1,720,952 research outputs found
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Get PDFThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
Variations on the Author
Get PDF“Variations on the Author” discusses two of Eduardo Coutinho’s recent films (Um Dia na Vida, from 2010, and Últimas Conversas, posthumously released in 2015) and their contribution to the general question of documentary authorship. The director’s filmography is characterized by a consistent yet self-effacing form of authorial self-inscription: Coutinho often features as an interviewer that rather than express opinions propels discourses; an interviewer that is good at listening. This mode of self-inscription characterizes him as an author who is not expressive but who is nonetheless markedly present on the screen. In Um Dia na Vida, however, Coutinho is completely absent form the image, while Últimas Conversas, on the contrary, includes a confessional prologue that moves the director from the margins to the center of his films. This article examines the ways in which these works stand out in the filmography of a director who offers new insights into the notion of cinematic authorship
Appliquée et collaborative ? : essais sur l'évolution de la recherche scientifique d'entreprise
No full textLa science d'entreprise, largement entendue comme la recherche scientifique menée par des entreprises commerciales, constitue une contribution clé à l'innovation. Certaines preuves récentes ont documenté son déclin quantitatif depuis son apogée à la fin des années 1960 / début des années 1970, principalement en raison de la réduction de la taille ou de la fermeture de grands laboratoires d'entreprise (Arora et al., 2018 ; Tijssen, 2004). Malgré ces éléments de preuve, il existe encore de nombreuses zones d'ombre concernant l'étendue et les caractéristiques de ce déclin, car il n'est pas clair si les entreprises se désengagent simplement de la recherche scientifique ou si elles en modifient simplement l'organisation, en passant d'activités de R&D intégrées verticalement à un système plus dynamique de recherche interne appliquée et de collaborations avec les universités.À partir d'un jeu de données original, j'examine ces évolutions et d'autres caractéristiques qualitatives de la science d'entreprise aux États-Unis des années 1980 jusqu'en 2014. Le jeu de données provient de trois sources différentes. Premièrement, toutes les publications scientifiques provenant de Web of Science (WoS), deuxièmement, des données d'entreprise et des brevets provenant de l'édition américaine d'Orbis, et enfin, des citations de littérature non brevetée (NPL) dans la base de données “reliance on science” de Marx & Fuegi (2020).J'aborde trois questions connexes. La première concerne l'augmentation éventuelle du nombre de publications collaboratives entre universités et entreprises, ainsi que les facteurs qui les motivent. Je montre que l'augmentation des collaborations s'accompagne d'une diminution de l'implication directe des entreprises dans la recherche scientifique, mais que cette corrélation est influencée par des facteurs liés à la nature de la science, plutôt que par des considérations commerciales des entreprises. Plus précisément, la probabilité de collaboration entre les entreprises et les universités augmente dans les domaines à évolution rapide, et leur relation dépend de la taille de l'entreprise.La deuxième question s’intéresse au fait de savoir si la science d'entreprise est devenue plus appliquée et moins fondamentale. Je constate que la science d'entreprise est progressivement devenue plus appliquée et moins fondamentale que la science académique, après avoir contrôlé par les domaines et les revues, indépendamment de l'âge et de la taille des entreprises.La troisième question concerne la possibilité que le déclin de la science d'entreprise soit dû, au moins en partie, au court-termisme induit par la pression des actionnaires. À cette fin, j'étudie l'impact des introductions en bourse (IPO) sur les activités de recherche des entreprises. Pour ce faire, j'utilise des données sur la population des entreprises déposant une IPO entre 1996 et 2010 avec au moins une publication ou un brevet. Je trouve un effet positif des IPO tant sur les publications d'entreprise que sur les publications collaboratives. Je ne constate aucun effet sur les citations ultérieures des publications, le caractère fondamental ou appliqué. J'explique ce résultat par un accès accru des entreprises au capital et l'arrivée de nouveaux scientifiques.En conclusion, l'analyse réalisée dans cette thèse éclaire l'évolution de la science d'entreprise de 1980 à 2014, contribuant ainsi à la littérature récente sur le déclin de la science d'entreprise. Le déclin des publications d'entreprise s'accompagne d'une augmentation notable des collaborations entre universités et entreprises. De plus, les entreprises