Advertisement

Additional Indexes and Indicators for Assessment of Research Production

  • Nikolay K. VitanovEmail author
Chapter
  • 1.4k Downloads
Part of the Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis of Scientific and Scholarly Communication book series (QQASSC)

Abstract

About forty-five indexes for assessment of research production of single researchers have been discussed in Chap.  2. These indexes are based mainly on citations of publications of the evaluated researcher. The indexes form Chap.  2 can be calculated also for groups of researchers. In addition to indexes from Chap.  2, other indexes useful for assessment of production of groups of researchers may be used. About ninety such indexes are discussed in this chapter. The indexes are grouped in the following classes: simple indexes; indexes for deviation from simple tendency; indexes for difference; indexes for concentration, dissimilarity, coherence, and diversity; indexes for advantage and inequality; indexes for stratified data; indexes for imbalance and fragmentation; indexes based on the concept of entropy; Lorenz curve and associated indexes. In addition, the set of indexes connected to the RELEV method for assessment of scientific research performance within public institutes as well as indicators and indexes for scientific research performance of nations and about comparing national scientific productions are discussed. Finally, we discuss briefly several journal citation measures as well as an example of an application of a geometric tool for detection of scientific elites in a group of institutes on the basis of Lorenz curves.

Keywords

Knowledge Production Citation Rate Lorenz Curve Stratify Data Relative Citation Rate 
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.

