Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Core-periphery nexus in the EU social sciences: bibliometric perspective

Scientometrics volume 127, pages 5793–5817 (2022)Cite this article

A Correction to this article was published on 05 October 2022

This article has been updated

Abstract

The paper explores the process of integration of CEE countries into the broader EU and global research landscapes in social sciences. We use bibliometric data extracted from the Scopus database for the 1996–2017 period and investigate changes between pre- and post-EU accession periods for 11 new and 4 prospective EU members, all post-socialist countries. In line with the previous literature, the descriptive statistic indicates that productivity in terms of the number of papers as well as the ratio of published papers in non-CEE vs. CEE journals has improved. The citation ratios are strongly in favor of non-CEE journals across all fields of social sciences. In general, productivity rises, while impact remains moderate with variations across scientific fields. Thus, the process of integration is in place, albeit at a slow pace.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Change history

Notes

  1. The European Research Area, http://ec.europa.eu/research/era/index_en.htm (accessed 5 July 2020).

  2. See, among others, Lindsey (1989), van Raan (2004) or Bornmann et al. (2008).

  3. Barré et al. (2013), for example, use the term Europeanisation to emphasize various types of intra-European integration and coordination.

  4. Authors’ access to Scopus database was endorsed by Croatian Ministry of Science and Education.

  5. This research was carried out as a part of the project ‘Research activity, collaboration and orientation in social sciences in Croatia and other post-socialist European countries (RACOSS)’, https://racoss.idi.hr/index_en.html.

  6. Revised Field of Science and Technology (FOS) classification in the Frascati Manual. https://unstats.un.org/unsd/EconStatKB/KnowledgebaseArticle10269.aspx (accessed 7 October 2017).

  7. It should be noted that as of 2017 a significant number of social-science journals from CEE countries have been included in Scopus, often with backward issues for several years but they are not included in our sample.

  8. Croatia's strong position regarding the number of journals draws its roots in the 1980s when it already had larger number of journals than other Yugoslav republics, today sovereign states included in this analysis. See more in Jokić (2003).

  9. Moed et al. (2021) analyzed comprehensively national journals of a large group of post-socialist countries but without discriminating among science fields.

  10. SNIP was originally developed by Moed (2010).

  11. To offset the impact of the Scopus indexing policy, one of the reviewers recommended normalizing the research productivity indicator. We undertook the exercise by calculating the “deflator” which has 1 in 1996 and reflects the growth rate of CEE Scopus journal articles. We do not present the results of this exercise because they indicate that the deflator captures—apart from the increase in the number of journals indexed in Scopus—all other factors that influence research productivity.

  12. Basu (2010) found for a large number of countries over the period 1996–2006 that the publication output varied linearly with number of country journals indexed in bibliographic databases.

  13. See more in Jokić et al. (2018).

  14. See Abt (2007), Jappe (2007) and Uddin et al. (2012).

References

  • Abramo, G., & D’Angelo, C. A. (2014). How do you define and measure research productivity? Scientometrics, 101(2), 1129–1144. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-014-1269-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Abt, H. A. (2007). The future of single-authored papers. Scientometrics, 73(3), 353–358. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-007-1822-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alatas, S. F. (2003). Academic dependency and the global division of labour in the social sciences. Current Sociology, 51(6), 599–613. https://doi.org/10.1177/00113921030516003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Archambault, É., Vignola-Gagné, É., Côté, G., Larivière, V., & Gingrasb, Y. (2006). Benchmarking scientific output in the social sciences and humanities: The limits of existing databases. Scientometrics, 68, 329–342. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-006-0115-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arunachalam, S., & Manorama, K. (1989). Are citation-based quantitative techniques adequate for measuring science on the periphery? Scientometrics, 15(5–6), 393–408. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02017061

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barré, R., Henriques, L., Pontikakis, D., & Weber, K. M. (2013). Measuring the integration and coordination dynamics of the European research area. Science and Public Policy, 40(2), 187–205. https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scs080

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bartol, T., Budimir, G., Dekleva-Smrekar, D., Pusnik, M., & Juznic, P. (2014). Assessment of research fields in Scopus and Web of Science in the view of national research evaluation in Slovenia. Scientometrics, 98(2), 1491–1504. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-013-1148-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Basu, A. (2010). Does a country’s scientific “productivity” depend critically on the number of country journals indexed? Scientometrics, 82(3), 507–516. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-010-0186-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bonaccorsi, A., Daraio, C., Fantoni, S., Folli, V., Leonetti, M., & Ruocco, G. (2017). Do social sciences and humanities behave like life and hard sciences? Scientometrics, 112(1), 607–653. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2384-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bornmann, L., Mutz, R., Neuhaus, C., & Daniel, H.-D. (2008). Citation counts for research evaluation: Standards of good practice for analyzing bibliometric data and presenting and interpreting results. Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics, 8(1), 93–102. https://doi.org/10.3354/esep00084

