Scientometrics

, Volume 114, Issue 3, pp 933–950 | Cite as

The relation between the quality of research, researchers’ experience, and their academic environment

  • Thor-Erik Sandberg Hanssen
  • Finn Jørgensen
  • Berner Larsen
Article
  • 299 Downloads

Abstract

This article investigates to what extent researchers’ experience and the solidity of their academic environment influence the quality of their research. The hypotheses are derived from the assumptions that experience matters for quality research and that there are great intellectual synergies to be obtained from interacting with many colleagues who are active researchers. All articles published between 2000 and 2006 in five leading transportation journals are included in the analysis, and their research quality is measured by the number of times each article is cited by August 2016. Controlling for other factors influencing citations, such as article age and the number of references, the most important finding is that both experience and academic environment matter for performing quality research. When the authors’ experience, measured by the number of previous publications, increases by 1% from its average level, their published articles are expected to garner 0.31% more citations. Moreover, when the research activity at the unit to which the authors are affiliated, measured by the unit’s total number of publications, increases by 1% from its average level, the number of times their articles are cited will increase by 0.19%. This signals that, relatively speaking, the researchers’ own experience and merits mean more than the academic environment with regard to producing high-quality research. The above results enable us to discuss how researchers’ experience can compensate for working in less active academic communities holding research quality constant.

