How to Combine Research Guarantor and Collaboration Patterns to Measure Scientific Performance of Countries in Scientific Fields: Nanoscience and Nanotechnology as a Case Study
Metadatos
Afficher la notice complèteEditorial
Frontiers Media
Materia
scholarly metrics research assessment leadership
Date
2016-07-29Referencia bibliográfica
Chinchilla Rodríguez, Z. & Ocaña Rosa, K. & Vargas Quesada, B. Front. Res. Metr. Anal. 1:2. [https://doi.org/10.3389/frma.2016.00002]
Patrocinador
Spanish National Plan for Scientific and Technical Research and Innovation is acknowledged (Research project CSO2014-57770-R); Projects I + D + I, State Programme of Research, Development and Innovation oriented to the Challenges of the Society: NANOMETRICS (Ref. CSO2014-57770-R) supported by Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad of SpainRésumé
This paper presents a comparative benchmarking of scientometric indicators to characterize
the patterns of publication and research performance at the country level, in a
specific field (nanoscience and nanotechnology) during the period 2003–2013. The aim
was to assess how decisive collaboration may be in attaining a sound level of scientific
performance, and how important leadership is for publication. To this end, we used a
new methodological approach that contributes to the debate about scientific autonomy
or dependency of countries in their scientific performance, and which may serve as an
aid in decision-making with regard to research management. The results reveal that in
terms of output, USA and China are the main producers; and due to the huge increase
in their publications, Iran, India, and Australia can be considered emerging countries.
The results highlight USA, Ireland, and Singapore as the countries with the highest levels
of normalized citation impact, scientific excellence, and good management of leadership,
all of which suggest strong scientific development and scientific autonomy. Also
worth mentioning is the high visibility and scientific consolidation of China and Australia,
despite the meager growth of their output. Moreover, the performance results indicate
that in most cases the countries whose pattern of publication is more international tend
to have greater visibility. Yet, a high degree of leadership does not always translate as a
high performance level; the contrary is often true. Due to the limitations of the sample
and characteristics of the field, we propose that future studies evaluate the generation
of new knowledge in this field and refine the approach presented here, so as to better
measure scientific performance.