, Volume 49, Issue 3, pp 453–490 | Cite as

The Publication Productivity of Young Scientists: An Empirical Study

  • Katarina Prpić


This research was conducted on a sample of 840 respondents who represent half of the Croatian population of young scientists. There are three main features which define the publication productivity of young scientists. 1) Despite the worsened position of R & D, they publish more scientific papers than the young generations of scientists at the beginning of the nineties. 2) Differences between a highly-productive minority, which produces on average half of all scientific publications, and a low-productive majority is already apparent in young scientists. 3) The productivity of young scientists is formed according to productivity patterns typical of particular scientific fields and disciplines.

With regard to the explanation of productivity, the following has been found. a) An expansion of the set of predictors resulted in an improvement in the explanation of the productivity of young scientists compared with previous surveys. b) Among the factors which contribute significantly to the explanation of the quantity of scientific publications, the most powerful predictor is attendance at conferences abroad, followed by scientific qualifications and some gatekeeping variables. c) Besides certain similarities, scientific fields also show a specific structure of determinants of young scientists' productivity.


Empirical Study Powerful Predictor Scientific Publication Specific Structure Scientific Field 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    G. M. Dobrov, Potencijal nauke (Scientific Potential), Institut za naučno-tehničku dokumentaciju i informacije — Centar za proučavanje politike razvoja naučnog rada, Beograd, 1970.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    H. Zuckerman, R. K. Merton, Age, aging and age structure in science. In: K. Merton, The Sociology of Science. Theoretical and Empirical Investigations, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago and London, 1974, pp. 497-559.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    S. Cole, Comments on “Indicators of scientific manpower”, Scientometrics, 2 (1980) 405-409.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    M. Roche, Y. Freites, Rise and twilight of the Venezuelan scientific community, Scientometrics, 23 (1992) 267-289.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    F. Saavedra, M. R. Mackenzie, R. Pessot, M. Krauskopf, Size and aging of the scientific commmunity in Chile, Scientometrics, 27 (1993) 105-117.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    H. C. Lehman, Age and Achievement, Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1953.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    B. Golub, Potencijalni (profesionalni i vanjski) egzodus mladih znanstvenika (Potential, Professional and External Exodus of Young Scientists). In: K. PrpiĆ (Ed.), U potrazi za akterima znanstvenog i tehnološkog razvoja (In Search of the Protagonists of Scientific and Technological Development), Institut za društvena istraživanja, Zagreb, 2000.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    T. S. Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1970.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    J. R. Cole, S. Cole, Social Stratification in Science, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1981.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    S. Cole, Age and scientific performance, American Journal of Sociology, 84 (1979) 958-977.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    M. J. Mulkay, The Social Process of Innovation, Macmillan, London, 1972.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    T. F. Gieryn, R. F. Hirsh, Marginality and innovation in science, Social Studies of Science, 13 (1983) 87-106.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    P. Messeri, Age differences in the reception of new scientific theories: The case of plate tectonics theory, Social Studies of Science, 18 (1988) 91-112.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    H. Z. Zhao, G. H. Jiang, Life-span and precocity of scientists, Scientometrics, 9 (1986) 27-36.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    H. Han, Linear increase law of optimum age of scientific creativity, Scientometrics, 15 (1980) 309-312.