Journal Productivity in Fishery Science an informetric analysis

Knowledge is a human resource which has the ability to consolidate the valuable results of human thinking and civilization through different times. It is the totality of understanding of nature and its features for improved quality of life of human society. Because of this, knowledge has been increasing in volume, dimension and directions. The term ‘information’ and 'knowledge' are often used as if they are interchangeable. Information is ‘potential knowledge‘ which is converted into knowledge by the integration of memory of human beings. In modern times there is a confusion on knowledge usage. Therefore an understanding of the concept ‘knowledge’ is needed for formulation of strategies in information science

Producción científica en educación relacionada con la legislación y la administración: un análisis cienciométrico

Contenido de la investigación: El objetivo general de esta investigación fue analizar la producción sobre legislación y educación en la categoría " Business, Management and Accounting" a través de un estudio cienciométrico de las publicaciones indexadas en la base de datos de SCOPUS. Las hipótesis fueron que los artículos de investigación en legislación y educación en la categoría Negocios, Gestión y Contabilidad en las revistas indexadas en SCOPUS en el período de estudio verifican las principales leyes cienciométricas: Lotka y Bradford y que la colaboración entre autores en esta producción científica es principalmente de carácter local o nacional. El objetivo general fue desglosado en 6 objetivos específicos: El primer objetivo fue conocer el desarrollo diacrónico de la producción científica en educación relacionada con la legislación e indexada en SCOPUS (Business, Management and Accounting). Toda la producción se encontró en el período entre 1970 y 2019, mientras que ha habido un aumento gradual en el volumen de producción hasta el año 2002, alcanzando el pico máximo en 2002, pero desde entonces, ha habido una disminución. Además, no hubo un patrón de crecimiento continuo, sino que se evidencian diversas fluctuaciones. Al principio del periodo estudiado, no se encontró producción durante cuatro años seguidos y entre 1999 y 2000 se ha producido un descenso de la producción, con una Tasa de Variación Interanual (TVI) negativa igual a -47, y en 2008, con una Tasa de Variación Interanual (TVI) negativa igual a -45, mientras que la TVI positiva más alta (sin tener en cuenta el incremento de 1975, ya que hubo 4 años sin producción) se alcanzó en 2001 con un valor de 207. En general, se ha pasado de producir 36 documentos en 1975 a 1052 en 2020; es decir, se trata de un incremento porcentual del 4072%. La media de documentos publicados es de 711 al año. En cuanto a la tasa anual de cambio, la tasa más alta se ha identificado en 1975, seguida de 1978. Comparando nuestro resultado con los resultados de Lopera-Pérez et al (2021), quienes realizaron un análisis bibliométrico de la producción científica internacional sobre Educación Ambiental en la Web of Science (WoS) dentro de las categorías Educación e Investigación Educativa y Educación, Disciplinas Científicas para las últimas dos décadas (2000-2019). Sus resultados mostraron el acelerado incremento de la producción de conocimiento en esta área, y presentan los principales contextos de investigación, así como algunas perspectivas educativas y de investigación. Dichos resultados contrastan con los nuestros, ya que encontramos una disminución de la producción desde 2002. En la misma línea, Gantman y Fernández (2017) analizaron la producción de literatura académica en español sobre estudios de organización y gestión entre 2000 y 2010 indexada en el Catálogo Latindex. El segundo objetivo consistió en describir e identificar las diferentes relaciones de redes de conocimiento que se generan. Se encontró que existe una colaboración relativamente baja (1,7) en la autoría en esta área, pero esta situación ha ido cambiando con los años. La colaboración entre autores y universidades fue identificada por Lopera-Pérez et al (2021), lo cual coincide con nuestros resultados, ya que se encontró que la colaboración comenzó a despegar y su incremento es notorio a partir del año 2008. El tercer objetivo consistió en visualizar las redes de colaboración nacionales e internacionales, tanto a nivel de autoría como a nivel institucional, e identificar patrones de colaboración. Este objetivo se responde en el apartado 6.1.6, donde se ha constatado que la mayoría han sido de autoría única, y los firmados por dos o tres autores representan un tercio del total. El patrón de autoría ha sufrido cambios en el periodo, pasando de un inicio en 1975 con predominancia en la publicación de documentos con autoría única frente a los de autoría múltiple hasta invertir la relación en 2019. El cuarto objetivo consistió en identificar los patrones de citación y colaboración. El análisis de las citas en las revistas analizadas indicó que el 39,7% de la producción no había recibido ninguna cita. Del total de documentos citados, el 12,6% sólo han sido citados una vez, y el 8,3% dos veces. El artículo más citado tiene 855 citas. Además, en cuanto a los años en los que se han realizado estas citas, el mayor porcentaje fue en 2003 con 944 citas, seguido de 2007 con 905 citas. En cuanto a los patrones de colaboración, al analizar en detalle el número de autores, se encontró que el 58,21% fueron de autoría única, y los firmados por dos o tres autores representaron el 34,37% del total. La media anual de los documentos sin colaboración resultó estar por encima de la media, lo que podría inducir que hay casi igualdad entre los documentos sin colaboración y los que sí la tienen. Sin embargo, este valor se debe en gran medida a los primeros años dentro del rango de estudio. La colaboración comenzó a despuntar y su aumento es notable a partir del año 2008. Por último, se determinaron los valores de los tres indicadores de colaboración más frecuentes en la literatura. Así, el grado de colaboración en el periodo es DC =0,66. El valor mínimo se produjo en 2002 y el máximo en 1970. Este valor fue casi similar al obtenido por las revistas de educación publicadas en Brasil (0,636) (Madrid, et al, 2017) y cercano al encontrado para el GD (0,75) en las publicaciones científicas colombianas en SciELO (Maz-Machado, Jiménez-Fanjul y Villarraga-Rico, 2016). Sin embargo, fue superior al encontrado para las categorías SSCI Demografía (0,605) y Estudios Urbanos (0,591) (Maz-Machado y Jiménez-Fanjul, 2018). El quinto objetivo consistió en establecer valores para los indicadores de la dimensión cuantitativa de la producción científica sobre el tema. A este objetivo se responde en el apartado 6.2.1 y 6.2.2. Se verificó la Ley de Bradford con las revistas que conforman el núcleo de Bradford siendo Chronicle of Higher Education y Journal of Management Education y estas dos acumulan 11526 documentos. Además, se verificó la ley de Lotka para el conjunto de autores que publicaron en las revistas objeto de estudio. El sexto y último objetivo fue identificar los temas abordados. Este objetivo se responde en el apartado 6.1.8. Se comprobó que los temas estaban relacionados con Gestión y Liderazgo en Educación, Educación Infantil, Educación Superior, Marketing en Educación, Educación Contable, Educación y Trabajo, Educación Turística, Educación en Salud Mental y Educación en Organización Industrial. Conclusión: Se ha realizado un análisis cienciométrico de la producción científica Business, Management and Accounting indexada en Scopus, donde se ha constatado los cambios sustanciales durante el periodo analizado desde 1970 hasta 2019, tanto a nivel de producción, como de colaboración entre autores y universidades, así como un análisis de la dimensión cuantitativa de la producción verificando leyes habituales en un estudio de estas características como la Ley de Bradford, Lotka y Bradford

