Search results

This study aims to examine the scholarly impact of funded and non-funded research published in ten core library and information science (LIS) journals published in 2016.

In total, ten high-impact LIS journals were selected using Google Scholar metrics. The source title of each selected journal was searched in the Scopus database to retrieve the articles published in 2016. The detailed information of all the retrieved articles for every journal was exported in a CSV Excel file, and after collecting all the journal articles’ information, all CSV Excel files were merged into a single MS Excel file for data analysis.

The study analyzed 1,064 publications and found that 14% of them were funded research articles. Funded articles received higher average citation counts (24.56) compared to non-funded articles (20.49). Funded open-access articles had a higher scholarly impact than funded closed-access articles. The research area with the most funded articles was “Bibliometrics,” which also received the highest number of citations (1,676) with an average citation count of 24.64. The National Natural Science Foundation of China funded the most papers (30), while the USA funded the highest number of research publications (36) in the field of LIS.

This study highlights the importance of securing funding, open access publishing, discipline-specific differences, diverse funding sources and aiming for higher citations. Researchers, practitioners and policymakers can use these findings to enhance research impact in LIS.

This study explores the impact of funding on research LIS and provides valuable insights into the intricate relationship between funding and research impact.

The key purpose of this study is to systematically examine the landscape of education research funded by the National Plan of Educational Research Funding (NPERF) in China. The study aims to: (1) identify the thematic focus areas that reflect the national education agenda, (2) analyze the general funding patterns of education research projects and (3) gain insights into the distinctive nature of the research agenda in China. The study employs a rigorous data-driven approach to offer valuable insights into the dynamic discourses within the field of education research in China, which has received relatively little attention despite its potential significance.

In this study, we utilized word co-occurrence analysis and corpus-based frequency analysis to analyze the research projects funded by the National Plan of Educational Research Funding (NPERF) from 2011 to 2020.

The key characteristics of these projects highlight the focus on higher education research, addressing the interests of specific cohorts of students, teachers and disadvantaged populations. Furthermore, these projects demonstrate a remarkable responsiveness to the policy needs of the country and a robust inclination toward an international comparative framework.

The findings offer valuable insights into the landscape and features of funded education research in China, revealing a strong emphasis on addressing practical needs and enhancing the capacity of the education system in the country.

This paper presents a systematic examination of the topics covered in funded research under the National Plan of Educational Research Funding (NPERF) scheme from 2011 to 2020. It contributes to the advancement of understanding regarding knowledge traditions and practices in the Chinese context. Methodologically, this paper is the first in the literature to be prototyped with a word co-occurrence analysis approach to systematically investigate the funded education research in China. Additionally, it includes the development of a comprehensive corpus list to uncover the key characteristics of the funded projects. The analysis provides unique insights into the priorities and directions of education research supported by the Chinese government, which are of potential interest to international readers.

The purpose of this study is to determine the funding ratio of BRICS nations in various research areas. The leading funding institutions that support research in the developing world have also been researched.

This study involves the funding acknowledgment analysis of the data retrieved from the “Clarivate Analytics' InCites database” under “22 specific research areas” to determine whether the publication was funded.

This study shows that China achieves the highest funding ratio of 88.6%, followed by Brazil (73.74%), Russia (72.93%) and South Africa (70.94%). However, India has the lowest funding ratio of 58.2%. For the subject areas, the highest funding ratio is by microbiology in Russia (86.6%), India (84.3%) and China (96.9%) and space science in Brazil (93.7%) and South Africa (94.82%). However, economics and business achieves the lowest funding ratio in Brazil (38.6%), India (20.1%) and South Africa (30.24%). Moreover, the regional funding agencies are the leading research sponsors in the BRICS nations.

This study implies increasing the funding ratio across various research areas, including arts, humanities and social sciences. The nations, particularly India, also need to gear up sponsoring the research to improve the funding ratio for scientific development, bringing overall good.

This study efforts to show the status of countries and research subjects in terms of funding ratio and reveals the prominent funders working toward scientific growth.