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bouillet, D., & Jokić, M. (2019). Characteristics of educational sciences research activity in European post-socialist countries in the period 1996 to 2013: Content analysis approach. European Educational Research Journal, 18(4), 407–425. https://doi.org/10.1177/1474904119827462

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bouillet, D., Jokić, M., & Martinčević, M. (2021). The analysis of the co-authorship in journals of educational sciences of authors from European post-socialist countries. Društvena istraživanja, 30(3), 593–1614. https://doi.org/10.3354/esep00084

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Butler, L., & McAllister, I. (2009). Metrics or peer review? Evaluating the 2001 UK research assessment exercise in political science. Political Studies Review, 7(1), 3–17. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1478-9299.2008.00167.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chinchilla-Rodrίguez, Z., Miguel, S., & Moya-Anegón, F. D. (2015). What factors affect the visibility of Argentinean publications in humanities and social sciences in Scopus? Some evidence beyond the geographic realm of research. Scientometrics, 102(1), 789–810. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-014-1414-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corpakis, D. (2010). The inclusiveness of the European research area in the field of social sciences and humanities and the ways and means by which this could be better achieved. In P. Kovacs & D. Kutsar (Eds.), Internationalisation of social sciences in Central and Eastern Europe: The ‘catching up’—A myth or a strategy? (pp. 34–55). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Moya-Anegón, F., Chinchilla-Rodríguez, Z., Vargas-Quesada, B., Corera-Álvarez, E., Muñoz-Fernández, F. J., González-Molina, A., & Herrero-Solana, V. (2007). Coverage analysis of Scopus: A journal metric approach. Scientometrics, 73(1), 53–78. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-007-1681-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Demeter, M. (2017). The core-periphery problem in communication research: A network analysis of leading publication. Publishing Research Quarterly, 33(4), 402–420. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12109-017-9535-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dumitrescu, D. (2010). Paving Romania’s way towards the European research area. In P. Kovacs & D. Kutsar (Eds.), Internationalisation of social sciences in Central and Eastern Europe: The ’catching up’—A myth or a strategy? (pp. 154–180). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Engels, T. C. E., Istenič Starčič, A., Kulczycki, E., Pölönen, J., & Sivertsen, G. (2018). Are book publications disappearing from scholarly communication in the social sciences and humanities? Aslib Journal of Information Management, 70(6), 592–607. https://doi.org/10.1108/AJIM-05-2018-0127

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Engels, T. C. E., Ossenblok, T. L. B., & Spruyt, E. H. J. (2012). Changing publication patterns in the social sciences and humanities, 2000–2009. Scientometrics, 93(2), 373–390. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-012-0680-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Filáček, A. (2010). Czech science policy in social sciences and humanities: Towards transformation and catching up. In P. Kovacs & D. Kutsar (Eds.), Internationalisation of social sciences in central and eastern Europe: The ’catching up’—A myth or a strategy? (pp. 133–153). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flecha, R., Soler-Gallart, M., & Sordé, T. (2015). Social impact: Europe must fund social sciences. Nature, 528(7581), 193. https://doi.org/10.1038/528193d

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gareau, F. H. (1985). The multinational version of social science with emphasis upon the discipline of sociology. Current Sociology, 33(3), 1–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gingras, Y., & Mosbah-Natanson, S. (2010). Les sciences sociales françaises entre ancrage local et visibilité international (The French social sciences between local anchoring and international visibility). Archives Europeennes De Sociologie, 51(2), 305–321. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003975610000147

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glänzel, W. (1996). A bibliometric approach to social sciences. National research performances in 6 selected social science areas, 1990–1992. Scientometrics, 35(3), 291–307. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02016902

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glänzel, W., & Schlemmer, B. (2007). National research profiles in a changing Europe (1983–2003): An exploratory study of sectoral characteristics in the triple helix. Scientometrics, 70(2), 267–275. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-007-0203-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gornev, G. (2010). In isolation parochial standards persist. The case of the social sciences in Bulgaria. In P. Kovacs & D. Kutsar (Eds.), Internationalisation of social sciences in Central and Eastern Europe: The ’catching up’—A myth or a strategy? (pp. 133–153). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grančay, M., Vveinhardt, J., & Šumilo, Ē. (2017). Publish or perish: How Central and Eastern European economists have dealt with the ever-increasing academic publishing requirements 2000–2015. Scientometrics, 111(3), 1813–1837. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2332-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heilbron, J. (2014). The social sciences as an emerging global field. Current Sociology, 62(5), 685–703. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011392113499739