References

  1. 1.
    M. Gibbons, C. Limoges, H. Nowotny, S. Schwartzman, P. Scott, M. Trow, The new production of knowledge: the dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies (Sage, London, 1994)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    L.K. Hessels, H. van Lente, Re-thinking new knowledge production: a literature review and a research agenda. Res. Policy 37, 740–760 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    R.A. Boschma, Proximity and innovation: a critical assessment. Reg. Stud. 39, 61–74 (2005)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    I. Rafols, Knowledge integration and diffusion: measures and mapping of diversity and coherence, ed. by Y. Ding, R. Rousseau, D. Wolfram, Measuring Scholarly Impact. Methods and Practice. (Springer, Cham, 2014), pp. 169–192Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    W. Glänzel, Bibliometrics as a research field: a course on theory and application of bibliometric indicators (Ungarische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Budapest, 2003)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    P. Brown, The half-life of the chemical literature. J. Am. Soc. Inform. Sci. 31, 61–63 (1980)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    R.E. Burton, R.W. Kebler, The “half-life” of some scientific and technical literatures. Am. Documentation 11, 18–22 (1960)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    P. Vinkler, The Evaluation of Research by Scientometric Indicators (Chandos, Oxford, 2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    P. Vinkler, Publication velocity, publication growth and impact factor: an empirical model, ed by B. Cronin, H.B. Atkins. The Web of Knowledge: A Festschrift in Honor of Eugene Garfield. ASIS Monograph Series (Information Today Inc, Medford, NJ, 2000), pp. 163–176Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    P. Vinkler, Research contribution, authorship and team cooperativeness. Scientometrics 26, 213–230 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    A. Przeworski, (Institutionalization of voting patterns or is mobilization the source of decay? Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 69, 49–67 (1975)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    R.R. Shutz, On the measurement of income inequality. Am. Econ. Rev. 41, 107–122 (1951)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    A.B. Atkinson, On the measurement of inequality. J. Econ. Theory 2, 244–263 (1970)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    F.A. Cowell, Measuring Inequality (Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK, 2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    P.D. Allison, Measures of inequality. Am. Sociol. Rev. 43, 865–880 (1978)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    A.R. Wilcox, Indices of qualitative variation and political measurement. Western Political Quart. 26(2), 325–343 (1973)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    A.L. Wilcox, Indices of Qualitative Variation. ORRN-TM-1919, (Oak Ridge National Laboratoty, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, 1967)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    S.S. Nagel, Public Policy: Goals, Means and Methods (St. Martin Press, New York, 1984)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    A.P. Lüthi, Messung wirtschaflicher Ungleichheit. Lecture Notes in Economic and Mathematical Systems No. 189 (Springer, Berlin, 1981)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    C. Gini, Variabilita e mutabilita (Bologna, Italy, 1912)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    L. Ceriani, P. Verme, The origins of Gini index: extracts from variabilita e Mutabilita (1912) by Corrado Gini. J. Econ. Inequality 10, 421–443 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    H.G.P. Jansen, Gini’s coefficient of mean difference as a measure of adoption speed: theoretical issues and empirical evidence from India. Agric. Econ. 7, 351–369 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    I.I. Eliazar, I.M. Sokolov, Measuring statistical evenness: a panoramic overview. Phys. A 391, 1323–1353 (2012)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    S. Yitzhaki, E. Schechtman, The Gini Methodology (Springer, New York, 2013)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    J.G. Rodriguez, R. Salas, The Gini coefficient: majority voting and social welfare. J. Econ. Theory 152, 214–223 (2014)MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    B. Milanovic, A simple way to calculate the Gini coefficient, and some implications. Econ. Lett. 56, 45–49 (1997)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    C.J. Groves-Kirkby, A.R. Denman, P.S. Phillips, Lorenz curve and Gini coefficient: novel tools for analysing seasonal variation of environmental radon gas. J. Environ. Manage. 90, 2480–2487 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    J. Yang, X. Huang, X. Liu, An analysis of education inequality in China. Int. J. Educ. Dev. 37, 2–10 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    K. Kimura, A micro-macro linkage in the measurement of inequality: another look at the Gini coefficient. Qual. Quant. 28, 83–97 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    P.A. Rogerson, The Gini coefficient of inequality: a new interpretation. Lett. Spatial Resour. Sci. 6, 109–120 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    M.-H. Huang, H.-H. Chang, D.