Search results

Since at least the 1970s, the American research university system has experienced episodic periods of austerity, frequently accompanied by expressions of concern about the threats that these conditions pose to U.S. scientific and technological leadership. In general, austerity has been tied to fluctuations in Federal Government funding of academic research and macroeconomic fluctuations that have shrunk state government budget revenues. Even amidst these episodes, the system has continued to expand and decentralize. The issue at present is whether this historic resiliency, of being a marvelous invalid, will overcome adverse contemporary trends in Federal and state government funding, as well as political trends that eat away at the societal bonds between universities and their broader publics. The paper juxtaposes examinations of the organizational and political influences that have given rise to the American research university system, trends in research revenues and research costs, and contemporary efforts by universities to balance the two. It singles out the secular decline in state government’s support of public universities as the principal reason why this period of contraction is different from those of the past. Rather though then these trends portending a market shakeout, as some at times have predicted, the projection here is that the academic research system will continue to be characterized by excess capacity and recurrent downward pressures on research costs. Because the adverse impacts are concentrated in the public university sector, they may also spill over into political threats to the current system of awarding academic research grants primarily via competitive, merit review arrangements.

This project focused on data from institutions graduating baccalaureate students who ultimately earned science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) doctorates in the sciences across a 15-year period. This project employed multiple regression and comparison of difference scores to identify colleges that produced comparatively high numbers of black bachelor's graduates who went on to earn STEM doctoral degrees. It identified colleges and universities that “overproduced” compared with peers and with predicted numbers of students of color who earned baccalaureate degrees and then went on to earn doctorates in STEM fields.

This paper aims to explore how fund managers (FMs) deal with major problems of ignorance and uncertainty in stock selection and in asset allocation decisions.

Interviews were conducted with 40 fund managers in the period October 1997 to January 2000. A seven stage approach was adopted to sift through and process the large volumes of case data. The interview case data formed the basis for identifying common patterns and themes across the cases.

The case data revealed the nature of this private information agenda concerning intellectual capital or intangibles and the dynamic connections between these variables in the value creation process. The case data provided insight into how the book value and market value gap arose and the special role of information on intangibles and intellectual capital in valuing the company.

The fund management behaviour has important implications for regulatory policy issues on insider information, on corporate disclosure, the corporate governance role of financial institutions, and for the governance of financial institutions.

The paper focuses on issues of importance in an increasingly concentrated and global FM industry.

Although the role of enterprise in R&D is broadly acknowledged, few attempts have been made to gather data for analyzing the nature and scope of private sector collaboration. This study aims to deliver empirical results based on quantitative data to gain insight into the role of private enterprise as an indispensable actor in scientific development and innovation.

The study aimed to deliver empirical results based on quantitative data to gain insight into the role of private enterprise as an indispensable actor in scientific development and innovation. To this end, an analysis was conducted of the contribution made by Spanish business, focusing on the 50 most active companies in terms of internationally visible scientific output, from three perspectives.

The findings provide insight into business involvement in the R&D system based on: research papers published; national, international and sectoral collaboration patterns; structural patterns; and the identification of the most prominent companies from a systematic comparison of their research results and their position in the resulting collaboration network.

Bibliometric analyses do not measure all types of publications. Indicators are usually based on data in the Thomson Reuters databases, which are regarded as being representative of peer‐reviewed, publicly accessible papers with high international visibility and impact. The Thomson Reuters databases feature a series of advantages that make them indispensable for studies on scientific collaboration.

One of the core ideas of this study is the emphasis on the essential role of collaboration in improving scientific results, as borne out by the correlation between the clustering coefficient and the hybrid indicators. The findings also provide proof of the success of strategies for institutional collaboration. The foregoing shows that the application of hybrid indicators to institutional aggregates yields novel results not explored in preceding studies.

The purpose of this paper is to study the progress of research on business research in India and identify the key disciplines, journals, articles, authors, and institutions.

Bibliometric analysis using data for articles published from the ISI Web of Knowledge databases consisting of the ISI Web of Science (1899-present) consisting of Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-expanded), Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI), and Arts & Humanities Citation Index (A&HCI); BIOSIS Previews (1969-present); CABI: CAAAB Abstracts (1910-present); MEDLINE (1950-present); Zoological Record (1864-present); and Journal Citation Reports (1999-2008).

There is growing number of research literature on the theme and more so post 2002. Among the journals, the most prolific, measured by number of articles published are Management Decision, International Journal of Human Resource Management, Harvard Business Review, and Journal of International Marketing and the top ten percent of the journals are responsible for 36 percent of all publications. Similarly the top seven authors are responsible for about 15 percent of all publications and the top ten institutions account for 30 percent of all publications. This highlights that few journals, authors, and institutions are dominating the research arena of business research in India.