How does science advance? Theories of the evolution of science

Abstract. This study presents different theories of the evolution of science to explain how science and its scientific fields evolve over the course of time. In particular, this study clarifies, as far as possible, models and properties of the scientific development to understand structure, dynamics and drivers of the scientific and technological evolution in society.Keywords. Scientific development, Evolution of science, Scientific research, Structure of science, Research fields, Economics of science, Political economy of science, Technological change, Research labs.JEL. A19, C00, I23, L30

Productivity Trends and Pattern of Scientific Collaboration of Bibliometric Research: An Exploratory Analysis

Bibliometrics is an emerging thrust area of research and has become a standard tool of science policy and research management in the last decades and attracted much attention because of the substantial expansion of literature. This study aims to systematically review the worldwide productivity trends, the pattern of scientific collaboration, and research outputs of Bibliometrics research from Web of Science (WoS) web database, Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-E). A bibliographic database of scientific papers published by authors affiliated worldwide, and containing the keywords “Bibliometric(s)” or “Scientometric(s)” or “Informetric(s)” or “Altmetric(s)” was built. A corpus of 9,630 publications was obtained and analyzed using the Histcite, VosViewer, and Biblioshiny software to highlight the evolution of the research domain. Publication rates from 2006 to 2020, organization of the research, type of documents, language-wise distribution, publication and citations trend by year, most productive countries, organizations, and authors, preferred types of sources of researchers, citations, and use of influential research; top-ranked papers, most frequently used author keywords; co-occurrence network in Bibliometrics research, Trend Topics and Topic Dendrogram, Conceptual Structure Map of each word in Bibliometrics literature, Collaboration Network (Author, Institutions and Country) were considered and quantitatively analyzed. This study contributes to the Bibliometrics research field in several ways. First, it provides the latest research status for researchers who are interested in the field through literature analysis. Second, it helps scholars become more aware of the research subfields through trend topic identification. Third, it provides insights to researchers engaging in the field and motivates attention to the relevant research

