Diana Hicks

How much is a collaboration worth? A calibrated bibliometric model

Interest in collaboration is increasing in policy circles. There are numerous international and national programs to encourage collaboration, for example, between university and industry researchers. However, little is know about the way in which collaboration changes the impact of a research publication. This paper explores how the impact (average citations per paper) varies with different types of collaboration. A calibrated bibliometric model is derived that demonstrates that collaborating with an author from the home institution or another domestic institution increases the average impact by approximately 0.75 citations while collaborating with an author from a foreign institution increases the impact by about 1.6 citations.

A Morphology of Japanese and European Corporate Research Networks

Institutions performing research often collaborate with each other, and firms are no exception. In recent years

University-industry research links in Japan

Some analysts have argued that research links between universities and industry in Japan must be weak because Japanese universities do not produce high quality science and because regulations restrict links. This article begins by examining the structure and funding of universities and indicators of the performance of Japanese science. The results do not lend support to the view that the universities do not produce research useful to industry. In addition, the system is evolving in directions more favorable for university research excellence. Examining the regulations governing university-industry interaction, and their observance, reveals no insuperable barriers. Thus, it is not surprising that bibliometric indicators suggest Japanese companies collaborate with Japanese academics more than with foreign institutions. R & D managers describe long-lasting relationships with academics, perhaps originating in college days, which continue with mutual benefits and obligations on both sides and provide valuable access to the wider network of the scientific community-access that money alone cannot buy. The stories of individual research collaborations establish the substantive nature of the underlying work, the importance of experimentation performed on university instrumentation, and the crucial role of personnel exchange.

Japanese corporations, scientific research and globalization☆

Abstract In an age of ‘stateless corporations’ do Japanese companies remain dependent upon the national science system in their home country? They do. Japanese companies produce scientific papers in the international literature, including papers reporting basic scientific research, but they publish relatively few papers from their foreign affiliates. The papers are produced by laboratories located in Japan, and these are staffed predominantly by Japanese. In producing their scientific research they collaborate relatively more with domestic institutions and cite Japanese scientific work heavily. These few facts describing the published scientific output of Japanese companies document the integration of Japanese corporations into the Japanese science system and hence their dependence upon that system. The implications of this result are twofold. First, any weakness in publicly funded Japanese research could well affect Japanese corporate research in the long term, because they are enmeshed in this system. Second, when combined with the fact that the companies contribute to the scientific literature, this result throws into doubt the idea that these companies are now ‘free riders’ on world science. They not only contribute to our scientific knowledge, but in doing so their science draws most heavily on Japanese, not foreign sources.

A systemic view of British science

Systemic analyses of national research systems are now within the reach of bibliometricians. By systemic we mean comprehensive, time series, institutionally based, sectoral level analyses of national research output. This paper describes such an analysis for the UK, a system comprising 8% of world scientific output. The paper analyses publishing size and the number of publishing institutions for each sector. Then each sectors intra-sectoral, inter-sectoral and international collaboration is assessed. The paper then examines the data by field, looking at sector publishing profiles across fields, and at how the collaborative patterns vary between fields. It concludes with a summary profile of each institutional sector.

Can bibliometrics measure up

The use of quantitative, literature-based methods to evaluate research performance remains highly contentious in policymaking and scientific circles. As a result of mounting pressure from the Government to demonstrate value for money, attention has focused on the most obviously tangible outputs of science: publications and citations. Peer review panels are also starting to demand performance data: the Agriculture and Food Research Council, for example, found that its experts were conducting their own, informal bibliometric analyses of research institutes. After numerous pilot studies by the research councils, there is almost an air of evaluation fatigue within parts of the scientific community. How are these methods being used, and can their advantages make up for the pitfalls?