Global Maps of Science based on the new Web-of-Science Categories

In August 2011, Thomson Reuters launched version 5 of the Science and Social Science Citation Index in the Web of Science (WoS). Among other things, the 222 ISI Subject Categories (SCs) for these two databases in version 4 of WoS were renamed and extended to 225 WoS Categories (WCs). A new set of 151 Subject Categories (SCs) was added, but at a higher level of aggregation. Since we previously used the ISI SCs as the baseline for a global map in Pajek (Rafols et al., 2010) and brought this facility online (at http://www.leydesdorff.net/overlaytoolkit), we recalibrated this map for the new WC categories using the Journal Citation Reports 2010. In the new installation, the base maps can also be made using VOSviewer (Van Eck & Waltman, 2010).Comment: Scientometrics, in pres

How does working on university-industry collaborative projects affect science and engineering doctorates' careers? Evidence from a UK research-based university

This paper examines the impact of industrial involvement in doctoral projects on the particular nature of the training and careers of doctorates. We draw on an original survey of job histories of doctorates in physical sciences and engineering from a research-based university in the UK. Using multivariate probit analysis and linearised (robust) and resampling (jackknife) variance estimation techniques, we found that projects with industrial involvement are associated with higher degree of socialisation with industry. There is some evidence showing that these projects are also more likely to focus on solving firm-specific technical problems or developing firm-specific specifications/prototypes, rather than exploring high-risk concepts or generating knowledge in the subject areas. Crucially, these projects result in fewer journal publications. Not surprisingly, in line with existing literature, we found that engaging in projects with industrial involvement (in contrast to projects without industrial involvement) confers advantages on careers in the private sector. Nevertheless, there is also a hint that engaging in projects with industrial involvement may have a negative effect on careers in academia or public research organisations. While acknowledging that the modelling results are based on a small sample from a research-based university and that therefore the results need to be treated with caution, we address implications for doctorates, universities and policymakers

From theory to practice: Operationalization of the GTEC framework

This paper presents a first attempt to operationalize the Global Traits, Experiences, Cognitions and Context (GTEC) framework proposed by Welch et al. (2018). This theoretical framework suggests four dimensions to characterize and contextualize the scientific workforce based on: 1) traits and experience, 2) cognitions, 3) community and, 4) institutional context. We apply the GTEC Framework using different data sources to note the improvement in measurement from using multiple dimensions. We use a well-regarded survey funded by the National Science Foundation and supplement it with additional variables from three other sources. The purpose is twofold. On the one hand, we build on the GTEC framework as a means to show how it could be applied to future empirical analyses. On the other hand, it emphasizes current data gaps that could still hamper our understanding on this phenomenon. While the model developed here moves us past a dichotomous understanding of foreign-born or mobile, it still leaves room for improvement to fully understand the global scientist

From theory to practice: Operationalization of the GTEC framework

This paper presents a first attempt to operationalize the Global Traits, Experiences, Cognitions and Context (GTEC) framework proposed by Welch et al. (2018). This theoretical framework suggests four dimensions to characterize and contextualize the scientific workforce based on: 1) traits and experience, 2) cognitions, 3) community and, 4) institutional context. We apply the GTEC Framework using different data sources to note the improvement in measurement from using multiple dimensions. We use a well-regarded survey funded by the National Science Foundation and supplement it with additional variables from three other sources. The purpose is twofold. On the one hand, we build on the GTEC framework as a means to show how it could be applied to future empirical analyses. On the other hand, it emphasizes current data gaps that could still hamper our understanding on this phenomenon. While the model developed here moves us past a dichotomous understanding of foreign-born or mobile, it still leaves room for improvement to fully understand the global scientist

Preferences for peer-reviewed versus other publication sources: a survey of general dentists in the National Dental PBRN

Abstract Background Medical professionals have access to a broad range of resources to address clinical information needs. While much attention is given to new sources of data such as those available on the internet, it is less clear how clinicians choose between peer-reviewed research literature and other publication-based sources. This analysis distinguishes between possible drivers of publication type preference (namely, practice setting, advanced training, professional development experiences). Dentists enrolled in the National Dental Practice-Based Research Network (PBRN) are the population for this study. Theories of human and intellectual capital and institutional logics theory are used to understand how advanced training and other clinical experiences may explain the choices that dentists make when faced with clinical questions. Methods An online questionnaire was implemented with general dentists in the US National Dental PBRN. A series of logistic and Ordinary Least Squares (OLS) regression models were used to explain the use of peer-reviewed and other publications. Measures of knowledge-based human capital distinctions (advanced clinical training and research engagement, advanced professional status, personal motivation for professional advancement) were used to explain preferences for research literature as a clinical resource. Results General dentists with advanced training, as well as those with a skill advancement motivation, show a preference for peer-reviewed materials. General dentists who have been practicing longer tend to favor other dental publications, preferring those sources as a resource when faced with clinical challenges. Human capital and professional motivation distinguish the information preferences among general dentists. Further, these factors explain more variance in use of peer-reviewed materials than practice setting does. Few differences by demographic groups were evident. Conclusions Results point to a distinct variation in the general dentistry professional community. Advanced training among general dentists, as well as the types of procedures typically conducted in their practice, distinguishes their information preferences from other general dentists, including those with more years of clinical experience

The Global Scientific Workforce (GTEC) Framework

Research on the globalization of scientific workforce is not keeping pace with reality, and our understanding of the dynamics of the global scientific workforce is plagued with significant conceptual and empirical gaps. This paper builds on prior research, but moves in a somewhat different direction. Rather than considering the foreign status of the individuals based on one or two dichotomous indicators, this paper 1) recognizes that “foreign-ness” is a multidimensional concept, closely linked to the notion of “globalness” and more complex than birthplace or education location; 2) develops a theoretical framework to characterize the globalized scientific workforce. We propose the Global Scientific Workforce (GTEC) Framework that takes into account different global characteristics of individuals, global cognitions, global community and global institutional context. The framework is used to explain key outcomes including perceived racial and ethnic bias and discrimination, dissatisfaction, isolation and mobility intent, among others