IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v105y2015i1d10.1007_s11192-015-1654-y.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Scientometric mapping of computer science research in Mexico

Author

Listed:
  • Ashraf Uddin

    (South Asian University)

  • Vivek Kumar Singh

    (South Asian University)

  • David Pinto

    (Benemérita Universidad Autónoma de Puebla)

  • Ivan Olmos

    (Benemérita Universidad Autónoma de Puebla)

Abstract

This paper presents a detailed scientometric and text-based analysis of Computer Science (CS) research output from Mexico during 1989–2014, indexed in Web of Science. The analytical characterization focuses on origins and growth patterns of CS research in Mexico. In addition to computing the standard scientometric indicators of TP, TC, ACPP, HiCP, H-index, ICP patterns etc., the major publication sources selected by Mexican computer scientists and the major funding agencies for CS research are also identified. The text-based analysis, on the other hand, focused on identifying major research themes pursued by Mexican computer scientists and their trends. Mexico, ranking 35th in the world CS research output during the mentioned period, is also unique in the sense that 75 % of the total CS publications are produced by top ten Mexican institutions alone. Similarly, Mexico has higher ICP instances than world average. The analysis presents a detailed characterization on these aspects.

Suggested Citation

  • Ashraf Uddin & Vivek Kumar Singh & David Pinto & Ivan Olmos, 2015. "Scientometric mapping of computer science research in Mexico," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 105(1), pages 97-114, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:105:y:2015:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-015-1654-y
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-015-1654-y
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-015-1654-y
    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/s11192-015-1654-y?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. Fu, Hui-Zhen & Ho, Yuh-Shan, 2013. "Independent research of China in Science Citation Index Expanded during 1980–2011," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 7(1), pages 210-222.
    2. 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.
    3. Daniel Teodorescu & Tudorel Andrei, 2011. "The growth of international collaboration in East European scholarly communities: a bibliometric analysis of journal articles published between 1989 and 2009," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 89(2), pages 711-722, November.
    4. Sujit Bhattacharya & Shilpa & Madhulika Bhati, 2012. "China and India: The two new players in the nanotechnology race," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 93(1), pages 59-87, October.
    5. Vivek Kumar Singh & Ashraf Uddin & David Pinto, 2015. "Computer science research: the top 100 institutions in India and in the world," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 104(2), pages 529-553, August.
    6. Li Tang & Philip Shapira, 2011. "China–US scientific collaboration in nanotechnology: patterns and dynamics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 88(1), pages 1-16, July.
    7. Bulent Ozel, 2012. "Collaboration structure and knowledge diffusion in Turkish management academia," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 93(1), pages 183-206, October.
    8. B. M. Gupta & Avinash Kshitij & Charu Verma, 2011. "Mapping of Indian computer science research output, 1999–2008," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 86(2), pages 261-283, February.
    9. Ruimin Ma & Chaoqun Ni & Junping Qiu, 2008. "Scientific research competitiveness of world universities in computer science," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 76(2), pages 245-260, August.
    10. Suresh Kumar & K. C. Garg, 2005. "Scientometrics of computer science research in India and China," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 64(2), pages 121-132, August.
    11. 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.
    12. Kostoff, Ronald N., 2008. "Comparison of China/USA science and technology performance," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 2(4), pages 354-363.
    13. Benedita Marta Gomes Costa & Edilson da Silva Pedro & Gorete Ribeiro Macedo, 2013. "Scientific collaboration in biotechnology: the case of the northeast region in Brazil," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 95(2), pages 571-592, May.
    14. Omwoyo Bosire Onyancha & Jan Resenga Maluleka, 2011. "Knowledge production through collaborative research in sub-Saharan Africa: how much do countries contribute to each other’s knowledge output and citation impact?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 87(2), pages 315-336, May.
    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. Matthew Harsh & Ravtosh Bal & Alex Weryha & Justin Whatley & Charles C. Onu & Lisa M. Negro, 2021. "Mapping computer science research in Africa: using academic networking sites for assessing research activity," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(1), pages 305-334, January.
    2. Hamdi A. Al-Jamimi & Galal M. BinMakhashen & Lutz Bornmann, 2022. "Use of bibliometrics for research evaluation in emerging markets economies: a review and discussion of bibliometric indicators," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(10), pages 5879-5930, October.
    3. Camil Demetrescu & Irene Finocchi & Andrea Ribichini & Marco Schaerf, 2022. "On computer science research and its temporal evolution," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(8), pages 4913-4938, August.
    4. Thiago H. P. Silva & Alberto H. F. Laender & Clodoveu A. Davis & Ana Paula Couto Silva & Mirella M. Moro, 2017. "A profile analysis of the top Brazilian Computer Science graduate programs," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 113(1), pages 237-255, October.
    5. Bárbara S. Lancho-Barrantes & Francisco J. Cantú-Ortiz, 2019. "Science in Mexico: a bibliometric analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 118(2), pages 499-517, February.
    6. Qikai Cheng & Jiamin Wang & Wei Lu & Yong Huang & Yi Bu, 2020. "Keyword-citation-keyword network: a new perspective of discipline knowledge structure analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(3), pages 1923-1943, September.
    7. Dixit, Aasheesh & Jakhar, Suresh Kumar, 2021. "Airport capacity management: A review and bibliometric analysis," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    8. Barbara S. Lancho-Barrantes & Hector G. Ceballos-Cancino & Francisco J. Cantu-Ortiz, 2021. "Comparing the efficiency of countries to assimilate and apply research investment," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 55(4), pages 1347-1369, August.
    9. Xiaozan Lyu & Rodrigo Costas, 2021. "Studying the characteristics of scientific communities using individual-level bibliometrics: the case of Big Data research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(8), pages 6965-6987, August.