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henriksen, D. (2016). The rise in co-authorship in the social sciences (1980–2013). Scientometrics, 107(2), 455–476. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-1849-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henriksen, D. (2018). What factors are associated with increasing co-authorship in the social sciences? A case study of Danish Economics and Political Science. Scientometrics, 114(3), 1395–1421. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2635-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hicks, D. M. (1999). The difficulty of achieving full coverage of international social science literature and the bibliometric consequences. Scientometrics, 44(2), 193–215. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02457380

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hicks, D. M. (2004). The four literatures of social science. In H. Moed (Ed.), Handbook of quantitative science and technology research (pp. 476–496). Kluwer Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hladchenko, M., & Moed, H. F. (2021). The effect of publication traditions and requirements in research assessment and funding policies upon the use of national journals in 28 post-socialist countries. Journal of Informetrics, 15(4), 101190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2021.101190

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huang, M., & Chang, Y. (2008). Characteristics of research output in social sciences and humanities: From a research evaluation perspective. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(11), 1819–1828. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.20885

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ingwersen, P. (1997). The Central International Visibility of Danish and Scandinavian Research 1988–1996: A general overview of science & technology, the humanities and social sciences by online publication analysis CIS Report 5.3. Centre for Informetric Studies, Royal School of Library and Information Science.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jappe, A. (2007). Explaining international collaboration in global environmental change research. Scientometrics, 71(3), 367–390. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-007-1676-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jokić, M. (2003). Evaluation of Croatian journals covered by the ISI databases (Institute for Scientific Information). Periodicum Biologorum, 105(1), 95–98.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jokić, M. (2020). Productivity, visibility, authorship, and collaboration in library and information science journals: Central and Eastern European authors. Scientometrics, 122(2), 1189–1219. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-019-03308-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jokić, M., Mervar, A., & Mateljan, S. (2018). Scientific potential of European fully open access journals. Scientometrics, 114(3), 1373–1394. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2629-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jokić, M., Mervar, A., & Mateljan, S. (2019a). Comparative analysis of book citations in social science journals by Central and Eastern European authors. Scientometrics, 120(3), 1005–1029. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-019-03176-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jokić, M., Mervar, A., & Mateljan, S. (2019b). The development of political science in Central and Eastern Europe: Bibliometric perspective, 1996–2013. European Political Science, 18(3), 491–509. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41304-018-0191-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jurajda, Š, Kozubek, S., Münich, D., & Škoda, S. (2017). Scientific publication performance in post-communist countries: Still lagging far behind. Scientometrics, 112(1), 315–328. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2389-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kousha, K., & Thelwall, M. (2015). Alternative metrics for book impact assessment: Can choice reviews be a useful source? In A. A. Salah, Y. Tonta, A. A. Akdag Salah, C. Sugimoto, & U. Al (Eds.), Proceedings of ISSI 2015 Istanbul: 15th International Society of Scientometrics and Informetrics Conference (pp. 59–70). Bogaziçi University Printhouse.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kozak, M., Bornmann, L., & Leydesdorff, L. (2015). How have the Eastern European countries of the former Warsaw Pact developed since 1990? A bibliometric study. Scientometrics, 102, 1101–1117. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-014-1439-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kozlowski, J., Radosevic, S., & Ircha, D. (1999). History matters: The inherited disciplinary structure of the post-communist science in countries of Central and Eastern Europe and its restructuring. Scientometrics, 45(1), 137–166. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02458473

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kramberger, A., & Mali, F. (2010). An evaluation system of the science and international orientation of social scientists: The case of Slovenia. In P. Kovacs & D. Kutsar (Eds.), Internationalisation of social sciences in Central and Eastern Europe: The ’catching up’—A myth or a strategy? (pp. 192–214). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kulczycki, E., Engels, T. C. E., Pölönen, J., Bruun, K., Dušková, M., Guns, R., Nowotniak, R., Petr, M., Sivertsen, G., Istenič Starčič, A., & Zuccala, A. (2018). Publication patterns in the social sciences and humanities: Evidence from eight European countries. Scientometrics, 116(1), 463–486. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2711-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kulczycki, E., Rozkosz, E. A., & Drabek, A. (2019). Internationalization of Polish journals in the social sciences and humanities: Transformative role of the research evaluation system. Canadian Journal of Sociology, 44(1), 9–38. https://doi.org/10.29173/cjs28794