-Z. Chen, The trend in scientific research and technological innovation: a reduction of the predominant role of the U.S. in world research and technology. J. Infometrics 6, 457–468 (2012)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    A. Stirling, A general framework for analysing diversity in science, technology and society. J. Royal Soc. Interface 4, 707–719 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    A.O. Hirschman, National Power and Structure of Foreign Trade (University of California Press, Berkeley, CA, 1945)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    O.C. Herfindahl, Concentration in the steel industry. Ph.D. Thesis, (Columbia University, 1950)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    R. Linda, Competition policies and measures of dominant power, ed. by H.W. de Jorg. W.G. Shepherd, Mainstreams in Industrial Organization (Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, Dordrecht, 1986), pp. 287–307Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    G. Chammas, J. Spronk. Concentration measures in portfolio management, ed. by S. Greco, B. Bouchoin-Meunter, G. Colleti, M. Fedrizzi, B. Matarazzo, R.R. Yager, Advances in Computational intelligence, in 14th International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-based Systems, IPMU 2012, Catania, Italy, July 9–13, 2012, Proceedings, Part IV. (Springer, Berlin, 2012), pp. 94–103Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    A. Arlandis, E. Baranes, Interactions between network operators, content producers and internet intermediaries: empirical implications on network neutrality. Intereconomics 2, 98–105 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    W. Naude, R. Rossouw, Export diversification and economic performance: evidence from Brazil, China, India and South Africa. Econ. Change Restructuring 44, 99–134 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    J. Horvath, Suggestion for a comprehensive measure of concentration. South. Econ. J. 36, 446–452 (1970)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    J.L. Ray, D. Singer, Measuring the concentration of power in the international system. Sociol. Methods Res. 1, 403–437 (1973)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    R. Taagepera, J.L. Ray, A generalized index of concentration. Sociol. Methods Res. 5, 367–383 (1977)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    S. Lieberson, Measuring population diversity. Am. Sociol. Rev. 34, 850–862 (1969)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    L.A. Renzulli, H. Aldrich, Who can you turn to? The activation within core business discussion networks. Soc. Forces 84, 323–341 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    J.R. Bond, The influence of constituency diversity on electoral competition in voting for Congress 1974–1978. Legislative Stud. Quart. 8, 201–217 (1983)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    C.R. Rao, Diversity and dissimilarity coefficients: a unified approach. Theor. Popul. Biol. 21, 24–43 (1982)MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    C. Ricotta, L. Szeidl, Towards a unifying approach to diversity measures: bridging the gap between the Shannon entropy and Rao’s quadratic index. Theor. Popul. Biol. 70, 237–243 (2006)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    L. Cassi, W. Mescheba, E. Turckheim, How to evaluate the degree of interdisciplinarity of an institution? Scientometrics 101, 1871–1895 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    O.D. Duncan, B. Duncan, A methodological analysis of segregation indexes. Am. Sociol. Rev. 20, 210–217 (1955)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    R. Taagepera, Inequality, concentration, imbalance. Polit. Methodol. 6, 275–291 (1979)Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    D.W. Rae, M. Taylor, The Analysis of Political Cleavages (Yale University Press, New Haven, Conn, 1971)Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    L. Leydesdorff, Indicators of structural change in the dynamics of science: entropy statistics of the SCI Journal Citation Reports. Scientometrics 53, 131–159 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    H. Theil, The desired political entropy. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 63, 521–525 (1969)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    H. Theil, On the estimation of relationships involving qualitative variables. Am. J. Sociol. 76, 103–154 (1970)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Y. Wang, Decomposing the entropy index of racial diversity: in search of two types of variance. Ann. Reg. Sci. 48, 897–915 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    K.D. Bailey, Sociological entropy theory: toward a statistical and verbal congruence. Qual. Quant. 18, 113–133 (1983)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    B. Raj, J. Koerts (eds.), Henri Theil’s Contributions to Economics and Econometrics. Volume 2: Consumer demand analysis and information theory. (Kluwer, Dordrecht, 1992)Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    H. Theil, Economics and Information Theory (North Holland, Amsterdam, 1967)Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    D.F. Batten, Spatial Analysis of Intercatting Economies (Kluwer, Dordrecht, 1983)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    K. Kesselman, French local politics: a statistical examination of grass roots consensus. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 60, 963–974 (1966)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    H. Theil, Statistical Decomposition Analysis (North Holland, Amsterdam, 1972)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    J. Fellman, Lorenz curve. ed by M. Lovric. International Encyclopedia of Statistical Science (Springer, Berlin, 2011), pp. 760–761Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    D. Chotikapanich, Modeling Income Distributions and Lorenz Curves (Springer, New York, 2008)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    E. Scalas, T. Radivoevic, U. Garibaldi, Wealth distribution and Lorenz curve: a finitary approach. J, Econ. Interact. Coordinartion (in press) (2015). doi: 10.1007/s11403-014-0136-2 Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    G. Warner, A Lorenz curve based index of income stratification. Rev. Black Polit. Econ. 28, 41–57 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    J. Tang, X. Wang, Analysis of land use structure based on Lorenz curves. Environ. Monit. Coord. 151, 175–180 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    O. Alonso-Villar, Measuring concentration: Lorenz curves and their decompositions. Ann. Reg. Sci. 47, 451–475 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    P. Suppes, Lorenz curves for various processes: a pluralistic approach to equity. Soc. Choice Welfare 5, 89–101 (1988)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    L. Egghe, Conjugate partitions in infometrics: Lorenz curves, h-type indices, Ferrer graphs and Durfee squares in a discrete and continuous setting. J. Infom. 