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    K. D. Knorr,, R. Mittermeir, G. Aichholzer, G. Waller, Individual publication productivity as a social position effect in academic and industrial research units. In: F. M. Andrews (Ed.), Scientific Productivity, the Effectiveness of Research Groups in Six Countries, Cambridge University Press — Unesco, Cambridge — London — New York — Melbourne — Paris, 1979, pp. 55-120.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    S. Kyvik, Age and scientific productivity: Differences between fields of learning. In: The Study of Science and Technology in the 1990's: Abstracts, Society for Social Studies of Science — European Association for the Study of Science and Technology, Amsterdam, 1988 pp. 140-141.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    D. Todorovsky, On the working time budget of the university teacher, Scientometrics, 40 (1997) 13-21.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    V. A Markusova, R. S. Gilyarevskii, A. I. Chernyi, B. C. Griffith, Information behavior of russian scientists in the “Perestroika” period. Results of the questionnaire study, Scientometrics, 37 (1996) 361-380.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    D. C. Pelz, F. M. Andrews, Scientists in Organizations: Productive Climates for Research and Development, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, 1976.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    S. Kowalewska, Patterns of influence and the performance of research units. In: F. M. Andrews (Ed.), Scientific Productivity, the Effectiveness of Research Groups in Six Countries, Cambridge University Press — Unesco, Cambridge — London — New York — Melbourne — Paris, 1979, pp. 169-189.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    A. G. Heffner, Authorship recognition of subordinates in collaborative research, Social Studies of Science, 9 (1979) 377-384.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    K. Kumar, Role parity in international social science collaborative research: Research roles of U.S. researchers and their collaborators, Knowledge: Creation, Diffusion, Utilisation, 7 (1985) 7-32.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    A. Schulze, On the rise of scientific innovation and their acceptance in research groups: A sociopsychological study, Social Studies of Science, 20 (1990) 35-64.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    T. Thagaard, Research environment, motivation and publication productivity, Science Studies, 4 (1991) 5-18.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    C. L. Mulford, L. Waldner-Haugrud, H. Gajbhiye, Variables associated with agricultural scientists' work alienation and publication productivity, Scientometrics, 27 (1993) 261-282.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    L. Fonseca, S. Velloso, S. Wofchuk, L. De Meis, The importance of human relationships in scientific productivity, Scientometrics, 39 (1997) 159-171.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    H. Grupp, S. Hinze, International orientation, efficiency of and regard for research in East and West Germany: A biblometric investigation of aspects of technology genesis in the United Germany, Scientometrics, 29 (1994) 83-113.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    K. PrpiĆ, Znanstvena produktivnost istraživača između minimalizma i maksimalizma (Scientific productivity of researchers between minimalism and maximalism). In: K. PrpiĆ, B. Golub, Znanstvena produktivnost i potencijalni egzodus istraživača Hrvatske (Scientific Productivity and Potential Exodus of Croatian Researchers) Institut za društvena istraživanja Sveučilišta u Zagrebu, Zagreb, 1990, pp. 1-61.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    K. PrpiĆ, Profesionalni i društveni položaj mladih istraživača (Professional and social position of young researchers). In: K. PrpiĆ (Ed.), U potrazi za akterima znanstvenog i tehnološkog razvoja (In Search of the Protagonists of Scientific and Technological Development), Institut za društvena istraživanja, Zagreb, 2000, pp. 21-127.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    K. PrpiĆ, Odrednice znanstvene produktivnosti (Determinants of Scientific Productivity), Institut za društvena istraživanja Sveučilšta u Zagrebu, Zagreb, 1991.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    K. PrpiĆ, The socio-cognitive frameworks of scientific productivity, Scientometrics, 31 (1994) 294-311.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    K. PrpiĆ, Characteristcs and determinants of eminent scientists' productivity, Scientometrics, 36 (1996) 185-206.