    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. Vivek Kumar Singh & Ashraf Uddin & David Pinto, 2015. "Computer science research: the top 100 institutions in India and in the world," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 104(2), pages 529-553, August.
    2. Vivek Kumar Singh & Sumit Kumar Banshal & Khushboo Singhal & Ashraf Uddin, 2015. "Scientometric mapping of research on ‘Big Data’," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 105(2), pages 727-741, November.
    3. Wieslawa Gryncewicz & Monika Sitarska-Buba, 2021. "Leading Research by Institutions and Authors: A Modern Research Analysis," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(3B), pages 1012-1026.
    4. Dalibor Fiala & Gabriel Tutoky, 2017. "Computer Science Papers in Web of Science: A Bibliometric Analysis," Publications, MDPI, vol. 5(4), pages 1-16, September.
    5. Weishu Liu & Mengdi Gu & Guangyuan Hu & Chao Li & Huchang Liao & Li Tang & Philip Shapira, 2014. "Profile of developments in biomass-based bioenergy research: a 20-year perspective," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 99(2), pages 507-521, May.
    6. B. M. Gupta & Avinash Kshitij & Charu Verma, 2011. "Mapping of Indian computer science research output, 1999–2008," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 86(2), pages 261-283, February.
    7. Lili Yuan & Yanni Hao & Minglu Li & Chunbing Bao & Jianping Li & Dengsheng Wu, 2018. "Who are the international research collaboration partners for China? A novel data perspective based on NSFC grants," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(1), pages 401-422, July.
    8. Matthew Harsh & Ravtosh Bal & Alex Weryha & Justin Whatley & Charles C. Onu & Lisa M. Negro, 2021. "Mapping computer science research in Africa: using academic networking sites for assessing research activity," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(1), pages 305-334, January.
    9. Abramo, Giovanni & D’Angelo, Ciriaco Andrea, 2018. "Who benefits from a country’s scientific research?," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 12(1), pages 249-258.
    10. Wang, L., 2014. "The structure and comparative advantages of China's scientific research: Quantitative and qualitative perspectives," MERIT Working Papers 2014-028, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    11. Jiang Li & Yueting Li, 2015. "Patterns and evolution of coauthorship in China’s humanities and social sciences," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(3), pages 1997-2010, March.
    12. Jia Zheng & Zhi-yun Zhao & Xu Zhang & Dar-zen Chen & Mu-hsuan Huang, 2014. "International collaboration development in nanotechnology: a perspective of patent network analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 98(1), pages 683-702, January.
    13. Xianwen Wang & Shenmeng Xu & Zhi Wang & Lian Peng & Chuanli Wang, 2013. "International scientific collaboration of China: collaborating countries, institutions and individuals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 95(3), pages 885-894, June.
    14. Camil Demetrescu & Irene Finocchi & Andrea Ribichini & Marco Schaerf, 2022. "On computer science research and its temporal evolution," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(8), pages 4913-4938, August.
    15. Manjari Manisha & G. Mahesh, 2014. "Bibliometric characteristics of champion works of China and India," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 98(2), pages 1101-1111, February.
    16. Jan Resenga Maluleka & Omwoyo Bosire Onyancha & Isola Ajiferuke, 2016. "Factors influencing research collaboration in LIS schools in South Africa," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 107(2), pages 337-355, May.
    17. Kim, Jinseok & Diesner, Jana, 2015. "The effect of data pre-processing on understanding the evolution of collaboration networks," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 9(1), pages 226-236.
    18. Toluwase Asubiaro, 2019. "How collaboration type, publication place, funding and author’s role affect citations received by publications from Africa: A bibliometric study of LIS research from 1996 to 2015," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 120(3), pages 1261-1287, September.
    19. Mingyang Wang & Zhenyu Wang & Guangsheng Chen, 2019. "Which can better predict the future success of articles? Bibliometric indices or alternative metrics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 119(3), pages 1575-1595, June.
    20. Slavo Radosevic & Esin Yoruk, 2014. "Are there global shifts in the world science base? Analysing the catching up and falling behind of world regions," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 101(3), pages 1897-1924, December.

    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:105:y:2015:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-015-1654-y. 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.