IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v126y2021i9d10.1007_s11192-021-04079-7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Universal and specific features of Ukrainian economic research: publication analysis based on Crossref data

Author

Listed:
  • O. Mryglod

    (Institute for Condensed Matter Physics of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine)

  • S. Nazarovets

    (State Scientific and Technical Library of Ukraine)

  • S. Kozmenko

    (University of Social Sciences Spoleczna Akademia Nauk)

Abstract

Our study is one of the first examples of multidimensional and longitudinal disciplinary analysis at the national level based on Crossref data. We present a large-scale quantitative analysis of Ukrainian economic research. This study is not yet another example of research aimed at ranking of local journals, authors or institutions, but rather exploring general tendencies that can be compared to other countries or regions. We study different aspects of Ukrainian economic research output. In particular, the collaborative nature, geographic landscape and some peculiarities of citation statistics are investigated. We have found that Ukrainian economic research is characterized by a comparably small share of co-authored publications, however, it demonstrates the tendency towards more collaborative output. Based on our analysis, we discuss specific and universal features of Ukrainian economic research. The importance of supporting various initiatives aimed at enriching open scholarly metadata is considered. A comprehensive and high-quality meta description of publications is probably the shortest path to a better understanding of national trends, especially for non-English speaking countries. The results of our analysis can be used to better understand Ukrainian economic research and support research policy decisions.