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    S. Eastwood, P. Derish, E. Leash, S. Ordway, Ethical issues in biomedical research: Perceptions and practices of postdoctoral research fellows responding to a survey, Science and Engineering Ethics, 2 (1996) 89-114.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    S. Hemlin, M. Gustafsson, Research production in the arts and humanities. A questionnaire study of factors influencing research performance, Scientometrics, 37 (1996) 417-432.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    S. Kyvik, Productivity differences, fields of learning, and Lotka's law, Scientometrics, 15 (1989) 205-214.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    W. O. Hagstrom, Competition in science, American Sociological Review, 39 (1974) 1-18.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    B. KlaiĆ, Scijentometrija ili peer review? (Scientometrics or peer review?). In: D. Polšek (Ed.), Vidljiva i nevidljiva akademija. Moguénosti društvene procjene znanosti u Hrvatskoj (Visible and Invisible Academy. Social Appraisal of Science and Scientists in Croatia), Institut društvenih znanosti Ivo Pilar, Zagreb, 1998, pp. 83-96.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    K. PrpiĆ, Scientific fields and eminent scientists' productivity patterns and factors, Scientometrics, 37 (1996) 445-471.Google Scholar
  40. 41.
    S. Kyvik, I. M. Larsen, International contact and research performance, Scientometrics, 29 (1994) 161-172.Google Scholar
  41. 42.
    B. Stefaniak, International cooperation of Polish researchers with partners from abroad: A scientometric study, Scientometrics, 41 (1998) 155-167.Google Scholar
  42. 43.
    F. Mali, Slovenska in evropska skupnost znanstvenikov (Slovenian and European community of Scientists), Teorija in praksa /Theory and Practice/, 28 (1991) 452-458.Google Scholar
  43. 44.
    K. BalÁzs, W. Faulkner, U. Schimank, Transformation of the research systems of post-communist Central and Eastern Europe: An introduction, Social Studies of Science, 25 (1995) 613-632.Google Scholar
  44. 45.
    E. Z. Mirskaya, Russian academic science today: Its societal standing and the situation within the scientific community, Social Studies of Science, 25 (1995) 705-725.Google Scholar
  45. 46.
    G. Sonnert, What makes a good scientist?: Determinants of peer evaluation among biologists, Social Studies of Science, 25 (1995) 35-55.Google Scholar
  46. 47.
    J. Leta, D. Lannes, L. De Meis, Human resources and scientific productivity in Brazil, Scientometrics, 41 (1998) 313-324.Google Scholar
  47. 48.
    A. R. Babu, Y. P. Singh, Determinants of research productivity, Scientometrics, 43 (1998) 309-329.Google Scholar
  48. 49.
    L. Fonesca, S. Velloso, S. Wofchuk, L. De Meis, The importance of human relationships in scientific productivity, Scientometrics, 39 (1997) 159-171.Google Scholar
  49. 50.
    P. D. Allison, J. A. Stewart, Productivity differences among scientists: Evidence for accumulative advantage, American Sociological Review, 39 (1974) 596-606.Google Scholar
  50. 51.
    P. D. Allison, Inequality and scientific productivity, Social Studies of Science, 10 (1980) 163-179.Google Scholar
  51. 52.
    P. D. Allison, J. S. Long, T. K. Krauze, Cumulative advantage and inequality in science, American Sociological Review, 77 (1982) 615-625.Google Scholar
  52. 53.
    A. J. Nederhof, A. F. J. Van Raan, Peer review and bibliometric indicators of scientific performance: A comparison of cum laude doctorates with ordinary doctorates in physics, Scientometrics, 11 (1987) 333-350.Google Scholar
  53. 54.
    A. J. Nederhof, A. F. J. Van Raan, A validation study of bibliometric indicators: The comparative performance of cum laude doctorates in chemistry, Scientometrics, 17 (1989) 427-435.Google Scholar
  54. 55.
    A. F. J. Van Raan, In matters of quantitative studies of science the fault of theorists is offering too little and asking too much, Scientometrics, 43 (1998) 129-139.Google Scholar
  55. 56.
    R. D. Whitley, The sociology of scientific work and the history of scientific developments. In: S. S. Blume (Ed), Perspectives in the Sociology of Science, John Wiley and Sons, Chichester — New York — Brisbane — Toronto, 1977, pp. 21-50.Google Scholar
  56. 57.
    R. Whitley, The Intellectual and Social Organization of the Sciences, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1984.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • Katarina Prpić
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute for Social Research of ZagrebZagrebCroatia)

Personalised recommendations