se sont tournées vers une science plus appliquée et moins fondamentale, ce qui soutient l'hypothèse d'un court-termisme accru. Cependant, les preuves de la pression des actionnaires sont moins prononcées, car les entreprises qui se rendent publiques intensifient leurs efforts de recherche au lieu de les restreindre.Corporate science, broadly intended as scientific research conducted by business companies, is a key input to innovation worldwide. Some recent evidence has documented its quantitative decline since its heyday in the late 1960s / early 1970s, as measured by the shrinking share of scientific publications by business-affiliated authors, mostly due to the downsizing or closure of large corporate laboratories (Arora, Belenzon, and Patacconi 2018; Tijssen 2004). Despite this evidence, there are still many shadow zones on both the extent and features of this decline, as it is not clear whether firms are simply disengaging from scientific research or whether they are just changing their organisation by moving from vertically integrated R&D activities towards a more dynamic system of applied in-house research and collaborations with universities.Based on an original dataset, I examine this and other qualitative features of the evolution of corporate science in the United States from the 1980s until recent years. The dataset results from three different data sources. First, all scientific publications from Web of Science (WoS) with at least a US-based author from 1980 to 2014. Second company data and patents from the US edition of Orbis, a large business information database by Bureau van Dijk. Last, non-patent literature (NPL) citations from worldwide patents to scientific publications, as collected in the “reliance on science” database by Marx & Fuegi (2020).I tackle three related questions. The first question addresses the increase in university-industry collaborative publications and the factors driving this trend. I show that the increase in collaborations is accompanied by a decrease in direct corporate involvement in scientific research, but this correlation is influenced by factors related to the nature of science, such as the increasing division of scientific labour and the “burden of knowledge”, rather than commercial considerations of the companies. Specifically, the probability of firms collaborating with universities increases in fast-moving fields, and their relationship depends on firm size.The second question concerns whether corporate science has become more applied, as suggested by the literature, and whether this has come at the expense of its ambition and scope, that is, whether it has also become less basic. I find that corporate science has progressively become more applied and less basic than academic science, after controlling for fields and journals and regardless of the firms’ age and size.The third question concerns whether corporate science's decline may be due, at least in part, to short-termism induced by shareholders' pressure. To this end, I investigate the impact of initial public offerings (IPOs) on firms' research activities. To do so, I use data on the population of firms filing for an IPO from 1996 to 2010 with at least one publication or patent. The results show a positive effect of IPOs on both corporate and collaborative publications. I find no effect on publications' forward citations, basicness or appliedness. I explain this result with firms' increased access to capital and the inflow of new scientists.In conclusion, the analysis carried out in this thesis sheds light on the evolution of corporate science from 1980 to 2014, contributing to the recent literature on the decline of corporate science. The decline in corporate publications is accompanied by a notable increase in university-industry collaborations, signalling a change in companies' approach towards scientific research. Furthermore, companies have moved towards more applied and less basic science, supporting the hypothesis of increased short-termism. However, the evidence for shareholder pressure is less pronounced as companies that go public intensify their research efforts instead of constraining them
Appropriate Similarity Measures for Author Cocitation Analysis
Get PDFWe provide a number of new insights into the methodological discussion about author cocitation analysis. We first argue that the use of the Pearson correlation for measuring the similarity between authors’ cocitation profiles is not very satisfactory. We then discuss what kind of similarity measures may be used as an alternative to the Pearson correlation. We consider three similarity measures in particular. One is the well-known cosine. The other two similarity measures have not been used before in the bibliometric literature. Finally, we show by means of an example that our findings have a high practical relevance.information science;Pearson correlation;cosine;similarity measure;author cocitation analysis