Suggested Citation

  • O. Mryglod & S. Nazarovets & S. Kozmenko, 2021. "Universal and specific features of Ukrainian economic research: publication analysis based on Crossref data," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(9), pages 8187-8203, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:126:y:2021:i:9:d:10.1007_s11192-021-04079-7
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-021-04079-7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-021-04079-7
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11192-021-04079-7?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Katharina Rath & Klaus Wohlrabe, 2016. "Recent trends in co-authorship in economics: evidence from RePEc," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(12), pages 897-902, August.
    2. Emanuel Kulczycki & Tim C. E. Engels & Janne Pölönen & Kasper Bruun & Marta Dušková & Raf Guns & Robert Nowotniak & Michal Petr & Gunnar Sivertsen & Andreja Istenič Starčič & Alesia Zuccala, 2018. "Publication patterns in the social sciences and humanities: evidence from eight European countries," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(1), pages 463-486, July.
    3. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/67ft27s7u58ocangahl1jigu6p is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Dorte Henriksen, 2016. "The rise in co-authorship in the social sciences (1980–2013)," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 107(2), pages 455-476, May.
    5. Cliff Nowell & Therese Grijalva, 2011. "Trends in co-authorship in economics since 1985," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(28), pages 4369-4375.
    6. Marion Fourcade & Etienne Ollion & Yann Algan, 2015. "The Superiority of Economists," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 29(1), pages 89-114, Winter.
    7. McDowell, John M & Melvin, Michael, 1983. "The Determinants of Co-Authorship: An Analysis of the Economics Literature," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 65(1), pages 155-160, February.
    8. Péter Sasvári & András Nemeslaki & László Duma, 2019. "Exploring the influence of scientific journal ranking on publication performance in the Hungarian social sciences: the case of law and economics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 119(2), pages 595-616, May.
    9. Wagner, Caroline S. & Leydesdorff, Loet, 2005. "Network structure, self-organization, and the growth of international collaboration in science," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(10), pages 1608-1618, December.
    10. András Schubert & Wolfgang Glänzel, 2006. "Cross-national preference in co-authorship, references and citations," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 69(2), pages 409-428, November.
    11. Benjamin F. Jones, 2021. "The Rise of Research Teams: Benefits and Costs in Economics," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 35(2), pages 191-216, Spring.
    12. Marion Fourcade & Etienne Ollion & Yann Algan, 2015. "The Superiority of Economists," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 29(1), pages 89-114, Winter.
    13. David N. Laband & Robert D. Tollison, 2000. "Intellectual Collaboration," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 108(3), pages 632-661, June.
    14. John Hudson, 1996. "Trends in Multi-authored Papers in Economics," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 10(3), pages 153-158, Summer.
    15. Gunnar Sivertsen, 2016. "Patterns of internationalization and criteria for research assessment in the social sciences and humanities," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 107(2), pages 357-368, May.
    16. Sujin Choi, 2012. "Core-periphery, new clusters, or rising stars?: international scientific collaboration among ‘advanced’ countries in the era of globalization," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 90(1), pages 25-41, January.
    17. Quirin Schiermeier, 2019. "Ukraine’s science revolution stumbles five years on," Nature, Nature, vol. 566(7743), pages 162-163, February.
    18. Serhii Nazarovets, 2020. "Controversial practice of rewarding for publications in national journals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(1), pages 813-818, July.
    19. Marion Fourcade & Etienne Ollion & Yann Algan, 2015. "La superioridad de los economistas," Revista de Economía Institucional, Universidad Externado de Colombia - Facultad de Economía, vol. 17(33), pages 13-43, July-Dece.
    20. Sameer Kumar & Vala Ali Rohani & Kuru Ratnavelu, 2014. "International research collaborations of ASEAN Nations in economics, 1979–2010," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 101(1), pages 847-867, October.
    21. Henk F. Moed & Felix Moya-Anegon & Vicente Guerrero-Bote & Carmen Lopez-Illescas & Myroslava Hladchenko, 2021. "Bibliometric assessment of national scientific journals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(4), pages 3641-3666, April.
    22. Lukas Kuld & John O’Hagan, 2018. "Rise of multi-authored papers in economics: Demise of the ‘lone star’ and why?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 114(3), pages 1207-1225, March.
    23. Dorte Henriksen, 2018. "What factors are associated with increasing co-authorship in the social sciences? A case study of Danish Economics and Political Science," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 114(3), pages 1395-1421, March.
    24. Dmytro Cheberkus & Serhii Nazarovets, 2019. "Ukrainian open index maps local citations," Nature, Nature, vol. 575(7784), pages 596-596, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Zhihong Huang & Qianjin Zong & Xuerui Ji, 2022. "The associations between scientific collaborations of LIS research and its policy impact," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(11), pages 6453-6470, November.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Andrea Mervar & Maja Jokić, 2022. "Core-periphery nexus in the EU social sciences: bibliometric perspective," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(10), pages 5793-5817, October.
    2. Lukas Kuld & John O’Hagan, 2018. "Rise of multi-authored papers in economics: Demise of the ‘lone star’ and why?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 114(3), pages 1207-1225, March.
    3. Etienne Farvaque & Frédéric Gannon, 2018. "Profiling giants: the networks and influence of Buchanan and Tullock," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 175(3), pages 277-302, June.
    4. Seongkyoon Jeong & Jae Young Choi & Jaeyun Kim, 2011. "The determinants of research collaboration modes: exploring the effects of research and researcher characteristics on co-authorship," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 89(3), pages 967-983, December.
    5. William W. Olney, 2017. "English Proficiency And Labor Market Performance: Evidence From The Economics Profession," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 55(1), pages 202-222, January.
    6. Franklin G. Mixon & Kamal P. Upadhyaya, 2024. "When forgiveness beats permission: Exploring the scholarly ethos of clinical faculty in economics," American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 83(1), pages 75-91, January.
    7. Andrikopoulos, Andreas & Samitas, Aristeidis & Kostaris, Konstantinos, 2016. "Four decades of the Journal of Econometrics: Coauthorship patterns and networks," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 195(1), pages 23-32.
    8. Christian Schneijderberg & Nicolai Götze & Lars Müller, 2022. "A study of 25 years of publication outputs in the German academic profession," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(1), pages 1-28, January.
    9. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/6urb9g3nsd9s9ai3tbjqnnd41g is not listed on IDEAS
    10. Etienne Farvaque & Frédéric Gannon, 2018. "Profiling giants," Post-Print hal-02078382, HAL.
    11. Giulio Cainelli & Mario A. Maggioni & T. Erika Uberti & Annunziata Felice, 2015. "The strength of strong ties: How co-authorship affect productivity of academic economists?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(1), pages 673-699, January.
    12. Christiane Hellmanzik & Lukas Kuld, 2021. "No place like home: geography and culture in the dissemination of economic research articles," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 61(1), pages 201-229, July.
    13. Fulya Y. Ersoy & Jennifer Pate, 2023. "Invisible hurdles: Gender and institutional differences in the evaluation of economics papers," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 61(4), pages 777-797, October.
    14. Bidault, Francis & Hildebrand, Thomas, 2014. "The distribution of partnership returns: Evidence from co-authorships in economics journals," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(6), pages 1002-1013.
    15. Andrew Mearman & Sebastian Berger & Danielle Guizzo, 2016. "Curriculum reform in UK economics: a critique," Working Papers 20161611, Department of Accounting, Economics and Finance, Bristol Business School, University of the West of England, Bristol.
    16. Goddard, Jessica J. & Kallis, Giorgos & Norgaard, Richard B., 2019. "Keeping multiple antennae up: Coevolutionary foundations for methodological pluralism," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 1-1.
    17. Thoma, Johanna, 2018. "Book review: economics rules," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 84173, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    18. Jishnu Das & Quy-Toan Do, 2020. "US and them - The geography of academic research," Vox eBook Chapters, in: Sebastian Galliani & Ugo Panizza (ed.), Publishing and Measuring Success in Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 1, pages 111-114, Centre for Economic Policy Research.
    19. Michael E. Rose, 2022. "Small world: Narrow, wide, and long replication of Goyal, van der Leij and Moraga‐Gonzélez (JPE 2006) and a comparison of EconLit and Scopus," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 37(4), pages 820-828, June.
    20. Ambrosino, Angela & Cedrini, Mario & B. Davis, John, 2022. "Today’s economics: One, No One and One Hundred Thousand," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis. Working Papers 202215, University of Turin.
    21. Brown, Craig O., 2020. "Economic leadership and growth," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 298-333.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:126:y:2021:i:9:d:10.1007_s11192-021-04079-7. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.