Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Different manifestations of ‘context’: examples from a bibliometric study of research in Zimbabwe in Southern Africa

  • Published:
Scientometrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

‘Context’ refers to the environment in which a phenomenon exists or takes place, and which can help to understand the phenomenon. Aspects of context are present in all bibliometric studies, but little scientific attention has been paid to how context manifests in bibliometric studies. This article, which is reflective and illustrative, argues that aspects of context can be applied or constructed. Three types of context application and three types of context construction are illustrated. This is done with reference to a bibliometric study of research in Zimbabwe, which analysed an integrated dataset of Scopus and Web of Science articles. In the study on which this article is based, context was applied as a background narrative, as part of data categorisation, and in the interpretation of findings. Context was further constructed by data categorisation, using different units of bibliometric analysis, and combining the bibliometric method with a non-bibliometric method. A schematic diagram of the identified types is presented, for other scholars to expand on and to continue to highlight the different manifestations of context in bibliometric studies.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Source: Authors’ own compilation. Notes: ZIMCHE = Zimbabwe Council for Higher Education; ZIMDEF = Zimbabwe Manpower Development Fund; ARC = Agricultural Research Council; MRCZ = Medical Research Council of Zimbabwe; SIRDC = Scientific and Industrial Research and Development Centre

Fig. 2

Source: Authors’ own compilation

Fig. 3

Source: Authors’ own compilation

Fig. 4

Source: Authors’ own compilation

Fig. 5

Source: Authors’ own compilation

Fig. 6

Source: Authors’ own compilation

Fig. 7

Source: Authors’ own compilation

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adams, J., Gurney, K., Hook, D., & Leydesdorff, L. (2014). International collaboration clusters in Africa. Scientometrics, 98(1), 547–556.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bambo, T. L., & Pouris, A. (2020). Bibliometric analysis of bioeconomy research in South Africa. Scientometrics, 125(1), 29–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bangani, S. (2018). The impact of electronic theses and dissertations: A study of the institutional repository of a university in South Africa. Scientometrics, 115(1), 131–151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beaudry, C., Mouton, J., & Prozesky, H. (2018). The next generation of scientists in Africa. African Minds.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Beintema, N., Chipunza, P., & Gao, L. (2017). Zimbabwe: Agricultural R&D indicators factsheet, January 2017. International Food Policy Research Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beintema, N., Chipunza, P., & Gao, L. (2019). Zimbabwe: Agricultural R&D indicators factsheet, April 2019. International Food Policy Research Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boshoff, N. (2009). Neo-colonialism and research collaboration in Central Africa. Scientometrics, 81(2), 413–434.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boshoff, N., & Akanmu, M. A. (2017). Scopus or Web of Science for a bibliometric profile of pharmacy research at a Nigerian university? South African Journal of Libraries and Information Science, 83(2), 12–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cambridge Dictionary. (N.d.). Retrieved June 09, 2021, from https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/context

