IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/infome/v6y2012i2p289-297.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An analysis for estimating the short-term effects of Japan's triple disaster on progress in materials science

Author

Listed:
  • Magnone, Edoardo

Abstract

Suppose there is a scientist that writes a paper for a peer-reviewed journal. How likely is it that a natural disaster will terminate, change, suspend or discontinue some aspect of this editorial process? To answer this question, the aim of present study was to determine the effects of a natural disaster on progress in materials science research. The Tsunami event in Japan and materials science are well suited to serve as a case study for both the development and application of a system to evaluate the Academic Research Output immediately after a natural disaster. In particular, the analysis focused on the short-term impacts of Japan's triple disaster – earthquake, Tsunami, and nuclear accident (11 March, 2011) – on the Academic Research Output in materials science subject from three different areas: Sendai (Miyagi Prefecture), Tsukuba (Ibaraki Prefecture) and Kyoto (Kyoto Prefecture). The last one has been used as an internal reference standard (normal/non-disaster situation) for the comparison. A geographical cluster-based study was conducted between 09 February and 10 April 2011. Consistent with the hypothesis that a disaster might slow down knowledge production, the conclusion showed that the Japan's triple disaster strongly influenced the Academic Research Output of papers in the selected field of science. Using statistical data, these findings show that the number of submitted papers and the cumulative number of authors contributing to the field of materials science decreased immediately after the March 11th events in the areas affected by disaster.

Suggested Citation

  • Magnone, Edoardo, 2012. "An analysis for estimating the short-term effects of Japan's triple disaster on progress in materials science," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 6(2), pages 289-297.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:infome:v:6:y:2012:i:2:p:289-297
    DOI: 10.1016/j.joi.2012.01.003
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1751157712000041
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.joi.2012.01.003?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. Sotaro Shibayama, 2011. "Distribution of academic research funds: a case of Japanese national research grant," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 88(1), pages 43-60, July.
    2. Lutz Bornmann, 2011. "Mimicry in science?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 86(1), pages 173-177, January.
    3. David A. King, 2004. "The scientific impact of nations," Nature, Nature, vol. 430(6997), pages 311-316, July.
    4. Wen-Ta Chiu & Yuh-Shan Ho, 2007. "Bibliometric analysis of tsunami research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 73(1), pages 3-17, October.
    5. A. Raan, 1999. "Advanced bibliometric methods for the evaluation of universities," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 45(3), pages 417-423, July.
    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. O. Mryglod & Yu. Holovatch & R. Kenna & B. Berche, 2016. "Quantifying the evolution of a scientific topic: reaction of the academic community to the Chornobyl disaster," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 106(3), pages 1151-1166, March.
    2. Edoardo Magnone, 2014. "The extreme case of terrorism: a scientometric analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 101(1), pages 179-201, October.

    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. Youliang Huang & Qian Huang & Sajid Ali & Xing Zhai & Xiaoming Bi & Renquan Liu, 2016. "Rehabilitation using virtual reality technology: a bibliometric analysis, 1996–2015," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(3), pages 1547-1559, December.
    2. Dragan Ivanović & Yuh-Shan Ho, 2014. "Independent publications from Serbia in the Science Citation Index Expanded: a bibliometric analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 101(1), pages 603-622, October.
    3. Beibei Niu & Song Hong & Jiefei Yuan & Sha Peng & Zhen Wang & Xu Zhang, 2014. "Global trends in sediment-related research in earth science during 1992–2011: a bibliometric analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 98(1), pages 511-529, January.
    4. Domingo Docampo & Lawrence Cram, 2019. "Highly cited researchers: a moving target," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 118(3), pages 1011-1025, March.
    5. Amanda H Goodall, 2005. "Should Research Universities be Led by Top Researchers? Part 1: Are they?," HEW 0506003, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Pentti Riikonen & Mauno Vihinen, 2008. "National research contributions: A case study on Finnish biomedical research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 77(2), pages 207-222, November.
    7. Maribel Vega-Arce & Gonzalo Salas & Gastón Núñez-Ulloa & Cristián Pinto-Cortez & Ivelisse Torres Fernandez & Yuh-Shan Ho, 2019. "Research performance and trends in child sexual abuse research: a Science Citation Index Expanded-based analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 121(3), pages 1505-1525, December.
    8. Jiang Wu, 2013. "Geographical knowledge diffusion and spatial diversity citation rank," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 94(1), pages 181-201, January.
    9. Yang Bai, 2018. "Has the Global South become a playground for Western scholars in information and communication technologies for development? Evidence from a three-journal analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(3), pages 2139-2153, September.
    10. Fiorenzo Franceschini & Maurizio Galetto & Domenico Maisano & Luca Mastrogiacomo, 2012. "The success-index: an alternative approach to the h-index for evaluating an individual’s research output," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 92(3), pages 621-641, September.
    11. Patrick Herron & Aashish Mehta & Cong Cao & Timothy Lenoir, 2016. "Research diversification and impact: the case of national nanoscience development," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(2), pages 629-659, November.
    12. Soutar, Geoffrey N. & Murphy, Jamie, 2009. "Journal quality: A Google Scholar analysis," Australasian marketing journal, Elsevier, vol. 17(3), pages 150-153.
    13. Tuan V. Nguyen & Ly T. Pham, 2011. "Scientific output and its relationship to knowledge economy: an analysis of ASEAN countries," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 89(1), pages 107-117, October.
    14. Anastassios Pouris, 2010. "A scientometric assessment of the Southern Africa Development Community: science in the tip of Africa," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 85(1), pages 145-154, October.
    15. de Oliveira, Thaiane Moreira & de Albuquerque, Sofia & Toth, Janderson Pereira & Bello, Debora Zava, 2018. "International cooperation networks of the BRICS bloc," SocArXiv b6x43, Center for Open Science.
    16. Yves Gingras & Mahdi Khelfaoui, 2018. "Assessing the effect of the United States’ “citation advantage” on other countries’ scientific impact as measured in the Web of Science (WoS) database," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 114(2), pages 517-532, February.
    17. Jo Royle & Louisa Coles & Dorothy Williams & Paul Evans, 2007. "Publishing in international journals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 71(1), pages 59-86, April.
    18. Jan Fagerberg & Maryann Feldman & Martin Srholec, 2011. "Technological Dynamics and Social Capability: Comparing U.S. States and European Nations," Working Papers on Innovation Studies 20111114, Centre for Technology, Innovation and Culture, University of Oslo.
    19. KANG Byeongwoo & MOTOHASHI Kazuyuki, 2020. "Local Industry Influence on Commercialization of University Research by University Startups," Discussion papers 20086, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    20. Yi-Ming Guo & Zhen-Ling Huang & Ji Guo & Hua Li & Xing-Rong Guo & Mpeoane Judith Nkeli, 2019. "Bibliometric Analysis on Smart Cities Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(13), pages 1-18, June.

    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:eee:infome:v:6:y:2012:i:2:p:289-297. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/joi .

    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.