2011
DOI: 10.1007/s11192-011-0576-6
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Science funding and research output: a study on 10 countries

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

2
48
0
8

Year Published

2012
2012
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
10

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 81 publications
(58 citation statements)
references
References 6 publications
2
48
0
8
Order By: Relevance
“…In recent years, with the development of bibliographic database for recording the funding information, numerous funded articles lead to an interesting aggregative level in scientometrics. Most previous studies can be divided into two main categories: (A) Fundamental analysis methods and indicators, such as innovative analytical frameworks of acknowledge information (Costas and van Leeuwen 2012;Diaz-Faes and Bordons 2014;Shapira and Wang 2010), h-index of research funding (Zhao et al 2009) and concise input-output measure (Zhao and Ye 2011); (B) The empirical investigations in a specific subject or aggregative level, for instance, the funded nano research (Wang and Shapira 2011), funded collaborations in mathematics (Zhou and Tian 2014), the feature of funded SCI articles of Iran (Jowkar et al 2011), funding analysis of SCI articles at the country level (Wang et al 2012) and the funded collaboration network of countries/territories (Tan et al 2012b). These studies mainly deal with the research articles in natural sciences.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In recent years, with the development of bibliographic database for recording the funding information, numerous funded articles lead to an interesting aggregative level in scientometrics. Most previous studies can be divided into two main categories: (A) Fundamental analysis methods and indicators, such as innovative analytical frameworks of acknowledge information (Costas and van Leeuwen 2012;Diaz-Faes and Bordons 2014;Shapira and Wang 2010), h-index of research funding (Zhao et al 2009) and concise input-output measure (Zhao and Ye 2011); (B) The empirical investigations in a specific subject or aggregative level, for instance, the funded nano research (Wang and Shapira 2011), funded collaborations in mathematics (Zhou and Tian 2014), the feature of funded SCI articles of Iran (Jowkar et al 2011), funding analysis of SCI articles at the country level (Wang et al 2012) and the funded collaboration network of countries/territories (Tan et al 2012b). These studies mainly deal with the research articles in natural sciences.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Wang et al (2012) analyse named sponsors on academic publications in 10 selected countries. They show for the UK that 43% of academic publications acknowledge external funding and report an average of 2.8 funding agents per paper.…”
Section: Research Funding and Research Productivitymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Correlation between the indicators of research output, namely, the number of publications, times cited, share in the world output and R&D funding was studied at the level of individual researchers [6], grant issuing organizations [7] or research-leading countries [8,9], correlation of research output and readership was reported at the level of individual documents within a single journal [10[, institutional [11,12] and country [9] levels. Therefore, one can conclude that problem of information support is one of the key problems in modern research surroundings.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%