4, 320–330 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    R. Rouseau, Measuring concentration: sampling design issues, as illustrated by the case of perfectly stratified samples. Scientometrics 28, 3–14 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    L. Egghe, R. Rousseau, Symmetric and asymmetric theory of relative concentration and applications. Scientometrics 52, 261–290 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    L. Egghe, R. Rousseau, How to measure own-group preference? A novel approach to a sociometric problem. Scientometrics 59, 233–252 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    R. Ketzer, K.F. Zimmermann, Publications: German scientific institutions on track. Scientometrics 80, 231–252 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    S. Shibayama, Distribution of academic research grants: a case of Japanese national research grant. Scientometrics 88, 43–60 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    B. Jarneving, Regional research and foreign collaboration. Scientometrics 83, 295–320 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    W. Halffman, L. Leydesdorf, Is inequality among universities increasing? Gini coefficients and the elusive rise of elite universities. Minerva 48, 55–72 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    T.J. Cleophas, A.H. Zwinderman, Pareto charts for identifying the main factors of multifactorial outcomes. ed. by T.J. Cleophas, A.H. Zwinderman. Machine Learning in Medicine (Springer, Berlin, 2014), pp. 101–106Google Scholar
  77. 77.
    S.H. Kan, Metrics and Models in Software Quality Engineering (Addison-Wesley, Boston, 2002)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    L. Egghe, R.A. Rousseau, A characterization of distributions which satisfy Price’s law and consequences for the laws of Zipf and Mandelbrot. J. Inform. Sci. 12, 193–197 (1986)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    S. Lieberson, Rank-sum comparisons between groups, ed. by D. Heise. Sociological Methodology (Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, 1976), pp. 276–291Google Scholar
  80. 80.
    S. Lieberson, An asymmetrical approach to segregation, ed. by C. Peach, V. Robinson, S. Smith. Ethnic Segregation in Cities (Croom Helm, London, 1981), pp. 61–82Google Scholar
  81. 81.
    N. Toren, V. Kraus, The effects of minority size on women’s position in academia. Soc. Forces 65, 1090–1100 (1987)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    M. Fosset, J.S. Scott, The measurement of intergroup income inequality: a conceptual review. Social Forces 61, 855–871 (1983)Google Scholar
  83. 83.
    P.B. Coulter, Measuring the inequity of urban public services. Policy Stud. J. 8, 683–698 (1980)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    M.T. Marsh, D.A. Schilling, Equity measurement in facility location analysis: a review and framework. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 74, 1–17 (1994)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    K. Barker, The UK research assessment exercise: the evolution of a national research evaluation system. Res. Eval. 16, 3–12 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    G. Falavigna, A. Manello, External funding, efficiency and productivity growth in public research: the case of the Italian National Research Council. Res. Eval. 23, 33–47 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    B.M. Coursey, A.N. Link, Evaluating technology-based public institutions: the case of radiopharmaceutical standards research at the National Institute of Standards and Technology. Res. Eval. 7, 147–157 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. 88.
    G. Lewison, Evaluation of national biomedical research outputs through journal-based esteem measures. Res. Eval. 5, 225–235 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. 89.
    C.M. Sa, A. Kretz, K. Sigurdson, Accountability, performance assessment, and evaluation: policy pressures and responses from research councils. Res. Eval. 22, 105–117 (2013)Google Scholar
  90. 90.
    F. Xu, X.X. Li, W. Meng, W.B. Liu, J. Mingers, Ranking academic impact of world national research institutes014by the Chinese Academy of Sciences. Res. Eval. 22, 337–350 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. 91.
    L. Georghiou, Research evaluation in European national science and technology systems. Res. Eval. 5, 3–10 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. 92.
    N. Kastrinos, Y. Katsoulacos, Towards a national system of research evaluation in Greece. Res. Eval. 5, 63–68 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. 93.
    C.-G. Yi, K.-B. Kang, Developments of the evaluation system of government-supported research institutes in Korean science and technology. Res. Eval. 9, 158–170 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. 94.
    M. Coccia, A basic model for evaluation R&D performance: theory and application in Italy. R&D Manage. 31, 453–464 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. 95.
    M. Coccia, Models for measuring the research performance and identifying the productivity of public research institutes. R&D Manage. 34, 267–280 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. 96.
    M. Coccia, A scientometric model for the assessment of scientific research performance within public institutes. Scientometrics 65, 307–321 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. 97.
    M. Coccia, Measuring performance of public research units for strategic change. J. Infometrics 2, 184–194 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. 98.
    P. Vinkler, Correlation between the structure of scientific research, scientometric indicators and GDP in EU and non-EU countries. Scientometrics 74, 237–254 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. 99.
    E. Albuquerque, Science and technology systems in less developed countries, ed. by H. Moed, W. Glaänzel, U. Schmoch. Handbook of Quantitative Science and Technology Research (Kluwer , Dordrecht, 2005), pp. 759–778Google Scholar
  100. 100.
    A. Basu, The Albuquerque model and efficiency indicators in national scientific productivity with respect to manpower and funding of science. Scientometrics 100, 531–539 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. 101.
    R. Klavans, K. Boyack, Thought leadership: a new indicator for national and institutional comparison. Scientometrics 75, 239–250 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. 102.
