWF). In Proceedings of the 14th international conference of the international society for scientometrics and informetrics (Vol. 2, pp. 1401–1408). Retrieved from http://www.issi2013.org/Images/ISSI_Proceedings_Volume_II.pdf. Accessed April 21, 2017.
Cronin, B., Shaw, D., & La Barre, K. (2003). A cast of thousands: Coauthorship and subauthorship collaboration in the 20th century as manifested in the scholarly journal literature of psychology and philosophy. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 54(9), 855–871. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.10278.
Cuxac, P., Lamirel, J. C., & Bonvallot, V. (2013). Efficient supervised and semi-supervised approaches for affiliations disambiguation. Scientometrics, 97(1), 47–58. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-013-1025-5.
Díaz-Faes, A. A., & Bordons, M. (2014). Acknowledgements in scientific publications: Presence in Spanish science and text patterns across disciplines. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 65(9), 1834–1849. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23081.
Giles, C. L., & Councill, I. G. (2004). Who gets acknowledged: Measuring scientific contributions through automatic acknowledgment indexing. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 101(51), 17599–17604. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0407743101.
Gök, A., Rigby, J., & Shapira, P. (2016). The impact of research funding on scientific outputs: Evidence from six smaller European countries. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 67(3), 715–730. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23406.
Grassano, N., Rotolo, D., Hutton, J., Lang, F., & Hopkins, M. M. (2017). Funding data from publication acknowledgements: Coverage, uses, and limitations. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 68(4), 999–1017. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23737.
Huang, S., Yang, B., Yan, S., & Rousseau, R. (2014). Institution name disambiguation for research assessment. Scientometrics, 99(3), 823–838. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-013-1214-2.
Lepori, B. (2011). Coordination modes in public funding systems. Research Policy, 40(3), 355–367. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2010.10.016.
Lewison, G., & Sullivan, R. (2015). Conflicts of interest statements on biomedical papers. Scientometrics, 102(3), 2151–2159. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-014-1507-0.
Morillo, F., Aparicio, J., González Albo, B., & Moreno, L. (2013a). Towards the automation of address identification. Scientometrics, 94(1), 207–224. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-012-0733-6.
Morillo, F., Santabárbara, I., & Aparicio, J. (2013b). The automatic normalisation challenge: Detailed addresses identification. Scientometrics, 95(3), 953–966. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-013-0965-0.
OECD. (2015). Frascati manual 2015: Guidelines for collecting and reporting data on research and experimental development., The measurement of scientific, technological and innovation activities Paris: OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264239012-en.
Oztaysi, B., Onar, S. C., Goztepe, K., & Kahraman, C. (2017). Evaluation of research proposals for grant funding using interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Soft Computing, 21(5), 1203–1218. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-015-1853-8.
Rigby, J. (2011). Systematic grant and funding body acknowledgement data for publications: New dimensions and new controversies for research policy and evaluation. Research Evaluation, 20(5), 365–375. https://doi.org/10.3152/095820211X13164389670392.
Sirtes, D. (2013). Funding acknowledgements for the German Research Foundation (DFG). The dirty data of the Web of Science database and how to clean it up. In Proceedings of the 14th international conference of the international society for scientometrics and informetrics (Vol. 1, pp. 784–795). Retrieved from http://www.forschungsinfo.de/Publikationen/Download/SIRTES_ISSI_2013_DFG_FUND_ACK.pdf. Accessed April 11, 2017.
Sirtes, D., & Riechert, M. (2014). A fully automated method for the unification of funding organizations in the web of knowledge. In Proceedings of the 19th international conference on science and technology indicators (pp. 594–597). Retrieved from http://www.forschungsinfo.de/publikationen/Download/SirtesRiechert_2014_STI_fully_automatic_FO_unification.pdf. Accessed April 11, 2017.
Wang, J., & Shapira, P. (2011). Funding acknowledgement analysis: An enhanced tool to investigate research sponsorship impacts: The case of nanotechnology. Scientometrics, 87(3), 563–586. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-011-0362-5.
Acknowledgements
This work is supported by the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness (Grant CSO2014-57826-P and predoctoral contract BES-2015-073537).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Morillo, F., Álvarez-Bornstein, B. How to automatically identify major research sponsors selecting keywords from the WoS Funding Agency field. Scientometrics 117, 1755–1770 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2947-8
Received:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2947-8