IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0155148.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Brazilian Science between National and Foreign Journals: Methodology for Analyzing the Production and Impact in Emerging Scientific Communities

Author

Listed:
  • Letícia Strehl
  • Luciana Calabró
  • Diogo Onofre Souza
  • Lívio Amaral

Abstract

In recent decades, we have observed an intensification of science, technology and innovation activities in Brazil. The increase in production of scientific papers indexed in international databases, however, has not been accompanied by an equivalent increase in the impact of publications. This paper presents a methodology for analyzing production and the impact of certain research areas in Brazil related to two aspects: the origin of the journals (national or foreign) and international collaboration. These two variables were selected for being of particular importance in understanding the context of scientific production and communication in countries with emerging economies. The sample consisted of papers written by Brazilian researchers in 19 subfields of knowledge published from 2002 to 2011, totaling 85,082 papers. To calculate the impact, we adopted a normalized indicator called the relative subfield citedness (Rw) using a window of 5 years to obtain measurements evaluated in 2 different years: 2007 and 2012. The data on papers and citations were collected from the Web of Science database. From the results, we note that most of the subfields have presented, from one quinquennium to another, improved performance in the world production rankings. Regarding publication in national and foreign journals, we observed a trend in the distribution maintenance of production of the subfields based on the origin of the journal. Specifically, for impact, we identified a lower Rw pattern for Brazilian papers when they were published in national journals in all subfields. When Brazilian products are published in foreign journals, we observed a higher impact for those papers, even surpassing the average global impact in some subfields. For international collaboration, we analyzed the percentage of participation of foreign researchers and the connection between collaboration and the impact of papers, especially emphasizing the distinction of hyperauthorship papers in terms of production and impact.

Suggested Citation

  • Letícia Strehl & Luciana Calabró & Diogo Onofre Souza & Lívio Amaral, 2016. "Brazilian Science between National and Foreign Journals: Methodology for Analyzing the Production and Impact in Emerging Scientific Communities," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(5), pages 1-15, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0155148
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0155148
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0155148
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0155148&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0155148?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Blaise Cronin, 2001. "Hyperauthorship: A postmodern perversion or evidence of a structural shift in scholarly communication practices?," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 52(7), pages 558-569.
    2. Katz, J. Sylvan & Martin, Ben R., 1997. "What is research collaboration?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 1-18, March.
    3. van Raan, Anthony F.J. & van Leeuwen, Thed N. & Visser, Martijn S. & van Eck, Nees Jan & Waltman, Ludo, 2010. "Rivals for the crown: Reply to Opthof and Leydesdorff," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 4(3), pages 431-435.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Jo Royle & Louisa Coles & Dorothy Williams & Paul Evans, 2007. "Publishing in international journals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 71(1), pages 59-86, April.
    2. Franceschet, Massimo & Costantini, Antonio, 2010. "The effect of scholar collaboration on impact and quality of academic papers," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 4(4), pages 540-553.
    3. Ho Fai Chan & Ali Sina Önder & Benno Torgler, 2016. "The first cut is the deepest: repeated interactions of coauthorship and academic productivity in Nobel laureate teams," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 106(2), pages 509-524, February.
    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. Yongjun Zhu & Lihong Quan & Pei‐Ying Chen & Meen Chul Kim & Chao Che, 2023. "Predicting coauthorship using bibliographic network embedding," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 74(4), pages 388-401, April.
    6. Alberto Baccini & Eugenio Petrovich, 2022. "Normative versus strategic accounts of acknowledgment data: The case of the top-five journals of economics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(1), pages 603-635, January.
    7. Waltman, Ludo, 2016. "A review of the literature on citation impact indicators," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 365-391.
    8. Giovanni Abramo & Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo & Flavia Costa, 2019. "A gender analysis of top scientists’ collaboration behavior: evidence from Italy," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 120(2), pages 405-418, August.
    9. Jonkers, Koen & Cruz-Castro, Laura, 2013. "Research upon return: The effect of international mobility on scientific ties, production and impact," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(8), pages 1366-1377.
    10. António Osório, 2018. "On the impossibility of a perfect counting method to allocate the credits of multi-authored publications," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(3), pages 2161-2173, September.
    11. Thelwall, Mike & Sud, Pardeep, 2014. "No citation advantage for monograph-based collaborations?," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 8(1), pages 276-283.
    12. Thelwall, Mike & Sud, Pardeep, 2016. "National, disciplinary and temporal variations in the extent to which articles with more authors have more impact: Evidence from a geometric field normalised citation indicator," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 48-61.
    13. Elisa Bellotti & Luka Kronegger & Luigi Guadalupi, 2016. "The evolution of research collaboration within and across disciplines in Italian Academia," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(2), pages 783-811, November.
    14. Abramo, Giovanni & D’Angelo, Ciriaco Andrea & Murgia, Gianluca, 2013. "The collaboration behaviors of scientists in Italy: A field level analysis," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 7(2), pages 442-454.
    15. Barry Bozeman & Daniel Fay & Catherine Slade, 2013. "Research collaboration in universities and academic entrepreneurship: the-state-of-the-art," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 38(1), pages 1-67, February.
    16. John Hudson, 2016. "An analysis of the titles of papers submitted to the UK REF in 2014: authors, disciplines, and stylistic details," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(2), pages 871-889, November.
    17. Vasileiadou, Eleftheria, 2009. "Stabilisation operationalised: Using time series analysis to understand the dynamics of research collaboration," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 3(1), pages 36-48.
    18. Philippe Mongeon & Elise Smith & Bruno Joyal & Vincent Larivière, 2017. "The rise of the middle author: Investigating collaboration and division of labor in biomedical research using partial alphabetical authorship," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(9), pages 1-14, September.
    19. Anna Małgorzata Kamińska & Łukasz Opaliński & Łukasz Wyciślik, 2022. "The Landscapes of Sustainability in the Library and Information Science: Collaboration Insights," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-23, December.
    20. Jan Youtie & Barry Bozeman, 2014. "Social dynamics of research collaboration: norms, practices, and ethical issues in determining co-authorship rights," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 101(2), pages 953-962, November.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:plo:pone00:0155148. 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.