Early citation counts correlate with accumulated impact

Adams, Jonathan

doi:10.1007/s11192-005-0228-9

Cited by 135 publications

(104 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Comparing my results to those for the specific disciplines analyzed by Waltman et al [10], my findings for economics and political science show higher predictability than they find for mathematics, but, not surprisingly, less than they find for biochemistry and molecular biology. Comparing my results to those of Adams [9], I find correlations of 0.692 between 2006-7 and 2008-12 citations for economics and 0.718 for political science, which are comparable to his results for the physical sciences.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 78%

High-Ranked Social Science Journal Articles Can Be Identified from Early Citation Information

Stern

2014

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Do citations accumulate too slowly in the social sciences to be used to assess the quality of recent articles? I investigate whether this is the case using citation data for all articles in economics and political science published in 2006 and indexed in the Web of Science. I find that citations in the first two years after publication explain more than half of the variation in cumulative citations received over a longer period. Journal impact factors improve the correlation between the predicted and actual future ranks of journal articles when using citation data from 2006 alone but the effect declines sharply thereafter. Finally, more than half of the papers in the top 20% in 2012 were already in the top 20% in the year of publication (2006).

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 78%

High-Ranked Social Science Journal Articles Can Be Identified from Early Citation Information

Stern

2014

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, Hall et al (2005), stress for the case of patents that the bulk of citations usually occurs early in a patent life cycle, and more precisely in a three to ten-year window. Similar results are found for the development of publication citations (Glaenzel et al, 2003;Adams, 2005) Thus, even a six-year window should capture the peak in citations for each publication.…”

Section: Research Fundingsupporting

confidence: 74%

Fishing for Complementarities: Competitive Research Funding and Research Productivity

Hottenrott

Lawson

2013

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Die Dis cus si on Pape rs die nen einer mög lichst schnel len Ver brei tung von neue ren For schungs arbei ten des ZEW. Die Bei trä ge lie gen in allei ni ger Ver ant wor tung der Auto ren und stel len nicht not wen di ger wei se die Mei nung des ZEW dar.Dis cus si on Papers are inten ded to make results of ZEW research prompt ly avai la ble to other eco no mists in order to encou ra ge dis cus si on and sug gesti ons for revi si ons. The aut hors are sole ly respon si ble for the con tents which do not neces sa ri ly repre sent the opi ni on of the ZEW. Non-technical SummaryIn most countries in Europe, where universities have primarily been financed through block grants, governments have introduced or increased the amount of funding distributed through competitive funding schemes (Stephan, 2012). Additionally, shrinking public research budgets meant that researchers are increasingly encouraged to look for funding elsewhere, e.g. source funding from industry and other sponsors. This resulted in a shift towards private sponsorship in most OECD countries (OECD, 2010). Funding from multiple sponsors can facilitate resource-intensive research, while at the same time creating the challenge to attribute research efforts and human resources to each project. Importantly, given the significant effects of industry grants on research outcomes (Hottenrott and Thorwarth, 2011; BanalEstañol et al., 2013), it is of interest whether industry sponsorship accelerates or compromises the positive effect of public research funding.Thus, when studying the relationship between research funding and research productivity, it is important to note that industry sponsorship cannot be evaluated without considering its impact on the productivity effects from other types of funding. The effect could be positive if industry and public grants promote research that is complementary, whereas a negative effect might indicate that scientists face a trade-off between allocating time and research effort to one or the other sponsor. This study aims to fill a gap in the literature by investigating the joint effect of funding from public and private sponsors on the research productivity in terms of quantity and quality of a sample of 809 engineering academics from 15 universities in the UK.We find that industry funding decreases the publication increase associated with public funding by reducing the marginal effect of public grants on publication outcomes in . This indicates that researchers are working at full capacity and increases in funding do not translate into comparative increases in research output when multiple sponsors are involved. This negative interaction effect is found for co-sponsorship from UK funders, which include UK research councils and charities, but is insignificant for EU grants. At the same time it is important to note that industry funding does not compromise the positive effect of public funding but only reduces the rate of publication increase associated with public grants. We further note, that significant benefits in terms ...

show abstract

“…The citations per year are more accurate and more scientific than the total citations to identify the top cited papers [44,45]. Citation statistics produced for a period of less than 3 years may not be sufficiently stable [46,47]. Therefore, we only select the papers published up to 19 March 2015 for citation analysis.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%