IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/qualqt/v56y2022i5d10.1007_s11135-021-01254-z.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluating the quality of scientific research papers in entrepreneurship

Author

Listed:
  • G. Yoganandan

    (Periyar University)

  • M. Vasan

    (National College (Autonomous))

Abstract

The study aims to find the quality of research papers published in the domain of entrepreneurship in India. This study covers 100 research papers. A standardized measurement tool developed by the earlier researchers was used to evaluate the research quality. The data compiled using the measurement tool were analyzed with the support of the SPSS. The statistical tools such as descriptive statistics, Friedman’s test, factor analysis, two-sample ‘t’ test, and ANOVA are applied to analyze the data. The study findings reported that the quality of research papers published in the field of entrepreneurship is not up to the quality standards. The quality of multiple-author papers is better than single-author papers. Similarly, the quality of papers published by foreign authors is comparatively better than Indian authors. Further, the quality of papers published with the combination of foreign and Indian authors is substantially good. The quality of papers published in foreign journals is higher as compared with Indian journals. Further, the standard of papers published under the qualitative approach was comparatively better than the quantitative approach. The authors developed a Conceptual Model of Process and Product of Research (YOVA model). This model clearly shows that the whole research process yields six levels of research products. The study recommended that the researchers need to go for international collaborations to improve the quality of the publication. The funding agencies, higher learning institutions and research institutions should focus on enhancing research infrastructure. The study examined the validity of research articles searched by novice researchers in India in Google by using keywords related to entrepreneurship and, as such this non-focused approach is a big impediment to quality research.

