Search results

The importance of scientific publications has enhanced the research activities at all aggregate levels. The purpose of this paper is to conduct an in-depth review of studies examined the factors that influence the publication productivity among researchers, institutions and countries.

This paper uses a systematic literature review approach that is based on relevant literature retrieved from two authentic and well-known databases named Web of Science and SCOPUS. Kitchenham protocol of systematic review was applied, and relevant studies were searched by selected keywords search. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were used to select high quality studies. A rigorous study selection procedure was designed.

Findings reveal that several factors play a significant role in the publication productivity growth. All of the identified factors were grouped into three categories. Most of the factors belong to personal category while two top dominant factors, funding and collaboration fall into situational category. Other most influential factors, time, academic rank and academic qualification are personal. Findings highlight that publication output at individual level is strongly influenced by personal factors while few environmental and situational factors also affect the number of publications. Publication productivity of institutes and countries is affected by environmental and situational factors.

This paper contributes by providing a detailed review to explore the influencing factors of scholarly publication of researchers, institutions and countries. This study will be supportive for researchers and policymakers for making strategies to stimulate the research publication practices at researchers, institutions and national level.

This study aims to investigate the research productivity in terms of publications count of the top four premiers Indian Institute of Management (IIM) institutions and to explore the current research trends.

Bibliometric techniques were employed to assess the performance in terms of research productivity of authors affiliated with IIMs. The Elsevier Scopus database was selected as a tool to extract the prospective publications data limiting the time frame for 2010–2021. The IIM-Ahmedabad, IIM-Bangalore, IIM-Calcutta and IIM-Lucknow have been selected for the study. The harvested data were analyzed by using the standard bibliometric indicators and scientometric parameters to measure the research landscape such as average growth rate, compound average growth rate, relative growth rate, doubling time, degree of collaboration, collaborative index, collaborative coefficient and modified collaborative coefficient. VOSviewer 1.6.17, BibExcel and Microsoft Excel were used for data analysis and visualization.

The research productivity of selected four IIMs has shown an upward trend during the study period from 2010–2021 and accrued 4,397 publications with an average of 366 publications per year. The authorship patterns demonstrate the collaborative trends as most of the publications were produced by the multiple-authors (81.03%). IIM-Ahmedabad has produced the maximum number of publications (32.20%). The research productivity of IIMs has come out in collaboration with the 125 nations across the world and the USA, the UK, Canada, Germany and China are the front runners with IIMs in the collaborative network. The high magnitude and density of collaboration are evident from the calculated mean values of the degree of collaboration (0.82). The mean values of the collaborative index (2.64), collaborative coefficient (0.51) and modified collaborative coefficient (0.51) demonstrated a positive trend, but indicate the fluctuation in the collaborative pattern as time proceeds.

The study is limited to the publications data indexed in the Scopus database, therefore the outcome may not be generalized across other databases available in the public domain like Web of Science (WoS), PubMed, Dimensions and Google Scholars.

The findings of the study may aid academics and library professionals in identifying research trends, collaboration networks and evaluating other academic and research institutions by using the current advancement in data analysis.

The present study is the first effort to evaluate the research productivity of IIMs. The expanding literature will make an important contribution to identifying patterns and evaluating current research trends on a worldwide scale.

The objective of this study is to explore the accounting research network among institutions and countries globally and to contribute to the knowledge development in accounting discipline across regions with a novel and original approach.

This study has been conducted by manually collecting data from 10,863 papers published in 22 accounting journals indexed in the Web of Science (WoS) for the period 2000–2016. Analyses and visualizations of collaborative networks across institutions and regions were performed by using network analysis software packages, including Pajek, UCINET 6, NetDraw and VOSviewer.

The study finds that the most productive five universities are the University of New South Wales, University of Sydney, University of Texas, University of California and University of Manchester worldwide. In accordance with the institution ranking, the five most productive countries in all periods are the USA, the UK, Australia, Spain and Canada. However, in addition to these countries, it is important to note that some European and Asian countries and New Zealand from Oceania are among the most productive countries which host prolific institutions. Furthermore, network indicators show that the UK is the most influential actor in centrality and brokerage within the research network. We should note that Australia is also among the most influential nations with its influential institutions. In all research metrics, the dominance of Anglophone countries (e.g. the USA, the UK and Australia) is observable on which language advantage might play a role since most internationally accredited journals publish scientific articles in English.

The study is bounded with several main limitations. First, due to collecting the data manually, there might be some inherent limitations. Second, the study is constrained by the time frame between 2000 and 2016. The study does not answer why and how questions in investigating research productivity and effectiveness in the network. Our study might inspire new studies to complement ours by considering these constraints.

