National Scientific Facilities and Their Science Impact on Non-Biomedical Research

H-index, proposed by Hirsch is a good indicator of the impact of a scientist's research. When evaluating departments, institutions or labs, the importance of h-index can be further enhanced when properly calibrated for size. Particularly acute is the issue of federally funded facilities whose number of actively publishing scientists frequently dwarfs that of academic departments. Recently Molinari and Molinari developed a methodology that shows the h-index has a universal growth rate for large numbers of papers, allowing for meaningful comparisons between institutions. An additional challenge when comparing large institutions is that fields have distinct internal cultures, with different typical rates of publication and citation; biology is more highly cited than physics, which is more highly cited than engineering. For this reason, this study has focused on the physical sciences, engineering, and technology, and has excluded bio-medical research. Comparisons between individual disciplines are reported here to provide contextual framework. Generally, it was found that the universal growth rate of Molinari and Molinari holds well across all the categories considered, testifying to the robustness of both their growth law and our results. The overall goal here is to set the highest standard of comparison for federal investment in science; comparisons are made with the nations preeminent private and public institutions. We find that many among the national facilities compare favorably in research impact with the nations leading universities.Comment: 22 pages, 7 figure

Genesis of Altmetrics or Article-level Metrics for Measuring Efficacy of Scholarly Communications: Current Perspectives

The article-level metrics (ALMs) or altmetrics becomes a new trendsetter in recent times for measuring the impact of scientific publications and their social outreach to intended audiences. The popular social networks such as Facebook, Twitter, and Linkedin and social bookmarks such as Mendeley and CiteULike are nowadays widely used for communicating research to larger transnational audiences. In 2012, the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment got signed by the scientific and researchers communities across the world. This declaration has given preference to the ALM or altmetrics over traditional but faulty journal impact factor (JIF)-based assessment of career scientists. JIF does not consider impact or influence beyond citations count as this count reflected only through Thomson Reuters' Web of Science database. Furthermore, JIF provides indicator related to the journal, but not related to a published paper. Thus, altmetrics now becomes an alternative metrics for performance assessment of individual scientists and their contributed scholarly publications. This paper provides a glimpse of genesis of altmetrics in measuring efficacy of scholarly communications and highlights available altmetric tools and social platforms linking altmetric tools, which are widely used in deriving altmetric scores of scholarly publications. The paper thus argues for institutions and policy makers to pay more attention to altmetrics based indicators for evaluation purpose but cautions that proper safeguards and validations are needed before their adoption

Goal Setting and Student Retention

Student retention has been a problem with which higher education institutions must face. Institutions have employed numerous different programs and services to improve student retention. This study sought to open up a new way to improve student retention by utilizing a goal-setting intervention that focused on creating SMART goals for student areas of weaknesses. This study employed the use of a quasi-experimental interrupted time series to better understand how goal-setting interventions could impact the participant attitudes correlated to retention. It was shown that goal-setting interventions had no significant impact on likelihood of retention but did exhibit improvement in client engagement with coursework, which is a positive indicator of student retention. It was concluded that more research should be done on goal-setting and student retention to better understand the impact goal-setting has on student likelihood of retention

Most Cited Articles Published in Brazilian Journals of Economics: Google Scholar Rankings

This paper examines the rankings of the most cited papers published in Brazilian journals of economics since 1990, according to Google Scholar [GS]. Quality research published in Brazil, as measured by academic impact, is mainly done by authors affiliated with international institutions. Half of the articles are co-authored, 7% are authored by graduate students, and women appear to be underrepresented. There is little overlap between authors publishing in domestic journals and authors publishing in international journals. The areas of research more frequently cited by GS and domestic journals are macroeconomics, labor economics, and industrial organization. The most cited articles in international journals are of econometrics, game theory, and development economics. Revista de Economia Política is the top Brazilian journal for the general public, and Revista de Econometria is the top Brazilian journal for academia. GS citations are not a good indicator of journal citationsRankings of Articles, Economists and Departments, Role of Economists.

