Clara Calero-Medina

The Leiden ranking 2011/2012: Data collection, indicators, and interpretation

The Leiden Ranking 2011/2012 is a ranking of universities based on bibliometric indicators of publication output, citation impact, and scientific collaboration. The ranking includes 500 major universities from 41 different countries. This paper provides an extensive discussion of the Leiden Ranking 2011/2012. The ranking is compared with other global university rankings, in particular the Academic Ranking of World Universities (commonly known as the Shanghai Ranking) and the Times Higher Education World University Rankings. The comparison focuses on the methodological choices underlying the different rankings. Also, a detailed description is offered of the data collection methodology of the Leiden Ranking 2011/2012 and of the indicators used in the ranking. Various innovations in the Leiden Ranking 2011/2012 are presented. These innovations include (1) an indicator based on counting a universitys highly cited publications, (2) indicators based on fractional rather than full counting of collaborative publications, (3) the possibility of excluding non-English language publications, and (4) the use of stability intervals. Finally, some comments are made on the interpretation of the ranking and a number of limitations of the ranking are pointed out.

Combining mapping and citation network analysis for a better understanding of the scientific development: The case of the absorptive capacity field

The general aim of this paper is to show the results of a study in which we combined bibliometric mapping and citation network analysis to investigate the process of creation and transfer of knowledge through scientific publications. The novelty of this approach is the combination of both methods. In this case we analyzed the citations to a very influential paper published in 1990 that contains, for the first time, the term Absorptive Capacity. A bibliometric map identified the terms and the theories associated with the term while two techniques from the citation network analysis recognized the main papers during 15 years. As a result we identified the articles that influenced the research for some time and linked them into a research tradition that can be considered the backbone of the “Absorptive Capacity Field”.

The role of editorial material in bibliometric research performance assessments

In this study, the possibilities to extend the basis for research performance exercises with editorial material are explored. While this document type has been traditionally not considered as an important type of scientific communication in research performance assessment procedures, there is a perception from researchers that editorial materials should be considered as relevant document types as important sources for the dissemination of scientific knowledge. In a number of these cases, some of the mentioned editorial materials are actually ‘highly cited’. This lead to a thorough scrutiny of editorials or editorial material over the period 1992–2001, for all citation indexes of Thomson Scientific. The relevance of editorial materials through three quantitative bibliometric characteristics of scientific publications, namely page length, number of references, and the number of received citations, are thoroughly analyzed.

Important factors when interpreting bibliometric rankings of world universities: an example from oncology

This paper presents bibliometric characteristics of the 386 most frequently publishing world universities and of a (partly overlapping) set of 529 European universities. Rather than presenting a ranking itself, it presents a statistical analysis of ranking data, focusing on more general patterns. It compares US universities with European institutions; countries with a strong concentration of academic research activities among universities with nations showing a more even distribution; a ranking of universities based on indicators calculated for all research fields combined with one compiled for a single field (oncology); general with specialised universities; and rankings based on a single indicator with maps combining social network analysis and a series of indicators. It highlights important factors that should be taken into account in the interpretation of rankings of research universities based on bibliometric indicators. Moreover, it illustrates policy-relevant research questions that may be addressed in secondary analyses of ranking data. In this way, this paper aims at contributing to a public information system on research universities. Copyright , Beech Tree Publishing.

Applying bibliometric mapping in a high level science policy context

Bibliometric maps have the potential to become useful tools for science policy issues. The complexity of the structures, however, makes it often very difficult to interpret the results. In this study, we present a case study in which we use the bibliometric mapping results to address a high level science policy issue of research efficiency. By revealing the results in an alternative way, we increased the utility of bibliometric mapping within the science policy context. Moreover, by including additional information to the entities in the landscape, we provide useful input for the research potential.

What do university rankings by fields rank? Exploring discrepancies between the organizational structure of universities and bibliometric classifications

University rankings by fields are usually based on the research output of universities. However, research managers and rankings consumers expect to see in such fields a reflection of the structure of their own organizational institution. In this study we address such misinterpretation by developing the research profile of the organizational units of two Spanish universities: University of Granada and Pompeu Fabra University. We use two classification systems, the subject categories offered by Thomson Scientific which are commonly used on bibliometric studies, and the 37 disciplines displayed by the Spanish I-UGR Rankings which are constructed from an aggregation of the former. We also describe in detail problems encountered when working with address data from a top down approach and we show differences between universities structures derived from the interdisciplinary organizational forms of new managerialism at universities. We conclude by highlighting that rankings by fields should clearly state the methodology for the construction of such fields. We indicate that the construction of research profiles may be a good solution for universities for finding out levels of discrepancy between organizational units and subject fields.

Bibliometric analysis of highly cited publications of biomedical and health research in England, 2004–2013

This report presents a bibliometric analysis of biomedical and health research in England, 2004–2013. It is intended to support the shortlisting and selection of the National Institute for Health Research Biomedical Research Centres in England.

O “RANKING BRASILEIRO DE PESQUISA” E OS PRINCÍPIOS DE BERLIM PARA RANKINGS DE INSTITUIÇÕES DE ENSINO SUPERIOR

Os rankings de universidades estao ganhando destaque como instrumentos de avaliacao das instituicoes de ensino superior. Nos ultimos anos surgiram varios rankings, tanto nacionais como internacionais. O Ranking Brasileiro de Pesquisa (BRR) foi lancado em 2014 no Brasil e mede o desempenho das instituicoes de pesquisa cientifica brasileiras (nao apenas universidades). Usando um sofisticado conjunto de indicadores bibliometricos, o ranking tem como objetivo fornecer medicoes altamente precisas do impacto cientifico destas organizacoes e do seu envolvimento na colaboracao cientifica, e sua fonte de dados e a base Web of Science , considerando publicacoes indexadas no periodo entre 2003 e 2012. O objetivo do presente artigo e analisar e discutir se o BRR segue as recomendacoes do documento “Principios de Berlim para Rankings de Instituicoes de Ensino Superior”, elaborado em 2006 pelo Grupo Internacional de Especialistas em Rankings, contendo um conjunto de dezesseis diretrizes para orientar os produtores de rankings na elaboracao de suas classificacoes. O cotejo das caracteristicas do BRR com os principios de Berlim mostrou que esse ranking esta perto de completar sua conformidade aos principios recomendados para rankings.

Performance of European Science: Research Networks and Profiles of EU Countries in a Global Perspective

This innovative book focuses on the most important concept underpinning current European Union research policy. It describes the history and concept of the European Research Area (ERA), analyses some of the underlying assumptions, assesses some of its achievements, and takes a brief look at its future.