IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v88y2011i2d10.1007_s11192-011-0406-x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The field-standardized average impact of national research systems compared to world average: the case of Italy

Author

Listed:
  • Giovanni Abramo

    (National Research Council of Italy
    University of Rome “Tor Vergata”)

  • Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo

    (University of Rome “Tor Vergata”)

  • Fulvio Viel

    (University of Rome “Tor Vergata”)

Abstract

The study presents a time-series analysis of field-standardized average impact of Italian research compared to the world average. The approach is purely bibliometric, based on census of the full scientific production from all Italian public research organizations active in 2001–2006 (hard sciences only). The analysis is conducted both at sectorial level (aggregated, by scientific discipline and for single fields within disciplines) and at organizational level (by type of organization and for single organizations). The essence of the methodology should be replicable in all other national contexts. Its offers support to policy-makers and administrators for strategic analysis aimed at identifying strengths and weaknesses of national research systems and institutions.

Suggested Citation

  • Giovanni Abramo & Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo & Fulvio Viel, 2011. "The field-standardized average impact of national research systems compared to world average: the case of Italy," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 88(2), pages 599-615, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:88:y:2011:i:2:d:10.1007_s11192-011-0406-x
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-011-0406-x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-011-0406-x
    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/s11192-011-0406-x?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. Giovanni Abramo & Ciriaco Andrea D'Angelo & Flavia Di Costa, 2008. "Assessment of sectoral aggregation distortion in research productivity measurements," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 17(2), pages 111-121, June.
    2. 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.
    3. Loet Leydesdorff & Caroline Wagner, 2009. "Is the United States losing ground in science? A global perspective on the world science system," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 78(1), pages 23-36, January.
    4. David A. King, 2004. "The scientific impact of nations," Nature, Nature, vol. 430(6997), pages 311-316, July.
    5. Giovanni Abramo & Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo, 2011. "National-scale research performance assessment at the individual level," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 86(2), pages 347-364, February.
    6. Thed N. Van Leeuwen & Martijn S. Visser & Henk F. Moed & Ton J. Nederhof & Anthony F. J. Van Raan, 2003. "The Holy Grail of science policy: Exploring and combining bibliometric tools in search of scientific excellence," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 57(2), pages 257-280, June.
    7. Dosi, Giovanni & Llerena, Patrick & Labini, Mauro Sylos, 2006. "The relationships between science, technologies and their industrial exploitation: An illustration through the myths and realities of the so-called `European Paradox'," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(10), pages 1450-1464, December.
    8. Giovanni Abramo & Ciriaco Andrea D'Angelo & Flavia Di Costa, 2010. "Testing the trade-off between productivity and quality in research activities," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 61(1), pages 132-140, January.
    9. Giovanni Abramo & Ciriaco Andrea D'Angelo & Flavia Di Costa, 2010. "Testing the trade‐off between productivity and quality in research activities," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 61(1), pages 132-140, January.
    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. Beibei Niu & Song Hong & Jiefei Yuan & Sha Peng & Zhen Wang & Xu Zhang, 2014. "Global trends in sediment-related research in earth science during 1992–2011: a bibliometric analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 98(1), pages 511-529, January.
    2. Ting Liu & Liu Tang, 2020. "Open innovation from the perspective of network embedding: knowledge evolution and development trend," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(2), pages 1053-1080, August.
    3. Yi Cui & Jian Mou & Yanping Liu, 2018. "Knowledge mapping of social commerce research: a visual analysis using CiteSpace," Electronic Commerce Research, Springer, vol. 18(4), pages 837-868, December.
    4. Dan Liu & Siqi Che & Wenzhong Zhu, 2022. "Visualizing the Knowledge Domain of Academic Mobility Research from 2010 to 2020: A Bibliometric Analysis Using CiteSpace," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(1), pages 21582440211, January.
    5. Yanwen Wang & Song Hong & Yifei Wang & Xi Gong & Chao He & Zhendong Lu & F. Benjamin Zhan, 2019. "What is the difference in global research on Central Asia before and after the collapse of the USSR: a bibliometric analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 119(2), pages 909-930, May.
    6. Yue Guiling & Siti Aisyah Panatik & Mohammad Saipol Mohd Sukor & Noraini Rusbadrol & Li Cunlin, 2022. "Bibliometric Analysis of Global Research on Organizational Citizenship Behavior From 2000 to 2019," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(1), pages 21582440221, February.