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kutsar, D., & Kovacs, P. I. (2010a). Introduction. Why this book? In P. Kovacs & D. Kutsar (Eds.), Internationalisation of social sciences in central and eastern Europe: The ’catching up’—A myth or a strategy? (pp. 1–6). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kutsar, D., & Kovacs, P. (2010b). Conclusion: Internationalisation of Central and Eastern European social sciences—Is the catching up a myth or reality? In P. Kovacs & D. Kutsar (Eds.), Internationalisation of social sciences in Central and Eastern Europe: The ’catching up’—A myth or a strategy? (pp. 215–227). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Larivière, V., Archambault, É., Gingras, Y., & Vignola-Gagné, É. (2006). The place of serials in referencing practices: Comparing natural sciences and engineering with social sciences and humanities. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 57(8), 997–1004. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.20349

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larivière, V., Gingras, Y., Sugimoto, C. R., & Tsou, A. (2014). Team size matters: Collaboration and scientific impact since 1900. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 66, 1323–1332. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23266

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lasda Bergman, E. M. (2012). Finding citations to social work literature: The relative benefits of using Web of Science, Scopus, or Google Scholar. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 38(6), 370–379. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2012.08.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindsey, D. (1989). Using citation counts as a measure of quality in science measuring what’s measurable rather than what’s valid. Scientometrics, 15(3–4), 189–203. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02017198

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lovakov, A., & Agadullina, E. (2019). Bibliometric analysis of publications from post-Soviet countries in psychological journals in 1992–2017. Scientometrics, 119(2), 1157–1171. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-019-03087-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Makkonen, T., & Mitze, T. (2016). Scientific collaboration between ‘old’ and ‘new’ member states: Did joining the European Union make a difference? Scientometrics, 106(3), 1193–1221. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1824-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mali, F. (2010). Policy issues of the international productivity and visibility of the social sciences in Central and Eastern European countries. Sociologija i prostor, 48(3), 415–435.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maslić Seršić, D., Martinčević, M., & Jokić, M. (2021). The contribution of CEE authors to psychological science: A comparative analysis of papers published in CEE and non-CEE journals indexed by Scopus in the period 1996–2013. Scientometrics, 126(2), 1453–1469. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03784-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miguel, S., Chinchilla-Rodriguez, Z., & De Moya-Anegón, F. (2011). Open access and scopus: A new approach to scientific visibility from the standpoint of access. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62(6), 1130–1145. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.21532

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moed, H. M. (2010). Measuring contextual citation impact of scientific journals. Journal of Informetrics, 4(3), 265–277. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2010.01.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moed, H. F., de Moya-Anegon, F., Guerrero-Bote, V., Lopez-Illescas, C., & Hladchenko, M. (2021). Bibliometric assessment of national scientific journals. Scientometrics, 126(4), 3641–3666. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-021-03883-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mosbah-Natanson, S., & Gingras, Y. (2014). The globalization of social sciences? Evidence from a quantitative analysis of 30 years of production, collaboration and citations in the social sciences (1980–2009). Current Sociology, 62(5), 626–646. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011392113498866

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mucha, J. (2009). Sociology in Central and Eastern Europe or East European sociology: Historical and present. Sociológia, 41(6), 507–525.

    Google Scholar 

  • Must, Ü. (2006). “New” countries in Europe—Research, development and innovation strategies vs bibliometric data. Scientometrics, 66(2), 241–248. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-006-0016-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Must, Ü. (2010). Collaboration in EU framework programmes—The case of the social sciences and humanities. Innovation, 23(1), 79–83. https://doi.org/10.1080/13511611003791190

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nederhof, A. J. (2006). Bibliometric monitoring of research performance in the social sciences and the humanities: A review. Scientometrics, 66(1), 81–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ossenblok, T. L. B., & Engels, T. C. E. (2015). Edited books in the social sciences and humanities: Characteristics and collaboration analysis. Scientometrics, 104(1), 219–237. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1544-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pajić, D. (2015). Globalization of the social sciences in Eastern Europe: Genuine breakthrough or a slippery slope of the research evaluation practice? Scientometrics, 102(3), 2131–2150. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-014-1510-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pajić, D., Jevremov, T., & Škorić, M. (2019). Publication and citation patterns in the social sciences and humanities: A national perspective. Canadian Journal of Sociology, 44(1), 67–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petr, M., Engels, T. C. E., Kulczycki, E., Dušková, M., Guns, R., Sieberová, M., & Sivertsen, G. (2021). Journal article publishing in the social sciences and humanities: A comparison of Web of Science coverage for five European countries. PLoS ONE, 16, e0249879. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0249879