Applied and collaborative ? : essays on the changing nature of corporate scientific research
No full textCorporate science, broadly intended as scientific research conducted by business companies, is a key input to innovation worldwide. Some recent evidence has documented its quantitative decline since its heyday in the late 1960s / early 1970s, as measured by the shrinking share of scientific publications by business-affiliated authors, mostly due to the downsizing or closure of large corporate laboratories (Arora, Belenzon, and Patacconi 2018; Tijssen 2004). Despite this evidence, there are still many shadow zones on both the extent and features of this decline, as it is not clear whether firms are simply disengaging from scientific research or whether they are just changing their organisation by moving from vertically integrated R&D activities towards a more dynamic system of applied in-house research and collaborations with universities.Based on an original dataset, I examine this and other qualitative features of the evolution of corporate science in the United States from the 1980s until recent years. The dataset results from three different data sources. First, all scientific publications from Web of Science (WoS) with at least a US-based author from 1980 to 2014. Second company data and patents from the US edition of Orbis, a large business information database by Bureau van Dijk. Last, non-patent literature (NPL) citations from worldwide patents to scientific publications, as collected in the “reliance on science” database by Marx & Fuegi (2020).I tackle three related questions. The first question addresses the increase in university-industry collaborative publications and the factors driving this trend. I show that the increase in collaborations is accompanied by a decrease in direct corporate involvement in scientific research, but this correlation is influenced by factors related to the nature of science, such as the increasing division of scientific labour and the “burden of knowledge”, rather than commercial considerations of the companies. Specifically, the probability of firms collaborating with universities increases in fast-moving fields, and their relationship depends on firm size.The second question concerns whether corporate science has become more applied, as suggested by the literature, and whether this has come at the expense of its ambition and scope, that is, whether it has also become less basic. I find that corporate science has progressively become more applied and less basic than academic science, after controlling for fields and journals and regardless of the firms’ age and size.The third question concerns whether corporate science's decline may be due, at least in part, to short-termism induced by shareholders' pressure. To this end, I investigate the impact of initial public offerings (IPOs) on firms' research activities. To do so, I use data on the population of firms filing for an IPO from 1996 to 2010 with at least one publication or patent. The results show a positive effect of IPOs on both corporate and collaborative publications. I find no effect on publications' forward citations, basicness or appliedness. I explain this result with firms' increased access to capital and the inflow of new scientists.In conclusion, the analysis carried out in this thesis sheds light on the evolution of corporate science from 1980 to 2014, contributing to the recent literature on the decline of corporate science. The decline in corporate publications is accompanied by a notable increase in university-industry collaborations, signalling a change in companies' approach towards scientific research. Furthermore, companies have moved towards more applied and less basic science, supporting the hypothesis of increased short-termism. However, the evidence for shareholder pressure is less pronounced as companies that go public intensify their research efforts instead of constraining them.La science d'entreprise, largement entendue comme la recherche scientifique menée par des entreprises commerciales, constitue une contribution clé à l'innovation. Certaines preuves récentes ont documenté son déclin quantitatif depuis son apogée à la fin des années 1960 / début des années 1970, principalement en raison de la réduction de la taille ou de la fermeture de grands laboratoires d'entreprise (Arora et al., 2018 ; Tijssen, 2004). Malgré ces éléments de preuve, il existe encore de nombreuses zones d'ombre concernant l'étendue et les caractéristiques de ce déclin, car il n'est pas clair si les entreprises se désengagent simplement de la recherche scientifique ou si elles en modifient simplement l'organisation, en passant d'activités de R&D intégrées verticalement à un système plus dynamique de recherche interne appliquée et de collaborations avec les universités.