Despite its high degree of objectivity, bibliometric analysis has a subjective dimension (Van Raan, 2003) since the researcher had to make choices on the search terms, the time period used, etc., and while the data set is comprehensive, is it not exhaustive as many new journals are not part of SSCI (Pillania and Fetscherin, 2009; Pillania, 2011).

The study undertakes a multi-disciplinary review of literature on business research in India. It identifies the key disciplines, journals, articles, authors, and institutions on business research in India. It is a ready reference for practitioners and future researchers on the subject.

This study has made an attempt to study and document the literature on business research in India.

This paper aims at analyzing the distinctive characteristics of highly cited articles (HCAs) in the domain of Social Sciences with respect to chronological growth pattern, productive journals, authorship pattern, prolific authors, top institutions and leading countries, network among institutions and top ranked keywords in social science research.

The required data has been retrieved from Scopus indexing database and further refined using various limits like document types, subject coverage and total citations, and finally, 839 articles were selected for detail analysis. A set of bibliometric indicators were used to make a quantitative analysis, whereas VOSviewer software tool was used to visualize the institutional network and keywords mapping of the HCAs.

This study revealed that highest number of HCAs (371) were published during the decade 2001–2010. Degree of collaboration, collaborative index and collaborative coefficient were observed to be 0.513, 1.98 and 0.988, respectively. The highly cited papers were emanated from 397 journals, contributed by 1,556 authors from 1,326 institutions placed in 46 countries. Social Science and Medicine was the most productive journal; J. Urry of Lancaster University, UK, was the most influential author; the USA, the UK and Canada are the torchbearers in social science research. The paper entitled “Five misunderstandings about case-study research,” authored by B. Flyvbjerg, published in 2006 in Qualitative Inquiry, received highest 4,730 citations.

The primary value of this paper lies in extending an understanding of the characteristics of HCAs in the domain of social sciences. It will provide an insight to the researchers to get acquainted with the most influential authors, journals, institutions, countries and major thrust areas of research in social sciences.

The purpose of this paper is to present a quantitative analysis of the Library and Information Science (LIS) scholarly literature published worldwide.

The ISI Web of Science database was used as a source for extracting the data of published documents during the period 2003–2017. The analysis of the published literature was based on the following indicators: research productivity of each county, annual publications, annual citations, highly cited articles, highly cited LIS journals, most productive institutions in the field of LIS and most prolific authors. The types of documents included in this study were research articles, conference proceeding papers, book reviews and editorials.

The findings revealed that the USA had the highest overall output of LIS scholarly publications. The year 2016 was identified as the most productive year for the number of publications, whereas 2017 was identified as the most productive year for the number of citations. “Impact of data sources on citation counts and rankings of LIS faculty: Web of Science versus Scopus and Google Scholar” was the most highly cited article. The Journal of Medical Library Association was the most highly cited journal in LIS. Indiana University from the USA was the most productive LIS research institution. Mike Thelwall, from the UK, is identified as the most prolific author in LIS.

The study will be of interest for those researchers, who intend to conduct bibliometric research studies in LIS.

Distributed leadership has been reported in the literature as an effective management approach for educational organizations such as institutions of higher education. This study aims to investigate the role of distributed leadership in the promotion of sustainability in an Israeli college of teacher education.

Based on the Multi-Level Model of Leadership Practice in higher education, taken from Bolden et al. (2008a) and from Woods et al. (2004), the authors investigated how the characteristics of distributed leadership are expressed in three central organization-wide structures in the college (a student group, the green council and a professional development program). They also explored in what ways aspects of distributed leadership promote sustainability-oriented activities on campus. They used a deductive and inductive interpretive approach in this case study.

The authors found three organization-level processes that are based on the principles of distributed leadership and that promote sustainability on campus: distributed leadership enables change in the organization’s internal culture with respect to mainstreaming sustainability; distributed leadership encourages collaboration between the entire campus population and between different departments and distributed leadership on campus enables the development of diverse “bottom-up” and “top-down” structures in the organization.

While the study’s findings indicated several challenges regarding the implementation of distributed leadership in the organization, they ultimately support the idea that distributed leadership may contribute to the long-term, organization-wide implementation of sustainability in higher education institutes. Therefore, the authors recommend that institutions that are willing to promote sustainability adopt distributed leadership as their major management approach.

