Scientometrics of the international journal Scientometrics
- 664 Downloads
An analysis of 1317 papers published in first fifty volumes during 1978 to 2001 of the international journal Scientometrics indicates the heterogeneity of the field with emphasis on scientometric assessment. The study indicates that the US share of papers is constantly on the decline while that of the Netherlands, India, France and Japan is on the rise. The research output is highly scattered as indicated by the average number of papers per institution. The scientometric output is dominated by the single authored papers, however, multi-authored papers are gaining momentum. Similar pattern has been observed for domestic and international collaboration.
KeywordsJapan India Similar Pattern International Collaboration Research Output
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.P. WOUTERS, L. LEYDESDORFF, Has Prices's dream come true: Is scientometrics a hard science? Scientometrics, 31 (1994) 193-222.Google Scholar
- 2.U. SCHOEPFLIN, W. GLäNZEL, Two decades of Scientometrics: An interdisciplinary field represented by its leading journal, Scientometrics, 50 (2001) 301-312.Google Scholar
- 3.A. SCHUBERT, The web of scientometrics: A statistical overview of the first 50 volumes of the journal, Scientometrics, 53 (2002) 3-20.Google Scholar
- 4.D. DE SOLLA PRICE, The analysis of scientometric matrices for policy implications, Scientometrics, 3 (1981) 47-54.Google Scholar
- 5.A. SCHUBERT, T, BRAUN, Relative indicators and relational charts for comparative assessment of publication output and citation impact, Scientometrics, 9 (1986) 281-291.Google Scholar
- 6.I. AJIFERUKE, Q. BURREL, J. TAUGE, Collaborative coefficient: A single measure of the degree of collaborations in research, Scientometrics, 14 (1988) 421-433.Google Scholar
- 7.S. J. CUNNINGHAM, S. M. DILLON, Authorship pattern in information systems, Scientometrics, 39 (1997) 19-27.Google Scholar
- 8.K. C. GARG, P. PADHI, A study of collaboration in laser science and technology, Scientometrics, 51 (2001) 415-427.Google Scholar