  • Chang, Y. W. (2013). A comparison of citation contexts between natural sciences and social sciences and humanities. Scientometrics, 96(2), 535–553.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chimhundu, C., De Jager, K., & Douglas, T. (2015). Sectoral collaboration networks for cardiovascular medical device development in South Africa. Scientometrics, 105(3), 1721–1741.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Confraria, H., & Godinho, M. M. (2015). The impact of African science: A bibliometric analysis. Scientometrics, 102(2), 1241–1268.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dodsworth, S. (2019). The challenges of making research collaboration in Africa more equitable. In S. Dodsworth (Ed.), Oxford research encyclopedia of politics (pp. 1–22). Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doslu, M., & Bingol, H. O. (2016). Context sensitive article ranking with citation context analysis. Scientometrics, 108(2), 653–671.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flaherty, K., & Chipunza, P. (2014). Zimbabwe: Agricultural R&D indicators factsheet, June 2014. International Food Policy Research Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flaherty, K., Chipunza, P., & Nyamukapa, A. (2011). Zimbabwe: Recent developments in agricultural research. International Food Policy Research Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • González-Teruel, A., & Abad-García, F. (2018). The influence of Elfreda Chatman’s theories: A citation context analysis. Scientometrics, 117(3), 1793–1819.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greene, J. C., Caracelli, V. J., & Graham, W. F. (1989). Toward a conceptual framework for mixed-method evaluation designs. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 11(3), 255–274.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harsh, M., Bal, R., Weryha, A., Whatley, J., Onu, C. C., & Negro, L. M. (2021). Mapping computer science research in Africa: Using academic networking sites for assessing research activity. Scientometrics, 126(1), 305–334.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Inglesi-Lotz, R., & Pouris, A. (2011). Scientometric impact assessment of a research policy instrument: The case of rating researchers on scientific outputs in South Africa. Scientometrics, 88(3), 747–760.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ishengoma, J. M. (2016). North-South research collaborations and their impact on capacity building: A Southern perspective. In T. Halvorson & J. Nossum (Eds.), North-South knowledge networks: Towards equitable collaboration between academics, donors and universities (pp. 149–186). African Minds.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim, K. W. (2006). Measuring international research collaboration of peripheral countries: Taking the context into consideration. Scientometrics, 66(2), 231–240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Landini, F., Malerba, F., & Mavilia, R. (2015). The structure and dynamics of networks of scientific collaborations in Northern Africa. Scientometrics, 105(3), 1787–1807.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lathabai, H. H., Prabhakaran, T., & Changat, M. (2017). Contextual productivity assessment of authors and journals: A network scientometric approach. Scientometrics, 110(2), 711–737.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, S., Chan, C., Ding, K., Wang, B., Xu, K., & Lin, Y. (2014). Literature retrieval based on citation context. Scientometrics, 101(2), 1293–1307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mêgnigbêto, E. (2013). Scientific publishing in West Africa: Comparing Benin with Ghana and Senegal. Scientometrics, 95(3), 1113–1139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mouton, J. (2008). Africa’s science decline: The challenge of building scientific institutions. Harvard International Review, 30(3), 46–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ngwenya, S., & Boshoff, N. (2020). Participation of ‘international national organisations’ in Africa’s research: A bibliometric study of agriculture and health research in Zimbabwe. Scientometrics, 124(1), 533–553.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Noyons, E., & Calero-Medina, C. (2009). Applying bibliometric mapping in a high level science policy context: Mapping the research areas of three Dutch Universities of Technology. Scientometrics, 79(2), 261–275.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Onwuegbuzie, A. J., Wilcox, R., Gonzales, V., Hoisington, S., Lambert, J., Jordan, J., Aleisa, M., Benge, C. L., Wachsmann, M. S., & Valle, R. (2018). Collaboration patterns among mixed researchers: A multidisciplinary examination. International Journal of Multiple Research Approaches, 10, 437–457.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oxford Learner’s Dictionary. [Online]. Retrieved June 09, 2021, from https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com

  • Payumo, J. G., Monson, J., Jamison, A., & Fenwick, B. W. (2019). Metrics-based profiling of university research engagement with Africa: Research management, gender, and internationalization perspective. Scientometrics, 121(2), 675–698.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rafols, I. (2019). S&T indicators in the wild: Contextualization and participation for response metrics. Research Evaluation, 28(1), 7–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schubert, T., & Sooryamoorthy, R. (2010). Can the centre-periphery model explain patterns of international scientific collaboration among threshold and industrialised countries? The case of South Africa and Germany. Scientometrics, 83(1), 181–203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. (2014). Mapping research and innovation in the Republic of Zimbabwe. Country Profiles in Science, Technology and Innovation Policy (Vol. 2).

  • Sooryamoorthy, R. (2010). Science and scientific collaboration in South Africa: Apartheid and after. Scientometrics, 84(2), 373–390.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sooryamoorthy, R. (2011). Scientific publications of engineers in South Africa, 1975–2005. Scientometrics, 86(1), 211–226.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sugimoto, C. R., & Lariviѐre, V. (2018). Measuring research: What everyone needs to know. Oxford University Press.

  • Van Leeuwen, T. (2004). Descriptive versus evaluative bibliometrics. In F. H. Moed (Ed.), Handbook of quantitative science and technology research (pp. 373–388). Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work is based on research supported by the National Research Foundation (NRF) of South Africa (Grant No. 91488). Any opinion, finding and conclusion or recommendation expressed in this article is that of the authors, and the NRF does not accept any liability in this regard. We would also like to express our sincere thanks to the two anonymous reviewers whose comments helped to improve and clarify this manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Centre for Research on Evaluation, Science and Technology (CREST) and DSI-NRF Centre of Excellence in Scientometrics and Science, Technology and Innovation Policy (SciSTIP), Stellenbosch University, Private Bag X1, Matieland, 7602, South Africa

    Similo Ngwenya & Nelius Boshoff

Authors
  1. Similo Ngwenya
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Nelius Boshoff
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nelius Boshoff.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ngwenya, S., Boshoff, N. Different manifestations of ‘context’: examples from a bibliometric study of research in Zimbabwe in Southern Africa. Scientometrics 127, 3911–3933 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-022-04435-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-022-04435-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation