IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v101y2014i1d10.1007_s11192-014-1389-1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Measuring recent research performance for Chinese universities using bibliometric methods

Author

Listed:
  • Jia Zhu

    (South China Normal University)

  • Saeed-Ul Hassan

    (Information Technology University- Punjab)

  • Hamid Turab Mirza

    (COMSATS Institute of Information Technology)

  • Qing Xie

    (KAUST)

Abstract

This paper focuses on measuring the academic research performance of Chinese universities by using Scopus database from 2007 to 2010. We have provided meaningful indicators to measure the research performance of Chinese universities as compared to world class universities of the US and the European region. Using these indicators, we first measure the quantity and quality of the research outcomes of the universities and then examine the internationalization of research by using international collaborations, international citations and international impact metrics. Using all of this data, we finally present an overall score called research performance point to measure the comprehensive research strength of the universities for the selected subject categories. The comparison identifies the gap between Chinese universities and top-tier universities from selected regions across various subject areas. We find that Chinese universities are doing well in terms of publication volume but receive less citations from their published work. We also find that the Chinese universities have relative low percentage of publications at high impact venues, which may be the reason that they are not receiving more citations. Therefore, a careful selection of publication venues may help the Chinese universities to compete with world class universities and increase their research internationalization.

Suggested Citation

  • Jia Zhu & Saeed-Ul Hassan & Hamid Turab Mirza & Qing Xie, 2014. "Measuring recent research performance for Chinese universities using bibliometric methods," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 101(1), pages 429-443, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:101:y:2014:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-014-1389-1
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-014-1389-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-014-1389-1
    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/s11192-014-1389-1?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. Moed, Henk F., 2010. "Measuring contextual citation impact of scientific journals," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 4(3), pages 265-277.
    2. Thed N. Van Leeuwen & Henk F. Moed & Robert J. W. Tijssen & Martijn S. Visser & Anthony F. J. Van Raan, 2001. "Language biases in the coverage of the Science Citation Index and its consequencesfor international comparisons of national research performance," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 51(1), pages 335-346, April.
    3. Zuo-Qi Ding & Jian-Ping Ge & Xiao-Ming Wu & Xiao-Nan Zheng, 2013. "Bibliometrics evaluation of research performance in pharmacology/pharmacy: China relative to ten representative countries," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 96(3), pages 829-844, September.
    4. Saeed-Ul Hassan & Peter Haddawy, 2013. "Measuring international knowledge flows and scholarly impact of scientific research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 94(1), pages 163-179, January.
    5. Jiang Tan & Hui-Zhen Fu & Yuh-Shan Ho, 2014. "A bibliometric analysis of research on proteomics in Science Citation Index Expanded," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 98(2), pages 1473-1490, February.
    6. Moed, H. F. & Burger, W. J. M. & Frankfort, J. G. & Van Raan, A. F. J., 1985. "The use of bibliometric data for the measurement of university research performance," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 14(3), pages 131-149, June.
    7. Hui-Zhen Fu & Xiao Long & Yuh-Shan Ho, 2014. "China’s research in chemical engineering journals in Science Citation Index Expanded: a bibliometric analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 98(1), pages 119-136, January.
    8. Hui-Zhen Fu & Yuh-Shan Ho, 2013. "Comparison of independent research of China’s top universities using bibliometric indicators," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 96(1), pages 259-276, July.
    9. Liming Liang & Yishan Wu, 2001. "Selection of databases, indicators and models for evaluating research performance of Chinese universities," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 10(2), pages 105-113, August.
    10. Henk F. Moed, 2002. "Measuring China"s research performance using the Science Citation Index," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 53(3), pages 281-296, March.
    11. Lie Yang & Zhulei Chen & Ting Liu & Rui Wan & Jia Wang & Wengang Xie, 2013. "Research output analysis of municipal solid waste: a case study of China," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 96(2), pages 641-650, August.
    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. Marcel Clermont & Alexander Dirksen & Barbara Scheidt & Dirk Tunger, 2017. "Citation metrics as an additional indicator for evaluating research performance? An analysis of their correlations and validity," Business Research, Springer;German Academic Association for Business Research, vol. 10(2), pages 249-279, October.
    2. Yi Zhang & Mingting Kou & Kaihua Chen & Jiancheng Guan & Yuchen Li, 2016. "Modelling the Basic Research Competitiveness Index (BR-CI) with an application to the biomass energy field," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 108(3), pages 1221-1241, September.
    3. Fei Shu & Wen Lou & Stefanie Haustein, 2018. "Can Twitter increase the visibility of Chinese publications?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(1), pages 505-519, July.
    4. Gerhard Reichmann & Christian Schlögl, 2022. "On the possibilities of presenting the research performance of an institute over a long period of time: the case of the Institute of Information Science at the University of Graz in Austria," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(6), pages 3193-3223, June.
    5. Teodoro Luque-Martínez & Salvador Barrio-García, 2016. "Constructing a synthetic indicator of research activity," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 108(3), pages 1049-1064, September.
    6. Guo Chen & Lu Xiao & Chang-ping Hu & Xue-qin Zhao, 2015. "Identifying the research focus of Library and Information Science institutions in China with institution-specific keywords," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 103(2), pages 707-724, May.
    7. José M. Merigó & Christian A. Cancino & Freddy Coronado & David Urbano, 2016. "Academic research in innovation: a country analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 108(2), pages 559-593, August.
    8. Bonaccorsi, Andrea & Belingheri, Paola & Secondi, Luca, 2021. "The research productivity of universities. A multilevel and multidisciplinary analysis on European institutions," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 15(2).
    9. Yasir Javed & Shakil Ahmad & Shabir Hussain Khahro, 2020. "Evaluating the Research Performance of Islamabad-Based Higher Education Institutes," SAGE Open, , vol. 10(1), pages 21582440209, January.
    10. Zewen Hu & Angela Lin & Peter Willett, 2019. "Identification of research communities in cited and uncited publications using a co-authorship network," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 118(1), pages 1-19, January.

    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. Bar-Ilan, Judit, 2008. "Informetrics at the beginning of the 21st century—A review," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 2(1), pages 1-52.
    2. Waltman, Ludo, 2016. "A review of the literature on citation impact indicators," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 365-391.
    3. Domingo Docampo & Lawrence Cram, 2019. "Highly cited researchers: a moving target," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 118(3), pages 1011-1025, March.
    4. Henk F. Moed, 2002. "Measuring China"s research performance using the Science Citation Index," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 53(3), pages 281-296, March.
    5. Yuh-Shan Ho, 2016. "Rebuttal to: Liu et al. “Progress in global parallel computing research: a bibliometric approach”, vol. 95, pp 967–983," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 108(3), pages 1693-1694, September.
    6. Li, Yunrong & Radicchi, Filippo & Castellano, Claudio & Ruiz-Castillo, Javier, 2013. "Quantitative evaluation of alternative field normalization procedures," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 7(3), pages 746-755.
    7. B Ian Hutchins & Xin Yuan & James M Anderson & George M Santangelo, 2016. "Relative Citation Ratio (RCR): A New Metric That Uses Citation Rates to Measure Influence at the Article Level," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(9), pages 1-25, September.
    8. Tianlong Zheng & Juan Wang & Qunhui Wang & Chunhong Nie & Zhining Shi & Xiaona Wang & Zhen Gao, 2016. "A bibliometric analysis of micro/nano-bubble related research: current trends, present application, and future prospects," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(1), pages 53-71, October.
    9. Bihui Jin & Jiangong Zhang & Dingquan Chen & Xianyou Zhu, 2002. "Development of the Chinese Scientometric Indicators (CSI)," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 54(1), pages 145-154, April.
    10. Yi Zhang & Mingting Kou & Kaihua Chen & Jiancheng Guan & Yuchen Li, 2016. "Modelling the Basic Research Competitiveness Index (BR-CI) with an application to the biomass energy field," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 108(3), pages 1221-1241, September.
    11. Li, Yunrong & Ruiz-Castillo, Javier, 2013. "The comparison of normalization procedures based on different classification systems," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 7(4), pages 945-958.
    12. repec:cte:werepe:11672 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Kostoff, Ronald N., 2008. "Comparison of China/USA science and technology performance," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 2(4), pages 354-363.
    14. Alireza Mesdaghinia & Masoud Younesian & Simin Nasseri & Ramin Nabizadeh Nodehi & Mahdi Hadi, 2015. "Analysis of the microbial risk assessment studies from 1973 to 2015: a bibliometric case study," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 105(1), pages 691-707, October.
    15. Guan Jiancheng & Wang Junxia, 2004. "Evaluation and interpretation of knowledge production efficiency," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 59(1), pages 131-155, January.
    16. David A. Pendlebury, 2019. "Charting a path between the simple and the false and the complex and unusable: Review of Henk F. Moed, Applied Evaluative Informetrics [in the series Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis of Scientifi," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 119(1), pages 549-560, April.
    17. Pedro Albarrán & Juan A. Crespo & Ignacio Ortuño & Javier Ruiz-Castillo, 2010. "A comparison of the scientific performance of the U.S. and the European union at the turn of the 21st century," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 85(1), pages 329-344, October.
    18. Javier Ruiz-Castillo, 2012. "The evaluation of citation distributions," SERIEs: Journal of the Spanish Economic Association, Springer;Spanish Economic Association, vol. 3(1), pages 291-310, March.
    19. Fei Shu & Wen Lou & Stefanie Haustein, 2018. "Can Twitter increase the visibility of Chinese publications?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(1), pages 505-519, July.
    20. repec:cte:werepe:we1306 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. Ludo Waltman & Nees Jan Eck, 2013. "Source normalized indicators of citation impact: an overview of different approaches and an empirical comparison," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 96(3), pages 699-716, September.
    22. Chen, Hua-Qi & Wang, Xiuping & He, Li & Chen, Ping & Wan, Yuehua & Yang, Lingyun & Jiang, Shuian, 2016. "Chinese energy and fuels research priorities and trend: A bibliometric analysis," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 966-975.

    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:101:y:2014:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-014-1389-1. 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.