    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. 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.
    2. Leydesdorff, Loet & Wagner, Caroline, 2009. "Macro-level indicators of the relations between research funding and research output," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 353-362.
    3. Domingo Docampo & Lawrence Cram, 2019. "Highly cited researchers: a moving target," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 118(3), pages 1011-1025, March.
    4. Rodríguez-Navarro, Alonso & Brito, Ricardo, 2018. "Technological research in the EU is less efficient than the world average. EU research policy risks Europeans’ future," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 12(3), pages 718-731.
    5. Gregory J Hather & Winston Haynes & Roger Higdon & Natali Kolker & Elizabeth A Stewart & Peter Arzberger & Patrick Chain & Dawn Field & B Robert Franza & Biaoyang Lin & Folker Meyer & Vural Ozdemir & , 2010. "The United States of America and Scientific Research," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 5(8), pages 1-9, August.
    6. Abramo, Giovanni & Cicero, Tindaro & D’Angelo, Ciriaco Andrea, 2012. "The dispersion of research performance within and between universities as a potential indicator of the competitive intensity in higher education systems," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 6(2), pages 155-168.
    7. Albarrán, Pedro & Crespo, Juan A. & Ortuño, Ignacio, 2009. "A comparison of the scientific performance of the U. S. and the European Union at the turn of the XXI century," UC3M Working papers. Economics we095534, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid. Departamento de Economía.
    8. Albarrán, Pedro & Ortuño, Ignacio & Ruiz-Castillo, Javier, 2011. "High- and low-impact citation measures: Empirical applications," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 5(1), pages 122-145.
    9. Bar-Ilan, Judit, 2008. "Informetrics at the beginning of the 21st century—A review," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 2(1), pages 1-52.
    10. repec:cte:werepe:11672 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Abramo, Giovanni & D’Angelo, Ciriaco Andrea, 2016. "A comparison of university performance scores and ranks by MNCS and FSS," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(4), pages 889-901.
    12. 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.
    13. Alonso Rodríguez-Navarro & Francis Narin, 2018. "European Paradox or Delusion—Are European Science and Economy Outdated?," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 45(1), pages 14-23.
    14. Huang, Ding-wei, 2016. "Positive correlation between quality and quantity in academic journals," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 329-335.
    15. Štěpán Jurajda & Stanislav Kozubek & Daniel Münich & Samuel Škoda, 2017. "Scientific publication performance in post-communist countries: still lagging far behind," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 112(1), pages 315-328, July.
    16. Patrick Herron & Aashish Mehta & Cong Cao & Timothy Lenoir, 2016. "Research diversification and impact: the case of national nanoscience development," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(2), pages 629-659, November.
    17. Yves Gingras & Mahdi Khelfaoui, 2018. "Assessing the effect of the United States’ “citation advantage” on other countries’ scientific impact as measured in the Web of Science (WoS) database," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 114(2), pages 517-532, February.
    18. Daraio, Cinzia & Bonaccorsi, Andrea & Simar, Léopold, 2015. "Rankings and university performance: A conditional multidimensional approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 244(3), pages 918-930.
    19. 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.
    20. Lutz Bornmann & Werner Marx, 2014. "How to evaluate individual researchers working in the natural and life sciences meaningfully? A proposal of methods based on percentiles of citations," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 98(1), pages 487-509, January.
    21. Giovanni Abramo & Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo & Francesco Rosati, 2014. "Relatives in the same university faculty: nepotism or merit?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 101(1), pages 737-749, October.

    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:88:y:2011:i:2:d:10.1007_s11192-011-0406-x. 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.