À partir d'un jeu de données original, j'examine ces évolutions et d'autres caractéristiques qualitatives de la science d'entreprise aux États-Unis des années 1980 jusqu'en 2014. Le jeu de données provient de trois sources différentes. Premièrement, toutes les publications scientifiques provenant de Web of Science (WoS), deuxièmement, des données d'entreprise et des brevets provenant de l'édition américaine d'Orbis, et enfin, des citations de littérature non brevetée (NPL) dans la base de données “reliance on science” de Marx & Fuegi (2020).J'aborde trois questions connexes. La première concerne l'augmentation éventuelle du nombre de publications collaboratives entre universités et entreprises, ainsi que les facteurs qui les motivent. Je montre que l'augmentation des collaborations s'accompagne d'une diminution de l'implication directe des entreprises dans la recherche scientifique, mais que cette corrélation est influencée par des facteurs liés à la nature de la science, plutôt que par des considérations commerciales des entreprises. Plus précisément, la probabilité de collaboration entre les entreprises et les universités augmente dans les domaines à évolution rapide, et leur relation dépend de la taille de l'entreprise.La deuxième question s’intéresse au fait de savoir si la science d'entreprise est devenue plus appliquée et moins fondamentale. Je constate que la science d'entreprise est progressivement devenue plus appliquée et moins fondamentale que la science académique, après avoir contrôlé par les domaines et les revues, indépendamment de l'âge et de la taille des entreprises.La troisième question concerne la possibilité que le déclin de la science d'entreprise soit dû, au moins en partie, au court-termisme induit par la pression des actionnaires. À cette fin, j'étudie l'impact des introductions en bourse (IPO) sur les activités de recherche des entreprises. Pour ce faire, j'utilise des données sur la population des entreprises déposant une IPO entre 1996 et 2010 avec au moins une publication ou un brevet. Je trouve un effet positif des IPO tant sur les publications d'entreprise que sur les publications collaboratives. Je ne constate aucun effet sur les citations ultérieures des publications, le caractère fondamental ou appliqué. J'explique ce résultat par un accès accru des entreprises au capital et l'arrivée de nouveaux scientifiques.En conclusion, l'analyse réalisée dans cette thèse éclaire l'évolution de la science d'entreprise de 1980 à 2014, contribuant ainsi à la littérature récente sur le déclin de la science d'entreprise. Le déclin des publications d'entreprise s'accompagne d'une augmentation notable des collaborations entre universités et entreprises. De plus, les entreprises se sont tournées vers une science plus appliquée et moins fondamentale, ce qui soutient l'hypothèse d'un court-termisme accru. Cependant, les preuves de la pression des actionnaires sont moins prononcées, car les entreprises qui se rendent publiques intensifient leurs efforts de recherche au lieu de les restreindre
Dispelling the Myths Behind First-author Citation Counts
Get PDFWe conducted a full-scale evaluative citation analysis study of scholars in the XML research field to explore just how different from each other author rankings resulting from different citation counting methods actually are, and to demonstrate the capability of emerging data and tools on the Web in supporting more realistic citation counting methods. Our results contest some common arguments for the continued
use of first-author citation counts in the evaluation of scholars, such as high correlations between author rankings by first-author citation counts and other citation
counting methods, and high costs of using more realistic citation counting methods that are not well-supported by the ISI databases. It is argued that increasingly available digital full text research papers make it possible for citation analysis studies to go beyond what the ISI databases have directly supported and to employ more
sophisticated methods
koamabayili/VECTRON-author-checklist: VECTRON author checklist
No full textWe have done our best to complete the author checklist relating to the use of animals in the hut study. Note that the objective for the hut study was to evaluate the IRS treatment applications for residual efficacy against Anopheles mosquitoes, including the local An. coluzzii mosquito population. Cows were only used to attract mosquitoes into the huts and no tests were carried out directly on the cows. The author checklist is intended for use with studies where experiments are carried out on animals, which is why we have had such difficulty in completing this for the hut study, as many of the questions do not relate to how the cows were used
Author-wise bibliometric analysis based on entropy.
No full textAuthor-wise bibliometric analysis based on entropy.</p
- …
