Search results

The purpose of this study is to assess the retrieval performance of three search engines, i.e. Google, Yahoo and Bing for navigational queries using two important retrieval measures, i.e. precision and relative recall in the field of life science and biomedicine.

Top three search engines namely Google, Yahoo and Bing were selected on the basis of their ranking as per Alexa, an analytical tool that provides ranking of global websites. Furthermore, the scope of study was confined to those search engines having interface in English. Clarivate Analytics' Web of Science was used for the extraction of navigational queries in the field of life science and biomedicine. Navigational queries (classified as one-word, two-word and three-word queries) were extracted from the keywords of the papers representing the top 100 contributing authors in the select field. Keywords were also checked for the duplication. Two important evaluation parameters, i.e. precision and relative recall were used to calculate the performance of search engines on the navigational queries.

The mean precision for Google scores high (2.30) followed by Yahoo (2.29) and Bing (1.68), while mean relative recall also scores high for Google (0.36) followed by Yahoo (0.33) and Bing (0.31) respectively.

The study is of great help to the researchers and academia in determining the retrieval efficiency of Google, Yahoo and Bing in terms of navigational query execution in the field of life science and biomedicine. The study can help users to focus on various search processes and the query structuring and its execution across the select search engines for achieving desired result list in a professional search environment. The study can also act as a ready reference source for exploring navigational queries and how these queries can be managed in the context of information retrieval process. It will also help to showcase the retrieval efficiency of various search engines on the basis of subject diversity (life science and biomedicine) highlighting the same in terms of query intention.

Though many studies have been conducted highlighting the retrieval efficiency of search engines the current work is the first of its kind to study the retrieval effectiveness of Google, Yahoo and Bing on navigational queries in the field of life science and biomedicine. The study will help in understanding various methods and approaches to be adopted by the users for the navigational query execution across a professional search environment, i.e. “life science and biomedicine”

The purpose of this paper is to assess the influence of personality traits on perception and acceptance of open access (OA) mode of publishing by the author community of University of Kashmir, India. The study is an attempt to highlight the relationship between personality traits of authors and OA mode of publishing.

The study is based on the responses of 48 faculty members affiliated with different Departments of Science Discipline of University of Kashmir. Big Five personality traits (extraversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, emotional stability and openness to experience) were tapped through ten-item personality inventory, and information regarding OA was gauged through six self-devised statements.

Pearson correlation test confirms statistically significant relation between personality traits and different dimensions of OA mode of publishing. Personality traits are found to have an influence on author’s perception of OA mode of publishing. However, the study could not ascertain any relation between the notions of an author about the quality of OA content with any of the personality traits. Emotionally stable authors are found to explicitly submit their work in OA journals without any anxiety or negativity. Agreeable and conscientious authors also prefer to keep their work open to make it helpful to the broader audience and get maximum recognition from peers and citations to their work respectively. However, some authors (agreeable) hesitate in submitting their work in open platforms due to the fear of getting their works easily copied.

The study is first of its kind highlighting a new dimension in the field of OA and investigates the influence of personality traits on author’s attitude towards open mode of publishing.

The purpose of this study is to explore the retrieval effectiveness of three image search engines (ISE) – Google Images, Yahoo Image Search and Picsearch in terms of their image retrieval capability. It is an effort to carry out a Cranfield experiment to know how efficient the commercial giants in the image search are and how efficient an image specific search engine is.

The keyword search feature of three ISEs – Google images, Yahoo Image Search and Picsearch – was exploited to make search with keyword captions of photos as query terms. Selected top ten images were used to act as a testbed for the study, as images were searched in accordance with features of the test bed. Features to be looked for included size (1200 × 800), format of images (JPEG/JPG) and the rank of the original image retrieved by ISEs under study. To gauge the overall retrieval effectiveness in terms of set standards, only first 50 result hits were checked. Retrieval efficiency of select ISEs were examined with respect to their precision and relative recall.

Yahoo Image Search outscores Google Images and Picsearch both in terms of precision and relative recall. Regarding other criteria – image size, image format and image rank in search results, Google Images is ahead of others.

The study only takes into consideration basic image search feature, i.e. text-based search.

The study implies that image search engines should focus on relevant descriptions. The study evaluated text-based image retrieval facilities and thereby offers a choice to users to select best among the available ISEs for their use.

The study provides an insight into the effectiveness of the three ISEs. The study is one of the few studies to gauge retrieval effectiveness of ISEs. Study also produced key findings that are important for all ISE users and researchers and the Web image search industry. Findings of the study will also prove useful for search engine companies to improve their services.

The purpose of the study is to map the funding status of COVID-19 research. The various aspects, such as funding ratio, geographical distribution of funded articles, journals publishing funded research and institutions that sponsor the COVID-19 research are studied. To visualize the country collaboration network and research trends/hotspots in the field of COVID-19 funded research, keyword analysis is also performed. The open-access (OA) status of the funded research on COVID-19 is also discussed.

