IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v74y2008i1d10.1007_s11192-008-0107-2.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Knowledge network hubs and measures of research impact, science structure, and publication output in nanostructured solar cell research

Author

Listed:
  • Katarina Larsen

    (KTH — The Royal Institute of Technology)

Abstract

This study on co-authorship networks in the area of nanostructured solar cells aims to contribute to a further understanding of the use of research evaluation measures of science output, impact and structure in an emerging research field. The study incorporates quantitative bibliometric methods of analysis and social network analysis in combination with a qualitative case study research approach. Conclusions drawn from the results emphasise, firstly, the importance of distinguishing between early and later phases of the evolution of a novel research field, and secondly, the application of a systemic view on learning processes and knowledge diffusion in a science-based technology field.

Suggested Citation

  • Katarina Larsen, 2008. "Knowledge network hubs and measures of research impact, science structure, and publication output in nanostructured solar cell research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 74(1), pages 123-142, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:74:y:2008:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-008-0107-2
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-008-0107-2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-008-0107-2
    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/s11192-008-0107-2?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. Meyer, Martin, 2000. "Does science push technology? Patents citing scientific literature," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 409-434, March.
    2. Chaomei Chen & Diana Hicks, 2004. "Tracing knowledge diffusion," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 59(2), pages 199-211, February.
    3. Paul A. David & Louise C. Keely, 2003. "The Economics of Scientific Research Coalitions: Collaborative Network Formation in the Presence of Multiple Funding Agencies," Chapters, in: Aldo Geuna & Ammon J. Salter & W. Edward Steinmueller (ed.), Science and Innovation, chapter 8, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    4. Michael L. Darby & Lynne G. Zucker, 2010. "Grilichesian Breakthroughs: Inventions of Methods of Inventing and Firm Entry in Nanotechnology," NBER Chapters, in: Contributions in Memory of Zvi Griliches, pages 143-164, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Clara Calero & Renald Buter & Cecilia Cabello Valdés & Ed Noyons, 2006. "How to identify research groups using publication analysis: an example in the field of nanotechnology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 66(2), pages 365-376, February.
    6. Keith Pavitt, 1998. "Do patents reflect the useful research output of universities?," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 7(2), pages 105-111, August.
    7. Joachim Schummer, 2004. "Multidisciplinarity, interdisciplinarity, and patterns of research collaboration in nanoscience and nanotechnology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 59(3), pages 425-465, March.
    8. Heinze, Thomas, 2006. "Emergence of nano S&T in Germany: network formation and company performance," Discussion Papers "Innovation Systems and Policy Analysis" 7, Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research (ISI).
    9. Aldo Geuna & Ammon J. Salter & W. Edward Steinmueller (ed.), 2003. "Science and Innovation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2831.
    10. Marianne Gauffriau & Peder Olesen Larsen, 2005. "Counting methods are decisive for rankings based on publication and citation studies," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 64(1), pages 85-93, July.
    11. Henry Small, 1973. "Co‐citation in the scientific literature: A new measure of the relationship between two documents," Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 24(4), pages 265-269, July.
    12. Pavitt, Keith, 1984. "Sectoral patterns of technical change: Towards a taxonomy and a theory," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 13(6), pages 343-373, December.
    13. Martin Meyer, 2000. "What is Special about Patent Citations? Differences between Scientific and Patent Citations," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 49(1), pages 93-123, August.
    14. Orsenigo, L. & Pammolli, F. & Riccaboni, Massimo, 2001. "Technological change and network dynamics: Lessons from the pharmaceutical industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 485-508, March.
    15. Katz, J. Sylvan & Martin, Ben R., 1997. "What is research collaboration?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 1-18, March.
    16. Wolfgang Glänzel & Koenraad Debackere & Bart Thijs & András Schubert, 2006. "A concise review on the role of author self-citations in information science, bibliometrics and science policy," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 67(2), pages 263-277, 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. Mu-Hsuan Huang & Huei-Ru Dong & Dar-Zen Chen, 2013. "The unbalanced performance and regional differences in scientific and technological collaboration in the field of solar cells," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 94(1), pages 423-438, January.
    2. Yan Yan & Jiancheng Guan, 2018. "How multiple networks help in creating knowledge: evidence from alternative energy patents," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 115(1), pages 51-77, April.
    3. Yu-Chun Chen & Hsiao-Yun Yeh & Jau-Ching Wu & Ingo Haschler & Tzeng-Ji Chen & Thomas Wetter, 2011. "Taiwan’s National Health Insurance Research Database: administrative health care database as study object in bibliometrics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 86(2), pages 365-380, February.
    4. Sanz-Casado, Elias & Lascurain-Sánchez, Maria Luisa & Serrano-Lopez, Antonio Eleazar & Larsen, Birger & Ingwersen, Peter, 2014. "Production, consumption and research on solar energy: The Spanish and German case," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 733-744.
    5. Ba, Zhichao & Liang, Zhentao, 2021. "A novel approach to measuring science-technology linkage: From the perspective of knowledge network coupling," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 15(3).
    6. Yanqing Shi & Si Chen & Lele Kang, 2021. "Which questions are valuable in online Q&A communities? A question’s position in a knowledge network matters," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(10), pages 8239-8258, October.
    7. Alfonso Ávila-Robinson & Kumiko Miyazaki, 2013. "Evolutionary paths of change of emerging nanotechnological innovation systems: the case of ZnO nanostructures," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 95(3), pages 829-849, June.