A scientometric method to analyze scientific journals as exemplified by the area of information science

==Background== In most academic disciplines journals play an important role in disseminating findings of research among the disciplinary community members. Understanding a discipline\u27s body of journals is therefore of grave importance when looking for previous research, compiling an overview of previous research and and in order to make a decision regarding the best place for publishing research results. Furthermore, based on Bradford\u27s Law of scattering, one can assume that in order to be able to compile a satisfying overview of previous research a wide range of journals has to be scanned, but also that there are some "core" journals which are of more importance to specific disciplines than others. ==Aim== This thesis aims to compile a comprehensive master list of journals which publish articles of relevance to Library and Information Science (LIS). A method to rank journals by their importance is introduced and some key characteristics of the disciplines body of journals are discussed. Databases indexing the disciplines journals are also compared. ==Method== The master list of LIS journals was created by combining the journal listings of secondary sources indexing the field\u27s literature. These sources were six databases focusing on LIS literature: INFODATA, Current Contents, Library and Information Science Abstracts, Library Information Science Technology Abstracts, Information Science and Technology Abstracts, and Library Literature and Information Science, the LIS subsection in three databases with a general focus: Social Science Citation Index, Academic Search Premier, and Expanded Academic ASAP, and the listing of LIS journals from the Elektronische Zeitschriften Bibliothek. Problems related to editorial policies and technical shortcomings are discussed, before comparing: predominant publication languages, places of publication, open access, peer review, and the ISI Journal Impact Factors (JIF). Journals were also ranked by the number of occurrences in multiple databases in order to identify "core" publications. The number of journals overlapping between databases are estimated and a matrix giving the overlap is visualized using multi dimensional scaling. Lastly, the degree of journals overlapping with other disciplines is measured. ==Results== A comprehensive master list of 1,205 journals publishing articles of relevance to LIS was compiled. The 968 active journals are mostly published in English, with one third of the journals coming from the US and another third from the UK and Germany. Nearly 16% of all journals are open access, 11% have a ISIJIF, and 42% are peer reviewed. Fifteen core journal could be identified and a list of the top fourteen journals published in Germany is introduced. Databases have between five to 318 journals in common and the journal collection shows an substantial overlap with a wide range of subjects, with the biggest journal overlap with Computing Studies, and Business and Economics. ==Conclusion== The aim of compiling a comprehensive list of LIS journal was achieved. The list will contribute to our understanding of scholarly communication within the LIS discipline and provide academics and practitioners with a better understanding of journals within the discipline. The ranking approach proved to be sufficient, showing good similarity with other studies over the last 40 years. The master list of LIS journals has also potential use to further research

Statistical studies of patents literature

This study has been undertaken to determine what pseudo-proprietary information and patenting activity statistics could be derived from an online patents database. To achieve this, a thorough investigation uas made of patenting in the field of an important group of beta-lactam antibiotics, the. Cephalosporins. Patents data was retrieved from the World Patents Index online files of Derwent Publications Limited, and the bibliographic details of each patent application retrieved analysed according to numbers of patents per patentee, priority and publication dates, types of patents, etc. A review of technological advances in this subject was conducted, demonstrating the value of patents literature for such purposes. The relationship between sales volumes and patenting activity for Cephalosporins patentees has been investigated and found to show a. significant correlation between these parameters. As an extension, the USA patenting and sales activity for the leading USA Industrial Corporations (the 1981 Fortune 500) was studied; overall a high correlation was exhibited, but there were notable differences. between different industries. A number of bibliometric studies have been undertaken with a variety of patents data. for a number of techhologies. These studies include the application of Bradford-Zipf plots, other productivity studies and Vector Analysis to patents. Whilst previous studies on journal literature have investigated the applicability of frequency distributions as measures of author productivity, this study has for the first time applied Lotka's Law, Price's Pareto-type Distribution, Simon-Yule Distribution, Shockley's Lognormal Distribution, Borel-Tanner Distribution, Williams Geometric Series, Fisher's Logarithmic Series and the Negative Binomial Distribution to patents data. Theoretical distributions were ascertained using a series of microcomputer programs written in BASIC programming' language. The results indicate that of the distributions investigated, the Negative Binomial most closely fits the observed data when goodness-offit is measured by the Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test