Keywords

Research Research quality Citations Department size Experience 

References

  1. Aagaard, K., Bloch, C., Schneider, J. W., Henriksen, D., Ryan, T. K., & Lauridsen, P. S. (2014). Evaluation of the Norwegian publication indicator—English summary. Aarhus: Danish Centre for Studies in Research and Research Policy, Aarhus University.Google Scholar
  2. Abramo, G., & D’Angelo, C. A. (2015). The relationship between the number of authors of a publication, its citations and the impact factor of the publishing journal: Evidence from Italy. Journal of Informetrics, 9(4), 746–761.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2015.07.003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Aksnes, D. W. (2003). Characteristics of highly cited papers. Research Evaluation, 12(3), 159–170.  https://doi.org/10.3152/147154403781776645.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Beaver, D. D. (2004). Does collaborative research have greater epistemic authority? Scientometrics, 60(3), 399–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Becker, G. S. (1964). Human capital: A theoretical and empirical analysis with special reference to education. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  6. Bergh, D. D., Perry, J., & Hanke, R. (2006). Some predictors of SMJ article impact. Strategic Management Journal, 27(1), 81–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bertocchi, G., Gambardella, A., Jappelli, T., Nappi, C. A., & Peracchi, F. (2015). Bibliometric evaluation vs. informed peer review: Evidence from Italy. Research Policy, 44(2), 451–466.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2014.08.004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bonaccorsi, A., & Daraio, C. (2003). Age effects in scientific productivity: The case of the Italian National Research Council (CNR). Scientometrics, 58(1), 49–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bornmann, L., & Daniel, H. (2008). What do citation counts measure? A review of studies on citing behavior. Journal of Documentation, 64(1), 45–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Diamond, A. M. (1986). What is a citation worth? The Journal of Human Resources, 21(2), 200–215.  https://doi.org/10.2307/145797.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Didegah, F., & Thelwall, M. (2013). Determinants of research citation impact in nanoscience and nanotechnology. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 64(5), 1055–1064.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Ebadi, A., & Schiffauerova, A. (2015). How to become an important player in scientific collaboration networks? Journal of Informetrics, 9(2015), 809–825.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Fox, J. (2016). Applied regression analysis and generalized linear models. Beverly Hills: Sage.Google Scholar
  14. Garfield, E. (1962). Can citation indexing be automated? Essays of an Information Scientist, 1, 84–90.Google Scholar
  15. Garfield, E. (1998). Random thoughts on citationology its theory and practice. Scientometrics, 43(1), 69–76.  https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02458396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gazni, A., & Didegah, F. (2011). Investigating different types of research collaboration and citation impact: A case study of Harvard University’s publications. Scientometrics, 87(2), 251–265.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-011-0343-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Habibzadeh, F., & Yadollahie, M. (2010). Are shorter article titles more attractive for citations? Crosssectional study of 22 scientific journals. Croatian Medical Journal, 51(2), 165–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hair, J. F. (1998). Multivariate data analysis. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  19. Hanssen, T.-E. S., & Jørgensen, F. (2014). Citation counts in transportation research. European Transport Research Review, 6(2), 205–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hanssen, T.-E. S., & Jørgensen, F. (2015). The value of experience in research. Journal of Informetrics, 9(1), 16–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hensher, D. A., & Greene, W. H. (2003). The mixed logit model: The state of practice. Transportation, 30(2), 133–176.  https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1022558715350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Horta, H., Cattaneo, M., & Meoli, M. (2016). PhD funding as a determinant of PhD and career research performance. Studies in Higher Education.  https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2016.1185406.Google Scholar
  23. Jamali, H. R., & Nikzad, M. (2011). Article title type and its relation with the number of downloads and citations. Scientometrics, 88(2), 653–661.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Judge, T. A., Cable, D. M., Colbert, A. E., & Rynes, S. L. (2007). What causes a management article to be cited-article author, or journal? Academy of Management Journal, 50(3), 491–506.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kenna, R., & Berche, B. (2011). Critical mass and the dependency of research quality on group size. Scientometrics, 86(2), 527–540.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kunnskapsdepartementet. (2014). Langtidsplan for forskning og høyere utdanning 2015–2024. Meld. St. 7 (2015–2024) Oslo.Google Scholar
  27. Kyvik, S. (1995). Are big university departments better than small ones? Higher Education, 30(3), 295–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lariviere, V., Gingras, Y., Sugimoto, C. R., & Tsou, A. (2015). Team size matters: Collaboration and scientific impact since 1900. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 66(7), 1323–1332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Lokker, C., McKibbon, K. A., McKinlay, R. J., Wilczynski, N. L., & Haynes, R. B. (2008). Prediction of citation counts for clinical articles at two years using data available within three weeks of publication: Retrospective cohort study. BMJ, 336(7645), 655–657.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Martin, B. R., & Irvine, J. (1983). Assessing basic research. Research Policy, 12(2), 61–90.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0048-7333(83)90005-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Neuhaus, C., & Daniel, H. (2008). Data sources for performing citation analysis: An overview. Journal of Documentation, 64(2), 193–210.  https://doi.org/10.1108/00220410810858010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Nicholson, W. (1998). Microeconomic theory: Basic principles and extensions. Forth Worth: Dryden Press.Google Scholar
  33. NOU: 2016: 3. (2016). Ved et vendepunkt: Fra ressursøkonomi til kunnskapsøkonomi. Produktivitetskommisjonens andre rapport, Oslo.Google Scholar
  34. Onodera, N., & Yoshikane, F. (2015). Factors affecting citation rates of research articles. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 66(4), 739–764.  https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Paiva, C. E., Lima, J. P. S. N., & Paiva, B. S. R. (2012). Articles with short titles describing the results are cited more often. Clinics, 67(5), 509–513.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Patterson, M. S., & Harris, S. (2009). The relationship between reviewers’ quality-scores and number of citations for papers published in the journal physics in medicine and biology from 2003–2005. Scientometrics, 80(2), 343–349.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-008-2064-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Perry, M., & Reny, P. J. (2016). How to count citations if you must. American Economic Review, 106(9), 2722–2741.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Ringelmann, M. (1913). Recherches sur les moteurs animés: Travails de l`homme. Annales del Institut National Agronomique, 2, 2–39.Google Scholar
  39. Ronda-Pupo, G. A., & Katz, J. S. (2016). The power-law relationship between citation-based performance and collaboration in management journals: A scale-independent approach. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 67(10), 2565–2572.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. SCImago. (2015). SJR—SCImago Journal & Country Rank. http://www.scimagojr.com. Accessed January 20, 2015.
  41. Smithson, M., & Merkle, E. C. (2013). Generalized linear models for categorical and continuous limited dependent variables. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group.MATHGoogle Scholar
  42. Stankiewicz, R. (1979). The size and age of Swedish academic research groups and their scientific performance. In F. M. Andrews (Ed.), Scientific productivity. The effectiveness of research groups in six countries. Cambridge/Paris: Cambridge University Press/UNESCO.Google Scholar
  43. Steiner, I. D. (1972). Group process and productivity (social psychology). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  44. Stremersch, S., Verniers, I., & Verhoef, P. C. (2007). The quest for citations: Drivers of article impact. Journal of Marketing, 71(3), 171–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Subotic, S., & Mukherjee, B. (2014). Short and amusing: The relationship between title characteristics, downloads, and citations in psychology articles. Journal of Information Science, 40(1), 115–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Tregenza, T. (1997). Darwin a better name than Wallace? Nature, 385(6616), 480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Vabø, A., & Kårstein, A. (2014). Robuste fagmiljøer. En litteraturgjennomgang. Oslo: Nordic Institute for Studies in Innovation, Research and Education.Google Scholar
  48. Vanclay, J. K. (2013). Factors affecting citation rates in environmental science. Journal of Informetrics, 7(2), 265–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Vintzileos, A. M., & Ananth, C. V. (2010). How to write and publish an original research article. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 202(4), 344.e341–344.e346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Vygotsky, L. (1962). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Wallmark, J. T., Eckerstein, S., Langered, B., & Holmqvist, H. E. S. (1973). Increase in efficiency with size of research teams. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, EM-20(3), 80–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Walters, G. D. (2006). Predicting subsequent citations to articles published in twelve crime-psychology journals: Author impact versus journal impact. Scientometrics, 69(3), 499–510.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Webster, G. D., Jonason, P. K., & Schember, T. O. (2009). Hot topics and popular papers in evolutionary psychology: Analyses of title words and citation counts in evolution and human behavior, 1979–2008. Evolutionary Psychology, 7(3), 348–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Winston, C. (1985). Conceptual developments in the economics of transportation: An interpretive survey. Journal of Economic Literature, 23(1), 57–94.Google Scholar
  55. Woelert, P. (2013). The ‘economy of memory’: Publications, citations, and the paradox of effective research governance. Minerva, 51(3), 341–362.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-013-9232-z.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Wuchty, S., Jones, B. F., & Uzzi, B. (2007). The increasing dominance of teams in production of knowledge. Science, 316(5827), 1036–1039.  https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1136099.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Yitzhaki, M. (2002). Relation of the title length of a journal article to the length of the article. Scientometrics, 54(3), 435–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Thor-Erik Sandberg Hanssen
    • 1
  • Finn Jørgensen
    • 1
  • Berner Larsen
    • 1
  1. 1.Business SchoolNord UniversityBodøNorway

Personalised recommendations