Our findings indicated the prominent institution-wide and country-wide actors; thus, the results provide a global perspective on the collaboration network. Second, our findings guide job seekers, who are particularly research-oriented, to potential recruiters around the world both at the institution level and country level. Third, the results might play an important role in forming institution-based and country-based research policies. The USA, among others, is a particularly important actor in productivity, whereas the UK, among others, is a remarkable country in centrality and brokerage in the research network. By examining the policies of these two countries, other nations might shape their research strategies, promotion policies and support and reward schemes. Fourth, cross-institution and in particular cross-country collaborations are imperative in the diversity of accounting research as they blend culturally diverse researchers. Fifth, prominent institutions highlighted in this study might be adopted as role models by other institutions in the same country and benefit their expertise in productivity and cooperation by scrutinizing their approaches. Sixth, our findings and metrics might be adopted as benchmarks for institutions and nations for performance evaluation. Considering our 5-year period indicators, institutions can set targets for their improvement and for measuring the progress. We provide other important implications in the conclusion section of the study.

To the best knowledge of the authors, no study yet investigated the collaboration across academic institutions, regions, and countries in accounting discipline to this extent. Therefore, our research provides a significant contribution to the literature by seeking a comprehensive network analysis of authorship patterns from an institutional and geographical perspective. Doing so, we contribute to knowledge development in accounting discipline with institutional and geographical network analyses.

The purpose of this study was to map the quantity (frequency), quality (impact) and structural indicators (correlations) of research produced on cloud computing in 48 countries and 3 territories in the Asia continent.

To achieve the objectives of the study and scientifically map the indicators, data were extracted from the Scopus database. The extracted bibliographic data was first cleaned properly using Endnote and then analyzed using Biblioshiny and VosViewer application software. In the software, calculations include citations count; h, g and m indexes; Bradford's and Lotka's laws; and other scientific mappings.

Results of the study indicate that China remained the most productive, impactful and collaborative country in Asia. All the top 20 impactful authors were also from China. The other most researched areas associated with cloud computing were revealed to be mobile cloud computing and data security in clouds. The most prominent journal currently publishing research studies on cloud computing was “Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing.”

The study is the first of its kind which identified the quantity (frequencies), quality (impact) and structural indicators (correlations) of Asian (48 countries and 3 territories) research productivity on cloud computing. The results are of great importance for researchers and countries interested in further exploring, publishing and increasing cross country collaborations related to the phenomenon of cloud computing.

This study aims to measure the global research landscape of the National Institute of Pharmaceutical Education and Research (NIPER) of India on a set of quantitative and qualitative metrics in terms of research output toward exploring research trends and give an overview of collaborative practices by researchers of NIPERs.

The present study has selected the Scopus database as a tool to retrieve potential publications of studied NIPERs during the last 12 years (2010–2021). NIPER-Mohali, NIPER-Hyderabad, NIPER-Ahmedabad, NIPER-Guwahati and NIPER-Kolkata have been selected for the study. The study has adopted a comprehensive search strategy to extract 3,926 publications data. VOS viewer 1.6.17, BibExcel and Microsoft Excel were used for data analysis and visualization.

The global scientific research output of NIPERs accrued 3,926 publications with an average of 327 publications per year. The retrieved publications fetched a total of 67,772 citations with an average citation impact of 17.26. There observed a steady growth of publications from 168 to 509 registered with an average growth rate of 18.44%. The mean relative growth rate and doubling time of research output are 0.26 and 2.94. The authorship patterns explore collaborative trends as most of the publications were published by multiple authors (99.39%). NIPERs have expanded their outreach to collaborate with the USA, Malaysia, Saudi Arabia, Australia and the UK to collaborate on research and regulatory reforms exhibits in the USA as a major contributor.

The present study is the first effort to evaluate the global research productivity of NIPERs and assess the current research trends on a set of quantitative and qualitative metrics to provide some insights into the complex dynamics of research productivity. The study’s outcome may help to identify the current research progress of NIPERs at the global level.

The purpose of the study is to conduct a scientometric analysis of cybersecurity literature indexed in the core collection of the Web of Science for a period of ten years (2011–2020).

Cybersecurity is a focused topic of research across the globe. To identify the global research productivity in the field, the terms “cybersecurity, cyber-security, web security, information security, computer security, etc.” were used for retrieving the publications in the advanced search mode of the database “Web of Science”, limiting the time frame for 2011– 2020. The results retrieved were downloaded in the Excel file for further analysis and interpretation. The harvested data was analysed by using scientometric techniques to measure the progress such as growth rate, doubling time and author collaborations. Besides, the Biblioshiny and VOSviewer software were used for mapping networks.

The research output in the field of cybersecurity has shown an increasing trend during 2011–2020, and the maximum number of scholarly publications was published in 2020 (1,581), i.e. more than 715% of 2011 (221). A good number of countries (93) have contributed globally in cybersecurity research, and the highest share in research publications was reported by the USA (23.55%), followed by China (23.24%), South Korea (5.31%), UK (5.28%) and India (4.25%). The authorship patterns in cybersecurity publications show a collaborative trend, as most articles have been published by multiple authors. Total 5,532 (90.14%) articles have been published in co-authorship, whereas only 605 (9.86%) articles have been published by single authors. Keyword analysis shows that the most common keyword research by the authors is cybersecurity and its variants such as “cyber security” and “cyber-security” (1,698) followed by security (782), computer security (680) and information security (329).