Zipf's law and log-normal distributions in measures of scientific output across fields and institutions: 40 years of Slovenia's research as an example

Slovenia's Current Research Information System (SICRIS) currently hosts 86,443 publications with citation data from 8,359 researchers working on the whole plethora of social and natural sciences from 1970 till present. Using these data, we show that the citation distributions derived from individual publications have Zipfian properties in that they can be fitted by a power law $P(x) \sim x^{-\alpha}$, with $\alpha$ between 2.4 and 3.1 depending on the institution and field of research. Distributions of indexes that quantify the success of researchers rather than individual publications, on the other hand, cannot be associated with a power law. We find that for Egghe's g-index and Hirsch's h-index the log-normal form $P(x) \sim \exp[-a\ln x -b(\ln x)^2]$ applies best, with $a$ and $b$ depending moderately on the underlying set of researchers. In special cases, particularly for institutions with a strongly hierarchical constitution and research fields with high self-citation rates, exponential distributions can be observed as well. Both indexes yield distributions with equivalent statistical properties, which is a strong indicator for their consistency and logical connectedness. At the same time, differences in the assessment of citation histories of individual researchers strengthen their importance for properly evaluating the quality and impact of scientific output.Comment: 8 pages, 3 figures; accepted for publication in Journal of Informetrics [supplementary material available at http://www.matjazperc.com/sicris/stats.html

Integrating health into the complex urban planning policy and decision-making context: a systems thinking analysis

Public health practitioners produce urban health indicator (UHI) tools to inform built environment policy and decision-making, among other objectives. Indicator producers perceive UHI tools as an easily understandable form of evidence about the urban environment impact on health for policy-makers’ consumption. However, indicator producers often conceptualise policy-making as a rational and linear process, therefore underestimating the complex and contested nature of developing and implementing policy. This study investigates the health-promotion value of UHI tools in the complex urban planning policy and decision-making context. A thematic analysis was conducted following semi-structured interviews with 22 indicator producers and users in San Francisco, Melbourne and Sydney. The analysis was informed by collaborative rationality and systems theories and the results were used to develop causal loop diagrams (CLDs) of producers and users’ mental models. The preliminary CLDs were tested and improved through a participatory modelling workshop (six participants). A high-level CLD depicts users and producers’ shared mental model in which indicator development and use are embedded in policy development and application processes. In the cases analysed, creating and using UHI tools increased inter-sectoral relationships, which supported actors to better understand each other’s opportunities and constraints. These relationships spurred new advocates for health in diverse organisations, supporting health-in-all-policies and whole-of-society approaches. Constraints to health-promoting policy and implementation (such as those which are legal, political and economic in nature), were overcome through community involvement in UHI tools and advocacy effectiveness. A number of factors reduced the perceived relevance and authority of UHI tools, including: a high number of available indicators, lack of neighbourhood scale data and poor-quality data. In summary, UHI tools were a form of evidence that influenced local urban planning policy and decision-making when they were embedded in policy processes, networks and institutions. In contrast to the dominant policy impact model in the indicator literature, such evidence did not typically influence policy as an exogenous entity. Indicators had impact when they were embedded in local institutions and well-resourced over time, resulting in trusted relationships and collaborations among indicator producers and users. Further research is needed to explore other governance contexts and how UHI tools affect the power of different actors, particularly for under-represented communities

How the distinctive cultures of osteopathic and allopathic medical schools affect the careers, perceptions, and institutional efforts of their anatomy faculties: A qualitative case study of two schools

Anatomy faculties are integral to basic science instruction in medical schools, particularly given the preponderance of anatomic instruction in the preclinical curriculum. Recent years have witnessed major curricular restructuring and other emerging national trends that pose significant challenges to anatomists. An examination of anatomy faculty perceptions at two philosophically distinct medical schools within this shifting climate provides an indicator of how different institutional characteristics may impact anatomy instruction and other faculty responsibilities. Semistructured interviews of anatomy faculty from a large, well-established allopathic medical school (Indiana University School of Medicine) and a small, new osteopathic medical school (Marian University College of Osteopathic Medicine) were explored using qualitative thematic analysis. Four overarching themes were identified: (1) Institutional philosophies, such as affiliation with osteopathic versus allopathic medicine, have minimal impact on how the anatomical sciences are taught. (2) Differences in anatomy faculty experiences at these two institutions are largely driven by the institution's size and history. There is a disparity between institutions in the relative importance of teaching and research, but an ability to do research is important for both faculties. (3) Anatomy instruction and research agendas are driven by personal philosophies and interests rather than institutional philosophy. (4) Autonomy is highly valued by anatomists at both institutions. All the participants share a devotion to educating future physicians. In fact, this study identified more similarities than differences in these two faculties. Finally, we argue that shared educational resources and research collaborations can improve anatomy education and faculty development at both institutions. Anat Sci Educ. © 2015 American Association of Anatomists