Internationalisation in higher education (HE) has always been romanticised and idealised but there has been limited focus on the internationalisation of gender equality and Equality, Diversity and Inclusion (EDI) certification and the role of international partnerships. Certification and Award Schemes (CAS), such as the Athena Swan Charter, can promote gender equality, best practices exchanges and foster institutional changes. Nevertheless, simply transferring strategies or frameworks without careful consideration of the nuances of the destination context can inadvertently lead to the perpetuation or exacerbation of gender inequalities and reproduce hierarchical relations between the Global South and North. Brazil's cultural and political context highlights the need for adapting the CAS framework to align with the unique conditions of the country, as well as institutional transformations in order to accommodate such a framework. This study aims to critically explore how gender equality and EDI certification can be internationalised in the Global South and how international partnerships can play a role in this process.

Building on a collaborative UK–Brazil funded project on advancing gender equality in Brazilian academia, we critically reflect on the assumptions of the funding call for operationalising international collaborations, and how we built solidarity – informed by our positionalities – against underlying colonial patterns. As part of our partnership, we were consulted to provide feedback on the introduction of an Athena SWAN framework in Brazil. We reflect on how the Athena Swan framework was “internationalised” in Brazil, especially in relation to its focus, the challenges of implementing gender equality and EDI efforts and the conditions required for such efforts to be meaningful in the Brazilian context. Thus, we assess and critically reflect on the current situation in Brazil, the role that certification can play for EDI and which conditions are required to enact change. In addition, we reflect on our positionalities and working practices as part of this collaboration as feminist researchers from different disciplinary and geographical backgrounds.

We trace colonial logics in the operationalisation of the funding scheme on setting international collaborations valorising the UK system and reinforcing geopolitical production of knowledge hierarchies between the Global North and Global South. Furthermore, reflecting on the Brazilian political, cultural context with a focus on HE we find similar challenges – to the UK – in implementing gender and EDI efforts. However, there are particular nuances in the Brazilian context that exacerbate these obstacles and make the implementation of an EDI certification framework in Brazil particularly challenging. Overcoming these barriers requires a collective effort from government, funding bodies, scientific associations and HE institutions, for the implementation of impactful and sustainable initiatives beyond mere rhetoric. Finally, while we had a positive collaboration, we felt ambivalent towards certain dimensions of the way the partnerships and the EDI internationalisation were operationalised.

We provide insights and practical recommendations that enhance the understanding of the issues surrounding the implementation of EDI efforts internationally such as CAS in the Brazilian context.

Reflecting on the internationalisation of EDI can lead to more tailored context-sensitive frameworks and activities that have the potential to influence societal attitudes and expectations towards gender roles and inclusivity, contributing to a more equitable and just society at large. It also touches upon the dynamics of international partnerships and collaborations across different contexts that can have implications for how such partnerships should be developed and funded beyond a mainstream colonial approach of “mentoring less advanced institutions”.

We reflect and critically discuss the internationalisation of EDI certification in HE and the role of international collaborations towards this process, a topic that has not been often examined within the literature on the internationalisation of HE as a romanticised and positive discourse. From our experience, we explore how such efforts can bring up ambivalence in the way they are operationalised and have the potential to both reinforce and disrupt colonial hierarchies.

This article explores whether six broad categories of activities undertaken by Canadian business scholars’ academics: publications record, citations record, teaching load, administrative load, consulting activities, and knowledge spillovers transfer, are complementary, substitute, or independent, as well as the conditions under which complementarities, substitution and independence among these activities are likely to occur.

A multivariate probit model is estimated to take into account that business scholars have to consider simultaneously whether or not to undertake many different academic activities. Metrics from Google Scholar of scholars from 35 Canadian business schools, augmented by a survey data on factors explaining the productivity and impact performances of these faculty members, are used to explain the heterogeneities between the determinants of these activities.