The database studied for the work does not represent the total literary output available on the theme. There are plenty of other databases, such as Scopus, Compendex, INSPEC, IEEE Xplore, arXiv, contributing to the same theme as well.

The findings of the study may help researchers, information technologists, library professionals and information specialists to identify the research progress, authorship patterns, collaborative networks and hot topics of research in the field of cybersecurity. Besides, it will assess the global response to the cybersecurity issue.

The study is the scientometric analysis of the cybersecurity based on current literature and will highlight the progress and development of global research in the said field.

This paper seeks to present a scientometric analysis of the Proceedings of the McMaster World Congress on the Management of Intellectual Capital and Innovation for the 1996‐2008 period in order to better understand the evolution and identity of the discipline.

Qualitative and quantitative data analysis techniques were applied to determine author distribution, country, individual and institutional‐level productivity rankings, and employed methodologies.

It was found that an average manuscript was written by 1.73 authors. The USA, Canada and the UK were the three most productive countries, which is consistent with prior KM/IC productivity research. Most productive institutions were the University of Calgary (Canada), Polytechnic University of Catalonia (Spain) and Universidad de Oviedo (Spain). The most productive individuals were James Falconer, Jose Maria Viedma Marti and Scott Erickson. Lotka's α, which represents the degree of conference delegate retention rate, was established as 2.7. Case studies were the most frequent method of inquiry, followed by framework development and literature reviews. Surveys and usage of secondary data were the leading empirical methodologies. Interviews, laboratory experiments, and field studies were under‐represented.

The findings offer valuable insights into the state and development of the KM/IC discipline and shed some light on its identity.

Scientometric analyses are of primary interest for academic researchers and therefore the practical implications of this study are limited.

The research reported is among the first to investigate the issue of the KM/IC discipline identity from a descriptive perspective.

The purpose of this paper is to identify the core literature of aerospace studies and the databases necessary to ensure its coverage in a collection for aerospace scientists. The paper also aims to examine whether China has different needs from other countries.

A sequence of bibliometric analyses was used. Institutions and countries with high aerospace research productivity were identified from 4,290 papers published in “aerospace engineering” journals in Science Citation Index. Journal papers cited in these papers (14,618 extracted from 17,015 citations in all) were analyzed to discover the core source journals for aerospace research. The availability of the core journals in online databases determined necessary library provision for aerospace research.

The most productive aerospace research institutions are in China and the USA. Journals are the most important information resources. While 20 per cent of cited journals were discipline‐specific, 80 per cent were in related fields. Chinese researchers had similar resource needs to researchers from other countries. To provide for aerospace research, a library collection needs to include the databases of the field, and commercial and open access journals that cover aerospace engineering, related disciplines and the sciences in general.

The paper reveals the characteristics of the literature of the aerospace discipline for the first time. It identifies the core journals used by aerospace researchers and the bundle of online resources necessary to adequately provide for research in the field. The technique used can be applied to other disciplines.

No scholarly publications have systematically studied the evolution and growth of China's scientific papers of library and information science published in the English language and covered by ISI during the reform era starting in 1979. It is intended that this paper should fill this gap.

This study surveys ISI library and information science papers authored by researchers of China during 1979‐2009 and quantitatively presents the development of scholarly publications authored by researchers from China. A total of 30 years of data of ISI literature are collected and analyzed, and the paper conducts an international comparison of research productivity among leading Asian countries.

The paper establishes the patterns and trends of papers authored by Chinese authors, particularly the top subject areas and top journals in which Chinese papers are highly represented. Besides, the paper makes an international comparison between China and other major Asian countries such as India, Japan, and Korea in terms of library and information science research outputs represented in ISI literature. China has become the leader in terms of research productivity of library and information science.

This study focuses on English‐language journal articles only. Only journals meeting ISI inclusion criteria are reviewed and analyzed. The possible accidentally inaccurate entries in the original ISI data have not been checked for accuracy and consistency for each journal article record.

The paper provided an example of using the powerful ISI databases of citation indexes, particularly ISI SCCI, in a cautious and critical way. It empirically presents the overall upward development of China's scholarship of library and information science. Either the Greater China area as a whole or Mainland China alone has become the leader in the scholarly publications in library and information ahead of India, Korea and Japan.

The purpose of this paper is to provide an overall picture of women's participation in Iranian scientific production.

A sample of 7,846 articles was obtained from the three ISI databases: Science Citation Index (SCI), Social Science Citation Index (SSCI), and Arts and Humanities Citation Index (AHCI) for the study period 2005‐2010. The articles were broken down by gender. Then for the scope of this study, research productivity, collaboration pattern, scientific‐disciplinary, and research impact were investigated.

A chi‐square test showed that there is a significant difference between the male and female research output in the three databases. Females accounted for 13 percent of the articles indexed in ISI databases during the study period. There is a gap of approximately 87 percent in research productivity between males and females in Iran. Iranian women are more active in the areas of chemistry, clinical medicine and general social sciences.

The paper highlights the role of women in science and the gap of research productivity between men and women; it may help illuminate policy decisions to promote female research in the country.