Suggested Citation

  • G. Yoganandan & M. Vasan, 2022. "Evaluating the quality of scientific research papers in entrepreneurship," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 56(5), pages 3013-3027, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:qualqt:v:56:y:2022:i:5:d:10.1007_s11135-021-01254-z
    DOI: 10.1007/s11135-021-01254-z
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11135-021-01254-z
    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/s11135-021-01254-z?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. Bornmann, Lutz & Daniel, Hans-Dieter, 2010. "The citation speed index: A useful bibliometric indicator to add to the h index," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 4(3), pages 444-446.
    2. Negin Salimi, 2017. "Quality assessment of scientific outputs using the BWM," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 112(1), pages 195-213, July.
    3. Walter, Jorge & Lechner, Christoph & Kellermanns, Franz W., 2007. "Knowledge transfer between and within alliance partners: Private versus collective benefits of social capital," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 60(7), pages 698-710, July.
    4. Lutz Bornmann & Hermann Schier & Werner Marx & Hans-Dieter Daniel, 2011. "Does the h index for assessing single publications really work? A case study on papers published in chemistry," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 89(3), pages 835-843, December.
    5. Jonathan Adams, 2013. "The fourth age of research," Nature, Nature, vol. 497(7451), pages 557-560, May.
    6. John Hudson, 1996. "Trends in Multi-authored Papers in Economics," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 10(3), pages 153-158, Summer.
    7. Li, Eldon Y. & Liao, Chien Hsiang & Yen, Hsiuju Rebecca, 2013. "Co-authorship networks and research impact: A social capital perspective," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(9), pages 1515-1530.
    8. Welch, Catherine & Piekkari, Rebecca, 2017. "How should we (not) judge the ‘quality’ of qualitative research? A re-assessment of current evaluative criteria in International Business," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 52(5), pages 714-725.
    9. Wah Yun Low & Kwan Hoong Ng & M. A. Kabir & Ai Peng Koh & Janaki Sinnasamy, 2014. "Trend and impact of international collaboration in clinical medicine papers published in Malaysia," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 98(2), pages 1521-1533, February.
    10. Wah Yun Low & Kwan Hoong Ng & M. A. Kabir & Ai Peng Koh & Janaki Sinnasamy, 2014. "Erratum to: Trend and impact of international collaboration in clinical medicine papers published in Malaysia," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 100(2), pages 607-607, August.
    11. Bornmann, Lutz & Schier, Hermann & Marx, Werner & Daniel, Hans-Dieter, 2012. "What factors determine citation counts of publications in chemistry besides their quality?," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 6(1), pages 11-18.
    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. Jane G. Payumo & Jamie Monson & Amy Jamison & Bradley W. Fenwick, 2019. "Metrics-based profiling of university research engagement with Africa: research management, gender, and internationalization perspective," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 121(2), pages 675-698, November.
    2. Hongquan Shen & Juan Xie & Jiang Li & Ying Cheng, 2021. "The correlation between scientific collaboration and citation count at the paper level: a meta-analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(4), pages 3443-3470, April.
    3. Marian-Gabriel Hâncean & Matjaž Perc & Jürgen Lerner, 2021. "The coauthorship networks of the most productive European researchers," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(1), pages 201-224, January.
    4. Zsolt Kohus & Márton Demeter & László Kun & Eszter Lukács & Katalin Czakó & Gyula Péter Szigeti, 2022. "A Study of the Relation between Byline Positions of Affiliated/Non-Affiliated Authors and the Scientific Impact of European Universities in Times Higher Education World University Rankings," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(20), pages 1-14, October.
    5. Ivone de Bem Oliveira & Rhewter Nunes & Lucia Mattiello & Stela Barros-Ribeiro & Isabela Pavanelli Souza & Alexandre Siqueira Guedes Coelho & Rosane Garcia Collevatti, 2019. "Research and partnership in studies of sugarcane using molecular markers: a scientometric approach," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 119(1), pages 335-355, April.
    6. Pilar Valderrama & Manuel Escabias & Evaristo Jiménez-Contreras & Mariano J. Valderrama & Pilar Baca, 2018. "A mixed longitudinal and cross-sectional model to forecast the journal impact factor in the field of Dentistry," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(2), pages 1203-1212, August.
    7. Hui Xuan Tan & Ephrance Abu Ujum & Kwai Fatt Choong & Kuru Ratnavelu, 2015. "Impact analysis of domestic and international research collaborations: a Malaysian case study," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(1), pages 885-904, January.
    8. Khosrowjerdi, Mahmood & Bornmann, Lutz, 2021. "Is culture related to strong science? An empirical investigation," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 15(4).
    9. Graf, Holger & Kalthaus, Martin, 2018. "International research networks: Determinants of country embeddedness," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(7), pages 1198-1214.
    10. Nicholas Yee Liang Hing & Xin Ci Wong & Pei Xuan Kuan & Mohan Dass Pathmanathan & Mohd Aizuddin Abdul Rahman & Kalaiarasu M. Peariasamy, 2022. "Scientific Abstract to Full Paper: Publication Rate over a 3-Year Period in a Malaysian Clinical Research Conference," Publications, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-13, October.
    11. Ekaterina Dyachenko & Iurii Agafonov & Katerina Guba & Alexander Gelvikh, 2024. "Independent Russian medical science: is there any?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 129(9), pages 5577-5597, September.
    12. Negin Rahmani & Alireza Salehi & Hossein Molavi Vardanjani & Maryam Marzban & Arezoo Behbood, 2020. "Using STROBE checklist to assess the reporting quality of observational studies affiliated with Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, and its correlates: a scientometric study from Iran," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 122(2), pages 989-1001, February.
    13. Dehdarirad, Tahereh & Nasini, Stefano, 2017. "Research impact in co-authorship networks: a two-mode analysis," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 11(2), pages 371-388.
    14. Liao, Chien Hsiang & Yen, Hsiuju Rebecca, 2012. "Quantifying the degree of research collaboration: A comparative study of collaborative measures," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 6(1), pages 27-33.
    15. Juan-Carlos Valderrama-Zurián & Remedios Aguilar-Moya & Juan Gorraiz, 2019. "On the bibliometric nature of a foreseeable relationship: open access and education," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 120(3), pages 1031-1057, September.
    16. Shahadat Uddin & Nazim Choudhury & Md Ekramul Hossain, 2019. "A research framework to explore knowledge evolution and scholarly quantification of collaborative research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 119(2), pages 789-803, May.
    17. Alfirević Nikša & Pavičić Jurica & Rendulić Darko, 2023. "A Bibliometric Analysis of Public Business School Scientific Productivity and Impact in South-East Europe (2017-2021)," South East European Journal of Economics and Business, Sciendo, vol. 18(1), pages 27-45, June.
    18. Confraria, Hugo & Mira Godinho, Manuel & Wang, Lili, 2017. "Determinants of citation impact: A comparative analysis of the Global South versus the Global North," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 265-279.
    19. JingJing Zhang & Jiancheng Guan, 2017. "Scientific relatedness and intellectual base: a citation analysis of un-cited and highly-cited papers in the solar energy field," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 110(1), pages 141-162, January.
    20. Elizabeth S. Vieira, 2023. "The influence of research collaboration on citation impact: the countries in the European Innovation Scoreboard," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(6), pages 3555-3579, 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:spr:qualqt:v:56:y:2022:i:5:d:10.1007_s11135-021-01254-z. 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.