Overall, the results reveal that there are complementarities between publications and citations, publications and knowledge spillovers transfer, citations and consulting, and between consulting and knowledge spillovers transfer. The results also suggest that there are substitution effects between publications and teaching, publications and administrative load, citations and teaching load, and teaching load and administrative load. Moreover, results show that public and private funding, business schools’ reputation, scholar’s relational resources, and business school size are among the most influential variables on the scholar’s portfolio of activities.

This study considers simultaneously the scholar’s whole portfolio of activities. Moreover, the determinants considered in this study to explain scholars’ engagement in different activities reconcile two conflicting perspectives: (1) the traditional self-managed approach of academics, and (2) the outcomes-focused approach of university management.

This study aims to analyze the adoption of open access (OA) publishing in social sciences within central universities in India, focusing on various aspects such as the growth of OA literature, the use of different OA routes and collaboration patterns in OA publications.

Ten central universities were selected based on their rankings in the National Institute Ranking Framework 2022. Data on OA publishing in social sciences were collected from the Social Science Citation Index of the Web of Science (WoS) database using the advanced search query “(CU=India OR AD=India) AND PY=(2003–2022) NOT PY=(2023).” Data analysis was conducted using MS Excel (v16.0), BibExcel (version 2017), Biblioshiny (version 4.1.2) and Google Open Refine (version 3.7).

The study found that 30.40% of total publications were OA, with BHU as leading institute in OA publishing. OA publishing in social sciences saw a consistent increase, peaking in 2022 with 209 publications. “Sustainability” and “Plos One” were among the top ten journals, with 103 and 34 OA papers, respectively. OA publications had a higher mean citation rate than closed access publications. Collaboration with seven and nine authors had higher mean citation rates, while six-author collaborations were lower. Indian researchers received the most citations collaborating with the USA, UK and Australia. The Netherlands and Saudi Arabia received the fewer citations, when collaborating with Indian authors.

The study’s main limitation is its reliance on WoS data, excluding many OA publications from smaller or specialized journals. Additionally, the focus on high-ranked central universities may not represent the entire academic landscape, as OA publishing patterns vary across other institutions and disciplines.

The study’s findings suggest that advancing OA publishing in social sciences at Indian universities requires raising awareness of OA concepts, enhancing institutional support and policies and informing researchers about funding opportunities. Emphasizing Gold OA and funding publication fees can broaden access to research. Universities with low OA ratios should adopt similar policies, mandate public research deposits and develop technical infrastructure. Encouraging multi-author collaborations can boost research impact and citation rates. Insights from the study can help institutions and policymakers shape effective OA strategies, enhancing the visibility and impact of social science research.

This is the first study analyzing the adoption of OA in the field of social sciences in high-ranked central universities in India. It has implications for promoting OA and increasing accessibility to research outputs. Universities with higher OA ratios can lead in this regard and encourage others to adopt similar practices for overall OA growth.

This study aims to highlight the growth and development of Indo-German collaborative research over the past three decades. Moreover, this study encompasses an in-depth examination of funding acknowledgements to gain valuable insights into the financial support that underpins these collaborative endeavours. Together with this paper, the authors provide an openly accessible data set of Indo-German research papers for further and reproducible research activities (the “Indo-German Literature Dataset”).

The data were retrieved from the Web of Science (WoS) database from the year 1990 till the 30th of November 2022. A total of 36,999 records were retrieved against the used query. Acknowledged entities were extracted using a named entity recognition (NER) model specifically trained for this task. Interrelations between the extracted entities and scientific domains, lengths of acknowledgement texts, number of authors and affiliations, number of citations and gender of the first author, as well as collaboration patterns between Indian and German funders were examined.

The study reveals a consistent and increasing growth in the publication trend over the years. The study brings to light that Physics, Chemistry, Materials Science, Astronomy and Astrophysics and Engineering prominently dominate the Indo-German collaborative research. The USA, followed by England and France, are the most active collaborators in Indian and German research. Largely, research was funded by major German and Indian funding agencies, international corporations and German and American universities. Associations between the first author’s gender and acknowledged entity were observed. Additionally, relations between entity, entity type and scientific domain were discovered.