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Płoszaj A., & Olechnicka A. (2015). Running faster or measuring better? How is the R&D sector in Central and Eastern Europe catching up with Western Europe?. GRINCOH Working Paper Series, Paper No. 3.06. Retrieved September 7, 2021, from http://www.grincoh.eu/media/serie_3_knowledge__innovation__technolog/grincoh_wp_3.06_olechnicka-ploszaj.pdf

  • Radosevic, S., & Yoruk, E. (2014). Are there global shifts in the world science base? Analysing the catching up and falling behind of world regions. Scientometrics, 101(3), 1897–1924. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-014-1344-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rotar, D. Z., Jokić, M., & Mateljan, S. (2018). The visibility of papers written by authors from European post-socialist countries as an indicator of integration into the EU legal system. Croatian Yearbook of European Law and Policy, 14(1), 136–160. https://doi.org/10.3935/cyelp.14.2018.304

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salomon, J.-J. (1977). The contribution of the social sciences. Omega, 5(6), 635–647. https://doi.org/10.1016/0305-0483(77)90045-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sivertsen, G. (2016). Patterns of internationalization and criteria for research assessment in the social sciences and humanities. Scientometrics, 107(2), 357–368. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-1845-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tijssen, R. J. W. (2008). Are we moving towards an integrated European research area? Some macro-level bibliometric perspectives. Collnet Journal of Scientometrics and Information Management, 2(1), 19–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/09737766.2008.10700837

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Uddin, S., Hossain, L., Abbasi, A., & Rasmussen, K. (2012). Trend and efficiency analysis of co-authorship network. Scientometrics, 90(2), 687–699. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-011-0511-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Raan, A. F. J. (2004). Measuring science. Capita selecta of current main issues. In H. F. Moed, W. Glänzel, & U. Schmoch (Eds.), Handbook of quantitative science and technology research. The use of publication and patent statistics in studies of S&T systems (pp. 19–50). Kluwer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Virtasalo, I., & Järvinen, J. (2010). The problématique of structures: Social sciences and Central and Eastern Europe in Flux. In P. Kovacs & D. Kutsar (Eds.), Internationalisation of social sciences in Central and Eastern Europe: The ’catching up’—A myth or a strategy? (pp. 59–71). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Webster, B. M. (1998). Polish sociology citation index as an example of usage of national citation indexes in scientometric analysis of social science. Journal of Information Science, 24(1), 19–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winclawska, B. M. (1996). Polish sociology citation index (principles for creation and the first results). Scientometrics, 35(3), 387–391. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02016909

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wuchty, S., Jones, B. F., & Uzzi, B. (2007). The increasing dominance of teams in production of knowledge. Science, 316(5827), 1036–1039. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1136099

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, L., Glänzel, W., & Liang, L. (2009). Tracing the role of individual journals in a cross-citation network based on different indicators. Scientometrics, 81(3), 821–838. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-008-2245-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the two anonymous reviewers for their insightful comments. The remaining errors are the responsibility of the authors.

Funding

This work has been supported by the Croatian Science Foundation under the project IP-09-2014-9351. The views expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Croatian Science Foundation.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. The Institute of Economics, Zagreb, Trg J.F. Kennedyja 7, 10 000, Zagreb, Croatia

    Andrea Mervar

  2. 10 000, Zagreb, Croatia

    Maja Jokić

Authors
  1. Andrea Mervar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Maja Jokić
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Conceptualization: MJ and AM; Formal analysis: AM; Writing—original draft preparation: AM and MJ; Writing—review and editing: AM; Funding acquisition: MJ.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Andrea Mervar.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose.

Additional information

The original online version of this article was revised: In the original publication coauthor Maja Jokić affiliation was incorrectly published.

Appendix

Appendix

See Table 3, Figs. 9, 10 and 11.

Table 3 Descriptive statistics of the dataset
Full size table
Fig. 9
figure 9

The average number of articles 1996–2006 vs. 2007–2017

Full size image
Fig. 10
figure 10

The average number of articles 2007–2017 vs. GDP. Eurostat is the source for GDP data

Full size image
Fig. 11
figure 11figure 11

Number of articles and journals across all fields of social sciences, 1996–2017. (Color figure online)

Full size image

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Mervar, A., Jokić, M. Core-periphery nexus in the EU social sciences: bibliometric perspective. Scientometrics 127, 5793–5817 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-022-04493-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-022-04493-5

Keywords

search

Navigation