    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. R. Karpagam & S. Gopalakrishnan & M. Natarajan & B. Ramesh Babu, 2011. "Mapping of nanoscience and nanotechnology research in India: a scientometric analysis, 1990–2009," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 89(2), pages 501-522, November.
    2. Chin-Chang Tsai & Elizabeth A. Corley & Barry Bozeman, 2016. "Collaboration experiences across scientific disciplines and cohorts," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 108(2), pages 505-529, August.
    3. Guang Yu & Ming-Yang Wang & Da-Ren Yu, 2010. "Characterizing knowledge diffusion of Nanoscience & Nanotechnology by citation analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 84(1), pages 81-97, July.
    4. Park, Inchae & Triulzi, Giorgio & Magee, Christopher L., 2022. "Tracing the emergence of new technology: A comparative analysis of five technological domains," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    5. Seongkyoon Jeong & Jong-Chan Kim & Jae Young Choi, 2015. "Technology convergence: What developmental stage are we in?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 104(3), pages 841-871, September.
    6. Wang, Jean J. & Ye, Fred Y., 2021. "Probing into the interactions between papers and patents of new CRISPR/CAS9 technology: A citation comparison," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 15(4).
    7. Elise Bassecoulard & Alain Lelu & Michel Zitt, 2007. "Mapping nanosciences by citation flows: A preliminary analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 70(3), pages 859-880, March.
    8. Bar-Ilan, Judit, 2008. "Informetrics at the beginning of the 21st century—A review," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 2(1), pages 1-52.
    9. Sung, Hui-Yun & Wang, Chun-Chieh & Huang, Mu-Hsuan & Chen, Dar-Zen, 2015. "Measuring science-based science linkage and non-science-based linkage of patents through non-patent references," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 9(3), pages 488-498.
    10. Stefano Scarazzati & Lili Wang, 2019. "The effect of collaborations on scientific research output: the case of nanoscience in Chinese regions," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 121(2), pages 839-868, November.
    11. Martin Meyer & Kevin Grant & Piera Morlacchi & Dagmara Weckowska, 2014. "Triple Helix indicators as an emergent area of enquiry: a bibliometric perspective," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 99(1), pages 151-174, April.
    12. Philip Shapira & Jan Youtie & Alan L. Porter, 2010. "The emergence of social science research on nanotechnology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 85(2), pages 595-611, November.
    13. Sujit Bhattacharya & Martin Meyer, 2003. "Large firms and the science-technology interface Patents, patent citations, and scientific output of multinational corporations in thin films," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 58(2), pages 265-279, October.
    14. Arnold Verbeek & Koenraad Debackere & Marc Luwel, 2003. "Science cited in patents: A geographic "flow" analysis of bibliographic citation patterns in patents," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 58(2), pages 241-263, October.
    15. Yong-Gil Lee & Jeong-Dong Lee & Yong-Il Song & Se-Jun Lee, 2007. "An in-depth empirical analysis of patent citation counts using zero-inflated count data model: The case of KIST," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 70(1), pages 27-39, January.
    16. Roderik Ponds, 2009. "The limits to internationalization of scientific research collaboration," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 34(1), pages 76-94, February.
    17. Martin Meyer, 2007. "What do we know about innovation in nanotechnology? Some propositions about an emerging field between hype and path-dependency," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 70(3), pages 779-810, March.
    18. Heinze, Thomas, 2006. "Emergence of nano S&T in Germany: network formation and company performance," Discussion Papers "Innovation Systems and Policy Analysis" 7, Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research (ISI).
    19. Guan-Can Yang & Gang Li & Chun-Ya Li & Yun-Hua Zhao & Jing Zhang & Tong Liu & Dar-Zen Chen & Mu-Hsuan Huang, 2015. "Using the comprehensive patent citation network (CPC) to evaluate patent value," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 105(3), pages 1319-1346, December.
    20. Su, Hsin-Ning & Moaniba, Igam M., 2017. "Investigating the dynamics of interdisciplinary evolution in technology developments," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 12-23.

    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:spr:scient:v:74:y:2008:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-008-0107-2. 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.