The study paves the way for enhanced collaboration, optimized resource utilization and societal advantages by offering a profound comprehension of the intricacies inherent in research partnerships between India and Germany. Implementation of the insights gleaned from this study holds the promise of cultivating a more resilient and influential collaborative research ecosystem between the two nations.

The study highlights a deeper understanding of the composition of the Indo-German collaborative research landscape of the past 30 years and its significance in advancing scientific knowledge and fostering international partnerships. Furthermore, the authors provide an open version of the original WoS data set. The Indo-German Literature Data set consists of 22,844 papers from OpenAlex and is available for related studies like literature studies and scientometrics.

This study aims to map the scholarly literature on human resource management (HRM) publishing intensity in journals listed in Web of Science (WOS) under the subject category “Information Science and Library Science,” between 1989 and 2022.

The current study used a “bibliometric research design,” which is a quantitative approach. Ten selected bibliometric indicators were used to measure the scientific literature: publication-related metrics, citation-related metrics, citation analysis, co-citation analysis, bibliographic coupling, co-word analysis, co-authorship analysis, network metrics, clustering and visualization. Moreover, Louvain’s clustering algorithm was used for network metrics.

The paper gives empirical insights into the scholarly literature on HRM. The results were analyzed for the 65 sources and 1,412 authors from 60 countries who contributed the most during this period. Moreover, the study highlights a glimpse of funding sources, open-access publishing patterns and venues of publishing.

The study would be very beneficial to researchers and practitioners across disciplines.

This study illustrates that HRM is a multidisciplinary field that is appealing to academics from various disciplines because of its unique emphasis on management, and as such, it necessitates the pooling and integration of people, information, expertise and strategies. The study investigates numerous quantitative indicators such as research trends and collaboration frameworks.

The study aims to access, monitor and visualize the scientific progress of Twitter-based research through a bibliometric analysis of scientific publications.

The data was retrieved from 2006 to February 23, 2022 using the Web of Science, a leading indexing and abstracting database. In response to the authors’ query, 6,193 items with 101,037 citations, an average citation of 16.31 and an h index of 126 were received. The “Biblioshiny” extension of the “Bibliometrics” package (www.bibliometrix.org) of R software was used to evaluate and visualize the data.

The present study highlighted the scientific progress of the field evolved over a period of time. The obtained results uncovered the publication trends, productive countries and their collaboration pattern, active authors who nurture the field by making their contribution, prolific source titles adopted by authors to publish the literature on the topic, most productive language in which literature was written, productive institutions, funding agencies that sponsor the research, influential articles, prominent keywords used in publications were also identified which will aid scientists in identifying research gaps in a particular area.

This study comprehensively illustrates the research status of Twitter-related research by conducting a bibliometric analysis. The study’s findings can assist relevant researchers in understanding the research trend, seeking scientific collaborators and funding for their research. Further, the study will act as a ready reference tool for the scientific community to identify research gaps, select research topics and appropriate platforms for submitting their scholarly endeavors.

This study aims to explore the research internationalization process in Georgia, one of the post-Soviet countries. Specifically, it examines the individual-level reasons that motivate faculty at Georgian universities to engage in the process of research internationalization. It also unpacks scholars’ perspectives on the driving factors for selecting the key partners in international research.

Sixteen faculty members for this exploratory qualitative study were selected through stratified purposeful sampling from five higher educational institutions in Georgia. Participants were asked to discuss their participation in international research projects and underline the activities and events that motivated them to participate in international collaborative projects. The critical incident method was used to analyze our qualitative data collected through semi-structured interviews.

The research revealed that faculty at Georgian universities are more oriented toward collaboration with their peers from European countries and the USA. This preference is influenced by such factors as higher quality of science, higher level of freedom and autonomy, personal contacts and networks, as well as language competencies. The data also helped to unpack Georgian scholars’ individual-level rationales that were conceptualized into three domains: human capital, financial capital and physical capital.

This study is an original work conducted in Georgia. It contributes to the development of the field of internationalization of research. The three-domain conceptual framework on the individual-level rationale for internationalization can be used in future research on post-Soviet countries and beyond.