Determinants of startup´s value according to venture capitalists

PURPOSE: The objective of this study is to analyze the existing literature and identify knowledge gaps about the main value determinants of startups – according to venture capitalists’ perspective.DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: This objective is verified through a bibliometric analysis and systematic review, which execution considers the use of RStudio, Biblioshiny and Rank Words softwares. The final sample consists of 184 articles, obtained from the Web of Science and Scopus databases. Furthermore, this study also verifies the main bibliometric laws - Lotka (authors), Bradford (journals) and Zipf (keywords).FINDINGS: There is a future research avenue related to the analysis of: i) financial determinants of startups’ value that are in more advanced stages – scale-up and mature – e.g. expenditure on research and development, sales growth, profitability, ii) types of venture capitalists as startups’ value determinants – e.g., crowdfunding, angel investor, mutual funds and iii) alternative methods of startups’ valuation – e.g., First Chicago, Scorecard, Venture capital, Berkus.PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: The results of the study allow an approximation between the research topics of the academic community and the startup management, enabling a consistent evolution of this market segment.ORIGINALITY/VALUE: The bibliometric analysis considers the verification of three main laws – Zipf, Bradford and Lotka. Furthermore, the systematic review is carried out through the codification of a (sub)categorization matrix. Moreover, the study also provides the analysis of the following aspects - not verified by other researches on the same topic: (i) stages of the startups as determinants of value for venture capitalists; (ii) geographical coverage between countries and (iii) mapping of the various types of venture capitalists.peer-reviewe

RQF publication quality measures: methodoligical issues

The Research Quality Framework uses Thomson-ISI citation benchmarks as its main set of objective measures of research quality. The Thomson-ISI measures rely on identifying a core set of journals in which the major publications for a discipline are to be found. The core for a discipline is determined by applying a nontransparent process that is partly based on Bradford&rsquo;s Law (1934). Yet Bradford was not seeking measures about quality of publications or journals. How valid then is it to base measures of publication quality on Bradford&rsquo;s Law? We explore this by returning to Bradford&rsquo;s Law and subsequent related research asking &lsquo;what is Bradford&rsquo;s Law really about?&rsquo; We go further, and ask &lsquo;does Bradford&rsquo;s Law apply in Information Systems?&rsquo; We use data from John Lamp&rsquo;s internationally respected Index of Information Systems Journals to explore the latter question. We have found that Information Systems may have a core of journals only a subset of which is also in the list of Thomson-ISI journals. There remain many unanswered questions about the RQF metrics based on Thomson-ISI and their applicability to information systems.<br /

RQF Publication Quality Measures: Methodological Issues

The Research Quality Framework uses Thomson-ISI citation benchmarks as its main set of objective measures of research quality. The Thomson-ISI measures rely on identifying a core set of journals in which the major publications for a discipline are to be found. The core for a discipline is determined by applying a nontransparent process that is partly based on Bradford’s Law (1934). Yet Bradford was not seeking measures about quality of publications or journals. How valid then is it to base measures of publication quality on Bradford’s Law? We explore this by returning to Bradford’s Law and subsequent related research asking ‘what is Bradford’s Law really about?’ We go further, and ask ‘does Bradford’s Law apply in Information Systems?’ We use data from John Lamp’s internationally respected Index of Information Systems Journals to explore the latter question. We have found that Information Systems may have a core of journals only a subset of which is also in the list of Thomson-ISI journals. There remain many unanswered questions about the RQF metrics based on Thomson-ISI and their applicability to information systems

An Examination of Lotka’s law in the Field of Library and Information Studies

The purpose of this study was to test Lotka’s law of scientific publication productivity using the methodology outlined by Pao (1985), in the field of Library and Information Studies (LIS). Lotka’s law has been sporadically tested in the field over the past 30+ years, but the results of these studies are inconclusive due to the varying methods employed by the researchers. A data set of 1,856 citations that were found using the ISI Web of Knowledge databases were studied. The values of n and c were calculated to be 2.1 and 0.6418 (64.18%) respectively. The Kolmogorov-Smirnov (K-S) one sample goodness-of-fit test was conducted at the 0.10 level of significance. The Dmax value is 0.022758 and the calculated critical value is 0.026562. It was determined that the null hypothesis stating that there is no difference in the observed distribution of publications and the distribution obtained using Lotka’s and Pao’s procedure could not be rejected. This study finds that literature in the field of library and Information Studies does conform to Lotka’s law with reliable results. As result, Lotka’s law can be used in LIS as a standardized means of measuring author publication productivity which will lead to findings that are comparable on many levels (e.g., department, institution, national). Lotka’s law can be employed as an empirically proven analytical tool to establish publication productivity benchmarks for faculty and faculty librarians. Recommendations for further study include (a) exploring the characteristics of the high and low producers; (b) finding a way to successfully account for collaborative contributions in the formula; and, (c) a detailed study of institutional policies concerning publication productivity and its impact on the appointment, tenure and promotion process of academic librarians