Towards a multipolar science world: Trends and impact.

This paper brings together recent statistical evidence on international (co-)publications and (foreign) PhD-students and scholars to document shifts in geographic sources of scientific production and their impact. The evidence demonstrates that despite the continued dominance of the US and the increasing importance of the EU, the TRIAD is in relative decline. Other geographic sources of science outside the TRIAD are rising, both in quantity, but also, although still to a lesser extent, in quality. Especially China drives this non-TRIAD growth. This catch-up of non-TRIAD countries drives a slow but real process of global convergence. It nevertheless leaves a less equal non-TRIAD science community, as the growth of China, is not matched by other non-TRIAD countries. Despite the rise of China’s own scientific production, and the increasing return flows of overseas students and scholars, the outward flows of Asean talents have not diminished over time. The data suggest a high correlation between the patterns of international mobility of scientists and the patterns of international collaborations. The large and stable flow of Chinese human capital into the US forms the basis on which stable international US-Chinese networks are built. With the EU lacking this Chinese human capital circulation, it is more difficult to build up similar strong and stable networks.

New approach to the visualization of international scientific collaboration

Chinchilla-Rodríguez, Z., Vargas-Quesada, B., Hassan-Montero, Y., González-Molina, A., Moya-Anegón, F. New approach to the visualization of international scientific collaboration. Information Visualization, 9 (4): 277-287, Winter 2010. DOI: 10.1057/ivs.2009.31In this study, visual representations are created in order to analyze different aspects of scientific collaboration at the international level. The main objective is to identify the international facet of research by following the flow of knowledge as expressed by the number of scientific publications, and then establishes the main geographical axes of output, showing the interrelationships of the domain, the intensity of these relations, and how the different types of collaboration are reflected in terms of visibility. Thus, the methodology has a twofold application, allowing us to detect significant differences that help characterize patterns of behaviour of a geographical system of output, along with the generation of representations that serve as interfaces for domain analysis and information retrieval.Peer reviewe

An empirical review of the different variants of the Probabilistic Affinity Index as applied to scientific collaboration

Responsible indicators are crucial for research assessment and monitoring. Transparency and accuracy of indicators are required to make research assessment fair and ensure reproducibility. However, sometimes it is difficult to conduct or replicate studies based on indicators due to the lack of transparency in conceptualization and operationalization. In this paper, we review the different variants of the Probabilistic Affinity Index (PAI), considering both the conceptual and empirical underpinnings. We begin with a review of the historical development of the indicator and the different alternatives proposed. To demonstrate the utility of the indicator, we demonstrate the application of PAI to identifying preferred partners in scientific collaboration. A streamlined procedure is provided, to demonstrate the variations and appropriate calculations. We then compare the results of implementation for five specific countries involved in international scientific collaboration. Despite the different proposals on its calculation, we do not observe large differences between the PAI variants, particularly with respect to country size. As with any indicator, the selection of a particular variant is dependent on the research question. To facilitate appropriate use, we provide recommendations for the use of the indicator given specific contexts.Comment: 35 pages, 3 figures, 5 table

A bibliometric view on the internationalization of European educational research

Is there a trend towards internationalization of educational research in Europe? Educational research is said to follow a tradition of nationally oriented studies and interventions supported by a national publication culture. Publications are a suitable source of empirical analysis of research output, as they reflect results, emergence and impact of research. This study focuses on publication based bibliometric indicators, which represent measurable characteristics of international orientation of research publications and which can be surveyed in time course. Being aware that the Web of Science (WoS) databases cover a crucial but rather limited proportion of the worldwide educational research output, this study provides bibliometric insights into the development of national publication outputs in educational research in the WoS and what idiosyncrasies are revealed for European countries, into the role of English as a publication language, into the trend towards transnational co-authorship as an indicator of international cooperation, and into citation frequencies as a measurement of research communication or research impact. (DIPF/Orig.

Citation models and research evaluation

Citations in science are being studied from several perspectives. On the one hand, there are approaches such as scientometrics and the science of science, which take a more quantitative perspective. In this chapter I briefly review some of the literature on citations, citation distributions and models of citations. These citations feature prominently in another part of the literature which is dealing with research evaluation and the role of metrics and indicators in that process. Here I briefly review part of the discussion in research evaluation. This also touches on the subject of how citations relate to peer review. Finally, I try to integrate the two literatures with the aim of clarifying what I believe the two can learn from each other. The fundamental problem in research evaluation is that research quality is unobservable. This has consequences for conclusions that we can draw from quantitative studies of citations and citation models. The term "indicators" is a relevant concept in this context, which I try to clarify. Causality is important for properly understanding indicators, especially when indicators are used in practice: when we act on indicators, we enter causal territory. Even when an indicator might have been valid, through its very use, the consequences of its use may invalidate it. By combining citation models with proper causal reasoning and acknowledging the fundamental problem about unobservable research quality, we may hope to make progress.Comment: This is a draft. The final version will be available in Handbook of Computational Social Science edited by Taha Yasseri, forthcoming 2023, Edward Elgar Publishing Lt

Comparing the post-WWII publication histories of oceanography and marine geoscience

From Springer Nature via Jisc Publications RouterHistory: received 2018-09-10, registration 2020-04-30, pub-electronic 2020-05-26, online 2020-05-26, pub-print 2020-08Publication status: PublishedAbstract: Oceanography and marine geosciences are closely related subjects, though they have had differing influences. The UK, which has experienced the financial benefits of North Sea oil and gas, while also having an extensive fishing industry and a science base linked to other English-speaking countries and European countries, potentially illustrates some changing influences and collaborative tendencies well. In this article, differences in article publication rates and collaborative tendencies, both globally and for the UK, are examined using the Web of Science™, Scopus™ and Georef™ for the period 1946–2018. The results show that publication rates of global oceanography articles rose exponentially faster than all global scientific publishing from the mid-1960s to 1980. Subsequently, the exponential rate of increase slowed though has remained faster than global science publishing. Global Marine Geoscience publication rates increased into the late 1980s, but have since declined. UK oceanography has roughly followed global trends, though its share of global oceanographic publishing declined from 28% in the 1950s to 8% in 2018. UK Marine Geoscience publishing has also generally followed global trends for that field. However, its share of global publications abruptly increased from 4.9% (average 1960–1980) to 13.2% by 1990, largely due to articles arising from UK participation in the Deep-Sea Drilling Project and Ocean Drilling Program. Oceanography and marine geoscience have also experienced strongly differing histories of collaborative articles over the last four decades. While oceanographic articles co-authored with researchers in other countries have been steadily increasing as a share of total UK Oceanography articles, those of marine geoscience peaked in 1990 and have since declined, though remained at high levels similar to those experienced by 2018 in Oceanography. Comparing global publication rates in both fields with measures of data and sample collection at sea suggests fundamental changes occurred in the way research was carried out. For example, Marine Geoscience publication rates were strongly correlated with geophysical track-line distances for the decade until ~1970, but were inversely correlated for the decade after then. This reflects, for example, the development of plate tectonics, which partly involved analysis of existing marine geophysical data, improved equipment capabilities and the increased role of scientific drilling