Geographical Trends in Research: A Preliminary Analysis on Authors’ Affiliations
In the last decade, research literature reached an enormous volume with an unprecedented current annual increase of 1.5 million new publications. As research gets ever more global and new countries and institutions, either from academia or corporate environment, start to contribute with their share, it is important to monitor this complex scenario and understand its dynamics.
We present a study on a conference proceedings dataset extracted from Springer Nature Scigraph that illustrates insightful geographical trends and highlights the unbalanced growth of competitive research institutions worldwide. Results emerged from our micro and macro analysis show that the distributions among countries of institutions and papers follow a power law, and thus very few countries keep producing most of the papers accepted by high-tier conferences. In addition, we found that the annual and overall turnover rate of the top 5, 10 and 25 countries is extremely low, suggesting a very static landscape in which new entries struggle to emerge. Finally, we highlight the presence of an increasing gap between the number of institutions initiating and overseeing research endeavours (i.e. first and last authors’ affiliations) and the total number of institutions participating in research. As a consequence of our analysis, the paper also discusses our experience in working with affiliations: an utterly simple matter at first glance, that is instead revealed to be a complex research and technical challenge yet far from being solved.
KeywordsScholarly knowledge Affiliations Conferences Scientometrics Research SciGraph
We would like to thank the SciGraph team, especially Dr. Michele Pasin, whose work and prompt response made this study possible.
- 1.Börner, K., Penumarthy, S.: Spatio-temporal information production and consumption of major US research institutions. In: Proceedings of ISSI Volume 1 (2005)Google Scholar
- 2.Bornmann, L., Mutz, R.: Growth rates of modern science: a bibliometric analysis based on the number of publications and cited references. J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 66(11), 2215–2222 (2015)Google Scholar
- 4.Egghe, L.: Power Laws in the Information Production Process: Lotkaian Informetrics. Emerald Group Publishing Limited, Bingley (2005)Google Scholar
- 7.Frenken, K., Hardeman, S., Hoekman, J.: Spatial scientometrics: towards a cumulative research program. J. Inf. 3(3), 222–232 (2009)Google Scholar
- 8.Hung, J.L.: Trends of e-learning research from 2000 to 2008: use of text mining and bibliometrics. Br. J. Educ. Technol. 43(1), 5–16 (2012)Google Scholar
- 10.King, D.A.: The scientific impact of nations. Nature 430, 311 (2004)Google Scholar
- 11.Ley, M.: DBLP: some lessons learned. Proc. VLDB Endow. 2(2), 1493–1500 (2009)Google Scholar
- 15.Pan, R.K., Kaski, K., Fortunato, S.: World citation and collaboration networks: uncovering the role of geography in science. Sci. Rep. 2, 902 (2012)Google Scholar
- 16.Pareto, V., Page, A.N.: Translation of Manuale di economia politica (Manual of Political Economy). AM Kelley, New York (1971)Google Scholar
- 17.Pearson, K.: Mathematical contributions to the theory of evolution. III. Regression, heredity, and panmixia. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. Ser. A Contain. Pap. Math. Phys. Charact. 187, 253–318 (1896)Google Scholar
- 21.Verleysen, F.T., Weeren, A.: Clustering by publication patterns of senior authors in the social sciences and humanities. J. Inf. 10(1), 254–272 (2016)Google Scholar
- 22.Wilkinson, M.D., et al.: The FAIR guiding principles for scientific data management and stewardship. Sci. Data 3 (2016). https://www.nature.com/articles/sdata201618.pdf
- 23.Woodson, T.S.: Research inequality in nanomedicine. J. Bus. Chem. 9(3), 133–146 (2012)Google Scholar