Foresight J's journey started in 1999, and in 2022, it marked the conclusion of its 24 years of publication. This paper aims to provide an overall overview of important research trends published in Foresight J between 1999 and 2022 by conducting a quantitative analysis of the journal’s literature. The overarching goal is to provide valuable insights into the dynamics of scholarly communication, aiding researchers, institutions and policymakers in assessing the significance and influence of academic work, guiding future research directions and academic evaluation.

The two bibliometrics methodologies that make up the methodology of this article are scientific mapping and performance analysis. Authors have explained the development and composition of the Foresight J using these methods. The SCOPUS database is being used in current research to analyse several dimensions, such as the evolution of publications by year, the most cited papers, core authors and researchers, leading countries and prolific institutions. Moreover, the conceptual structure, scope, burst detection and co-occurrence analysis of the journal are mapped using network visualization software such as VOSviewer, CiteSpace and RStudio.

With a strong track record of output over the years, Foresight J has continued to develop in terms of publications. It is determined that “Saritas” is the author with the greatest overall impact. However, according to SCOPUS bibliometric data, “Blackman” and “Richardson” are the authors with the greatest relevance in terms of the quantity of articles. In addition, it becomes apparent that the USA, Australia and the UK are very productive nations in terms of publications. The most popular fields of the journal have always been forecasting, foresight, scenario planning, strategic planning, decision-making, technology and sustainable development. These are also the author keywords that appear the most frequently. In contrast, new study themes in the Foresight J include digital technologies, innovation, sustainability, blockchain, artificial intelligence and sustainability.

Several noteworthy research implications are provided by the bibliometric study of Foresight J. “Saritas” is the author with the most overall impact, indicating that the precise contributions and influence of this researcher in the fields of forecasting, foresight and related fields. Given that “Blackman” and “Richardson” are well-known writers, it is also critical to examine the scope and complexity of their contributions to potentially identify recurring themes or patterns in their writing. The geographic productivity results, which show that the USA, Australia and the UK are the top three countries for Foresight J publications, may encourage more research into regional differences, patterns of collaboration and the worldwide distribution of research endeavours in the context of forecasting and foresight. Popular fields including scenario planning, forecasting, foresight and sustainable development are consistent, indicating persistent research interests. Examining the causes of these subjects’ ongoing relevance can reveal information about the consistency and development of scholarly interests over time.

Foresight J’s bibliometric analysis has real-world applications for many stakeholders. It helps editors and publishers make strategic decisions about outreach and content by providing insights regarding the journal’s influence. Assessing organizational and author productivity helps institutions allocate resources more effectively. Policymakers acquire an instrument to evaluate research patterns and distribute funds efficiently. In general, bibliometric study of a journal helps decisionmakers in academic publishing make well-informed choices that maximize the potential of options for authors, editors, institutions and policymakers.

The societal ramifications of bibliometrically analysing Foresight J from 1999 and 2022 are substantial. This analysis highlights, over the past 24 years, research trends, technological developments and societal priorities have changed by methodically looking through the journal’s articles. Gaining knowledge about the academic environment covered by the journal can help raise public awareness of important topics and promote critical thinking. In addition, the analysis can support evidence-based decision-making by alerting decision makers to the influential research that was published in Foresight J. This could have an impact on the course of policies pertaining to innovation, technology and societal development.

This study presents a first comprehensive article that provides a general overview of the main trends and patterns of the research over the Foresight J’s history since its inception. Also, the paper will help the scientific community to know the value and impact of Foresight J.

Equity, diversity, inclusion and accessibility (EDIA) are the core values of librarianship. This study aims to examine the EDIA literature in the library and information science (LIS) profession, focusing on publishing trends, authorship patterns, thematic evolution, co-occurrence network, international collaboration network and three-factor analysis.

A scientometrics analysis was performed, and data were retrieved from the Web of Science database following a four-phase data extraction and filtration process. Data analysis was performed using specialized scientometrics tools.

Most of the published work comes from the developed world. The thematic evolution identified that the initial period (1971–2010) was dedicated to the diversity of library resources, services and users. The second phase (2011–2015) concentrated on accessibility and information literacy. The recent period (2016–2021) is linked with social inclusion, diversity and accessibility. Furthermore, the co-cluster citation and content analysis identified five major interconnected streams in the EDIA literature in LIS: disability and accessibility; diversity, inclusion and recruitment; social justice and libraries; libraries and immigrants; and libraries and the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgendered, queer community.

Theoretical, practical and implications for policy makers and curriculum developers were added to create awareness and better observe EDIA in LIS field.

The identification of research streams is one of the most important findings of this study, which shows that some areas of EDIA are maturing and others are emerging in the profession.