Science and technology metrics for research policy evaluation: some insights from a Moroccan experience

Bouabid, H.

doi:10.1007/s11192-014-1407-3

Cited by 8 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Furthermore, these co-publications have a positive impact on scientific productivity at the individual, institutional, and national levels, as well as on socioeconomic partnerships (Helga et al, 2009;Lebeau et al, 2008). This strong correlation has been demonstrated in several other studies within different contexts (Lee & Bozeman, 2005, Haslam et al, 2008, Defazio et al, 2009, Abramo et al, 2011, Bouabid, 2014.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 76%

Size of science team at university and internal co-publications: science policy implications

Bouabid

Achachi

2022

Scientometrics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Scientific collaboration within a science team (unit, group, etc.) has been under scrutiny. Recently, science of team science has emerged to use science for deep understanding of the ways researchers jointly perform science to increase their team's performance. This article analyses internal scientific outputs with respect to the size of university's science team. The objective is to examine the science policy motive that is, if the team size increases, by encouraging academics to gather in larger teams, then their outputs increase. The method of the contrapositive of this conditional statement is adopted. Thus, 120 accredited teams, composed of about 1500 academics in four universities in Morocco, were analyzed using a cross-matrix of members' co-publications, an intra-collaboration index, Lorenz curve of both internal co-publications and sole-publications, with respect to team's size. Our findings show that internal co-publications and sole ones are higher for small size teams and that the Lorenz distributions of these two indicators are unequal in favor of small size teams. We discuss the implications of our findings for science policy, beyond size, such as the output-instead of input-based perspective to form a team, time requirement to build a collaborative team, inter-and intra-disciplinarity oriented research, team directorship, etc.

show abstract

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 76%

Size of science team at university and internal co-publications: science policy implications

Bouabid

Achachi

2022

Scientometrics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Therefore, it is not evident that the strengthening of the institutional requirements has had a significant effect on scientific publishing. Perhaps adopting a system that values more other metrics, such as journals’ impact factors (Ingwersen and Larsen, 2014; Bouabid, 2014), may fuel the publications, as occurred in countries that instituted these metrics (Hilton, 2014). It is possible that having direct benefits to the more prolific scholars, such as financial rewards, might increase the productivity of the Brazilian academy (Stephan, 1996; Galbraith et al , 2014).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To a large extent, this has implied implementing objective metrics to evaluate the publications, or productivity, of researchers (Galbraith et al , 2014) and institutions to which they are affiliated (Maccari et al , 2009). Remarkably, countries that have institutionalized evaluation systems and procedures have had substantial increases in productivity (Bouabid, 2014; Ingwersen and Larsen, 2014; Hilton, 2014).…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Quantitative data are based on counting the number of articles published in journals. Qualitative data comprise an assessment of quality (Carpenter et al , 2014) that may be based on aspects such as the number of citations (Bouabid, 2014; Galbraith et al , 2014) or, more often, the quality of the journals in which the papers were published (Carpenter et al , 2014). Despite the most accepted criteria for productivity are based on the journal articles published, some authors defend that being a productive scholar is about making scholarly contributions, which as Northcraft and Tenbrunsel (2012) point out, acting as journal editor should be just as valid as publishing in top-tier journals.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The research productivity of new Brazilian PhDs in management

Falaster

Ferreira

Serra

2016

MRJIAM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Doctoral programs are primarily intended to train new professors and researchers to take positions requiring research competency. This paper aims to observe the scientific production of 734 Brazilian new PhDs in management and the possible link between the scientific output of the graduates and doctoral program rank. Design/methodology/approach Methodologically, the authors built a database collecting the journal publications of the first six years after doctoral degree of all PhDs in management graduated by Brazilian doctoral programs during the period of 1998-2008. The authors use cluster and descriptive analysis to explore PhD publication. Findings Results show a great disparity of productivity, where 10 per cent of all new PhDs account for most of the Brazilian research productivity, while most of the PhDs have a very low performance – and that the CAPES (the Brazilian institutional system) qualification of doctoral programs is not a good predictor of the performance of the future graduates. Results are discussed to understand this productivity gap among researchers in a context of a developing country where support institutions are working to improve quantity and quality of publication. Practical implications The results are useful for recruiters that need to decide between hiring new PhDs with low productivity graduated from high-ranked programs or new PhDs with high productivity from programs with more modest ranking. At least in part, the authors’ results question the real impact that the doctoral program’s prestige has on the performance of its graduates. Social implications There are implications for the future candidates to a management PhD program, for the Directors of these programs and for the institutional agencies that regulate and promote science and that establish the prevailing rules and norms that researchers and institutions follow. Originality/value The results are adamant in pointing out that there is a small group of highly productive new PhDs – that the authors called “stars”. Generally speaking, they may find these “star” new PhDs in several doctoral programs. They have also found that some of the new PhDs have a relatively higher level of international papers published, but not necessarily a larger volume of publications. Meanwhile, most PhDs present a very low level of performance. This has important contributions to the way they perceive the doctoral education in management, especially in Ibero-America, revealing insights about the quality of PhDs and PhD courses.

show abstract

“…A more recent effort was conducted by Bouabid for the country of Morocco (Bouabid, 2014). He examined the science and technology metrics of the 15 national universities in that country.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Strength in small: the University of Malta’s scientific output since accession

McMillan¹,

Lalonde

Bezzina

et al. 2016

IJIS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The Triple Helix model of academia, government and industry posits that the university can play an important role, even an entrepreneurial one, in innovation in increasingly knowledge-based societies (Etzkowitz and Leydesdorff, 2000). No longer the “ivory tower” universities are now moving toward an entrepreneurial paradigm. The purpose of this research effort is to examine how such a migration has been accomplished in Malta with a particular focus on the changing activities of its University. Design/methodology/approach This paper uses advanced bibliometric techniques to examine the scientific output of the University of Malta. Data were downloaded from Thomson Reuters Web of Science. These data were then processed using the software packages Bibexcel and VOSviewer to produce detailed maps of the scientific activity. Findings The results were that the University has greatly expanded its scientific footprint since its 2004 accession to the European Union (EU). International collaborations and highly cited papers have gone up significantly. Research limitations/implications Only one country was examined in this effort, and further study should compare to Malta to other small EU countries. The findings suggest that while some might consider Malta’s progress modest in absolute terms, it has made significant strides from its prior-to-accession base. Practical implications The findings have been presented to the Malta Council for Science and Technology as evidence of the outcomes of their efforts. Originality/value Because Malta is the smallest member-state in the EU, little research has been done on its science base. However, the authors believe their findings could inform research efforts on other EU, and even non-EU, countries.

show abstract

Science and technology metrics for research policy evaluation: some insights from a Moroccan experience

Cited by 8 publications

References 32 publications

Size of science team at university and internal co-publications: science policy implications

Size of science team at university and internal co-publications: science policy implications

The research productivity of new Brazilian PhDs in management

Strength in small: the University of Malta’s scientific output since accession

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About