    A.F.J. van Raan, Statistical properties of bibliometric indicators: research group indicator distributions and correlations. J. Am. Soc. Inform. Sci. Technol. 57, 408–430 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. 103.
    D.A. King, The scientific impact of nations. Nature 430, 311–316 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. 104.
    A. Schubert, T. Braun, Relative indicators and relational charts for comparative assessment of publication output and citation impact. Scientometrics 9, 281–291 (1986)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. 105.
    J.D. Frame, Mainstream Research in Latin America and the Caribbean. Interciencia 2, 143–147 (1977)Google Scholar
  106. 106.
    R. Rousseau, L. Yang, Reflections on the activity index and related indicators. J. Infometrics 6, 413–421 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. 107.
    P. Vinkler, Weighted impact on publications and relative contribution score. Two new indicators characterizing publication activity of countries. Scientometrics 14, 161–163 (1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. 108.
    G. Abramo, C.A. D’Angelo, How do you define and measure research productivity? Scientometrics 101, 1129–1144 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. 109.
    E. Garfield, Citation Indexing: Its Theory and Applications in Science, Technology and Humanities (Wiley, New York, 1979)Google Scholar
  110. 110.
    H.F. Moed, Measuring contextual citation impact of scientific journals. J. Informetrics 4, 265–277 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  111. 111.
    B. Gonzalez-Pereira, V.P. Guerrero-Bote, F. Moya-Anegon, A new approach to the metric of journals scientific prestige: the SJR indicator. J. Informetrics 4, 379–391 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  112. 112.
    V.P. Guerrero-Bote, F. Moya-Anegon, A further step forward in measuring journals’ scientific prestige: the SJR2 indicator. J. Informetrics 6, 674–688 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  113. 113.
    L. Waltman, N.J. van Eck, T.N. van Leeuwen, M.S. Visser, A.J.F. van Raan, Towards a new crown indicator: an empirical analysis. Scientometrics 87, 467–481 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  114. 114.
    L. Waltman, N.J. van Eck, T.N. van Leeuwen, M.S. Visser, A.J.F. van Raan, Towards a new crown indicator: some theoretical considerations. J. Informetrics 5, 37–47 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  115. 115.
    R. Abzug, Community elites and power structure, ed. by R.A. Cnaan, C. Milofsky, Handbook oF Community Movements and Local Organizations (Springer, New York, 2008), pp. 89–101Google Scholar
  116. 116.
    J.S. Coleman, Power and Structure of Society (Norton, New York, 1974)Google Scholar
  117. 117.
    L. Trilling, Technological elites in France and the United States. Minerva 17, 225–243 (1979)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  118. 118.
    N. Elias, H. Martins, R. Whitley, Scientific Establishments and Hierarchies (Reidel, Dordrecht, 1982)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  119. 119.
    M. Mulkay, The mediating role of the scientific elite. Soc. Stud. Sci. 6, 445–470 (1975)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  120. 120.
    H. Best, U. Becker, Elites in Transition. Elite research in Central and Eastern Europe. (VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, 1997)Google Scholar
  121. 121.
    H. Zuckerman, Scientific Elites. Nobel laureates in the United States. (Free Press, New York, 1977)Google Scholar
  122. 122.
    J.N. Parker, C. Lortie, S. Allesina, Characterizing a scientific elite: the social characteristics of the most highly cited scientists in environmental science and ecology. Scientometrics 85, 129–143 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  123. 123.
    M. Davis, C. Wilson, Elite researchers in ophthalmology: aspects of publishing strategies, collaboration and multi-disciplinarity. Scientometrics 52, 395–410 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  124. 124.
    E. Lazega, L. Mounier, M.-T. Jourda, R. Stofer, Organizational vs. personal social capital in scientists’ performance: a multi-level network study of elite French cancer researchers (1996–1998). Scientometrics 67, 27–44 (2006)Google Scholar
  125. 125.
    C. Cao, R.P. Suttmeier, China’s new scientific elite: distinguished young scientists, the research environment and hopes for Chinese science. China Quart. 168, 960–984 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  126. 126.
    R.S. Hunter, A.J. Oswald, B.G. Charlton, The elite brain drain. Econ. J. 119, F231–F251 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  127. 127.
    G. Laudel, Migration currents among scientific elite. Minerva 43, 377–395 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  128. 128.
    B. Golub, The Croatian scientific elite and its socio-professional roots. Scientometrics 43, 207–229 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  129. 129.
    N.C. Mullins, Invisible colleges as scientific elites. Scientometrics 7, 357–368 (1985)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  130. 130.
    D. De Solla Price, Little Science, Big Science (Columbia University Press, New York, 1963)Google Scholar
  131. 131.
    W. Glänzel, A. Schubert, Price distribution: an exact formulation of Price’s ’square root law’. Scientometrics 7, 211–219 (1985)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  132. 132.
    J.L. Gast, The estimation of the Lorenz curve and Gini index. Rev. Econ. Stat. 54, 306–316 (1972)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  133. 133.
    N.C. Kakwani, Applications of Lorenz curves in economic analysis. Econometrica: J. Econometric Soc. 43, 719–727 (1977)MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  134. 134.
    A. Dragulescu, V.M. Yakovenko, Exponential and power-law probability distributions of wealth and income in the United Kingdom and the United States. Phys. A 299, 213–221 (2001)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  135. 135.
    A. van Heeringen, P.A. Dijkwel, The relationships between age, mobility and scientific productivity. Part II. Effect of age on productivity. Scientometrics 11, 281–293 (1987)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of MechanicsSofiaBulgaria
  2. 2.Max-Planck Institute for the Physics of Complex SystemsDresdenGermany

Personalised recommendations