The leading indexing and abstracting database, i.e. Web of Science (WoS), was used to retrieve the funded articles published on the topic COVID-19. The scientometric approach, more particularly “funding acknowledgment analysis (FAA),” was used to study the research funding.

A total of 5,546 publications of varied nature have been published on COVID-19, of which 1,760 are funded, thus indicating a funding ratio of 32%. China is the leading producer of funded research (760, 43.182%) on COVID-19 followed by the USA (482, 27.386%), England (179, 10.17%), Italy (119, 6.761%), Germany (107, 6.08%) and Canada (107, 6.08%). China is also in lead in terms of the funding ratio (60.94%). However, the funding ratio of the USA (31.54%) is at 11th rank behind Canada (40.68%), Germany (34.18%) and England (35.87%). The USA occupies a central position in the collaboration network having the highest score of articles with other countries (n = 489), with the USA–China collaboration ranking first (n = 123). National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) is the largest source of funding for COVID-19 research, supporting 342 (19.432%) publications, followed by the United States Department of Health Human Services (DHHS) and National Institute of Health (NIH), USA with 211 (11.989%) and 200 (11.364%) publications, respectively. However, China's National Key Research and Development Program achieves the highest citation impact (80.24) for its funded publications. Journal of Medical Virology, Science of the Total Environment and EuroSurveillance are the three most prolific journals publishing 63 (3.58%), 35 (1.989%) and 32 (1.818%), respectively, of the sponsored research articles on the COVID-19. A total of 3,138 institutions produce funded articles with Huazhong University of Science Technology and Wuhan University from China at the forefront publishing 92 (5.227%) and 83 (4.716%) publications, respectively. The funded research on COVID-19 is largely available in OA mode (1,674, 95.11%) and mainly through the Green and Bronze routes. The keyword clustering reveals that the articles mainly focus on the impact, structure and clinical characteristics of the virus.

The study's main limitation is that the results are based on the publications indexed by WoS, which has limited coverage compared to other databases. Moreover, all the funding agencies do not require or authors miss to acknowledge funding sources in their publications, which ultimately undermines the number of funded publications. The research publications on COVID-19 are also proliferating; thus, the study's findings shall be valid for a minimum period.

The funding of research on the COVID-19 is highly essential to accelerate innovative research and help countries fight against the global pandemic. The study's findings reflect the efforts made by nations and institutions to remove the financial and accessibility hurdles. It not only underscores the lead of the USA in the research on COVID-19, but also shows China as a forerunner in sponsoring the research, thus, helping to know the contribution of nations toward understanding the dynamics of pandemic and controlling it. The study will help healthcare practitioners and policymakers recognize the areas that remain the focus of sponsored research on COVID-19 and other left-out areas that need to be taken up and thus may help in policy formulation. It further highlights the impact of prolific funding agencies so that efforts may be initiated to increase the impact and thereby the returns of investment. The study can help to map the scientific structure of COVID-19 through the lens of funded research and recognize core inclinations of its development. Overall, a comprehensive analysis has been performed to present the detailed characteristics of sponsored research on emerging area of COVID-19, and it is informative, useful and one of its kind on the theme.

The study explores the funding support of research on COVID-19 and its other aspects, along with the mode of availability.

The study showcases the social impact (online attention) of funded research compared to nonfunded for the BRICS nations. The key themes achieving online attention across the funded and nonfunded publications have also been identified.

A total of 1,507,931 articles published across the BRICS nations for a period of three (03) years were downloaded from the Clarivate Analytics' InCites database of Web of Science (WoS). “Funding Acknowledgement Analysis (FAA)” was used to identify the funded and nonfunded publications. The altmetric score of the top highly cited (1%) publications was gauged from the largest altmetric data provider, “Altmetric.com”, using the DOI of each publication. One-way ANOVA test was used to know the impact of funding on the mentions (altmetrics) across different data sources covered by Altmetric.com. The highly predominant keywords (hotspots) have been mapped using bibliometric software, “VOSviewer”.

The mentions across all the altmetric sources for funded research are higher compared to nonfunded research for all nations. It indicates the altmetric advantage for funded research, as funded publications are more discussed, tweeted, shared and have more readers and citations; thus, acquiring more social impact/online attention compared to nonfunded publications. The difference in means for funded and nonfunded publications varies across various altmetric sources and nations. Further, the authors’ keyword analysis reveals the prominence of the respective nation names in publications of the BRICS.

The study showcases the utility of indexing the funding information and whether research funding increases social impact return (online attention). It presents altmetrics as an important impact assessment and evaluation framework indicator, adding one more dimension to the research performance. The linking of funding information with the altmetric score can be used to assess the online attention and multi-flavoured impact of a particular funding programme and source/agency of a nation so that necessary strategies would be framed to improve the reach and impact of funded research. It identifies countries that achieve significant online attention for their funded publications compared to nonfunded ones, along with the key themes that can be utilised to frame research and investment plans.

The study represents the social impact of funded research compared to nonfunded across the BRICS nations.