Complexity-based quality indicators for human and social capital in science and research: the case of Serbian Homeland versus Diaspora

Abstract

We developed quality indicators model for measuring human and social capital in the scientific and research communities, grounded in the complexity science. The model was implemented in two phases: in the first, we gathered initial data through the questionnaire designed for scientists and researchers; in the second, we fully analyzed all the respondents, according to the model—this included analysis of their CVs, with wider research of their data in all publicly available sources. The research sample included 444 PhD holders, 202 in Homeland and 242 in Diaspora, all of them being of Serbian origin. Among the most significant findings are the facts that Serbian PhDs from its Diaspora, compared with those living in the Homeland, published 4 times more papers, 6 times more in journals with IF; were cited 15 times more, in 14 times more documents; had 13 times higher value of overall IF; had both 5 times higher ResearchGate scores and the h-index values. In achieving all these, they perceived their work in science and research in more entrepreneurial manner and used collaboration strategies: on average, they had 4 times more co-authors than PhDs in the Homeland. On the other hand, PhDs working and living in the Homeland (Serbia) demonstrated higher devotion to the interests of wider communities they belonged to, considered succession planning as more important, and generally felt more afraid of risks that current trends of our civilization, especially regarding the lack of sustainable management, may lead our entire humanity to some form of collapse.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Fig. 1

References

  1. Anand, H., & Haberer, J. (1978). Scientific and political orientation of American scientists. Research Policy,7, 27–46.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Archambault, É., Vignola-Gagné, É., Côté, G., Larivière, V., & Gingrasb, Y. (2006). Benchmarking scientific output in the social sciences and humanities: The limits of existing databases. Scientometrics,68, 329–342.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Auriol, L., Schaaper, M., & Felix, B. (2012). Mapping careers and mobility of doctorate holders: Draft guidelines, model questionnaire and indicatorsThird Edition. OECD science, Technology and Industry Working Papers, 2012/07, OECD Publishing.

  4. Bagatelas, W. T., & Sergi, Bs. (2004). The Balkans ‘brain drain’—Its meaning and implications. SEER: Journal for Labour and Social Affairs in Eastern Europe,6, 7–12.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Bar-Ilan, J. (2010). Citations to the “Introduction to informetrics” indexed by WOS, Scopus and Google Scholar. Scientometrics,82, 495–506.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Barjak, F., & Robinson, S. (2008). International collaboration, mobility and team diversity in the life sciences: impact on research performance. Social Geography,3, 23–36.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Basu, A. (2012). Some differences in research publications of Indian scientists in India and the diaspora, 1986–2010. Scientometrics,94, 1007–1019.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Baudrillard, J. (1991). The precession of simulacra. In D. Hlynka & J. C. Belland (Eds.), Paradigms regained: The uses of illuminative, semiotic, and post-modern criticism as modes of inquiry in educational technology: A book of readings. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Baudrillard, J. (1995). Simulacra and simulation, histories of cultural materialism (The Body, in theory). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Becker, G. (1962). Investment in human capital: a theoretical analysis. Journal of Political Economy,70, 9–49.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Becker, G. (1994). Human capital: A theoretical and empirical analysis with special reference to education. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Ben-Porath, Y. (1980). The F-connection: Families, friends and firms and the organization of exchange. Population and Development Review,6, 1–30.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Benz, A. O. (2005). Culture in a new scientific worldview. Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies,17, 123–138.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Boa, K. D., & Bowman, R. M., Jr. (2006). Faith has its reasons: Integrative approaches to defending the christian faith. Downers Grove: Green Press.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Bourdieu, P. (1983). Ökonomisches Kapital, kulturelles Kapital, soziales Kapital. In R. Kreckel (Ed.), Soziale Ungleichheiten (Soziale Welt, Sonderheft 2). Goettingen: Otto Schartz & Co.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Bowles, S., & Gintis, H. (1975). The problem with human capital theory—A marxian critique. American Economic Review,65, 74–82.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Boyle, M., & Kitchin, R. (2008). Towards an Irish diaspora strategy: A position paper. NIRSA Working Paper 37.

  18. Bozeman, B., & Corley, E. (2004). Scientists’ collaboration strategies: Implications for scientific and technical human capital. Research Policy,33, 599–616.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Bozeman, B., Dietz, J. S., & Gaughan, M. (2001). Scientific and technical human capital: An alternative model for research evaluation. International Journal of Technology Management,22, 716–740.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Brinkerhoff, J. (2004). Digital diasporas and international development: Afghan-Americans and the reconstruction of Afghanistan. Public Administration and Development,24, 397–413.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Brinkerhoff, J. (2011). David and Goliath: Diaspora organizations as partners in the development industry. Public Administration and Development,31, 37–49.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Brown, M. G. (1996). Keeping the score: Using the right metrics to drive world-class performance. New York: Quality Resources.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Campbell, S. M., Braspenning, J., Hutchison, A., & Marshall, M. (2002). Research methods used in developing and applying quality indicators in primary care. Quality and Safety in Health Care,11, 358–364.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Canibano, C., & Bozeman, B. (2009). Curriculum vitae method in science policy and research evaluation: the state-of-the-art. Research Evaluation,18, 86–94.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Carroll, R. (2003). At the border between chaos and order: What psychotherapy and neuroscience have in common. In J. Corrigall & H. Wilkinson (Eds.), Revolutionary connections: Psychotherapy and neuroscience. London: Karnac.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Carvalho, J. J. (2006). Overview of the structure of a scientific worldview. Journal of Religion & Science,41, 113–124.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Chattopadhyay, S. (2012). Education and economics: Disciplinary evolution and policy discourse. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Colbert, B. A. (2004). The complex resource-based view: Implications for theory and practice in strategic human resource management. Academy of Management Review,3, 341–358.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology,Supplement 94, S95–S120.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Conti, T. (2006). Quality thinking and systems thinking. The TQM Magazine,18, 297–308.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Cross, N. (1993). Science and design methodology: A review. Research in Engineering Design,5, 63–69.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Djuric, M., & Filipovic, J. (2015). Human and social capital management based on complexity paradigm: Implications for various stakeholders and sustainable development. Sustainable Development,23, 343–354.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Djuric, M., Filipovic, J., & Komazec, S. (2019). Reshaping the future of social metrology: Utilizing quality indicators to develop complexity-based scientific human and social capital measurement model. Social Indicators Research. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-019-02217-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Dodani, S., & LaPorte, R. E. (2005). Brain drain from developing countries: How can brain drain be converted into wisdom gain? Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine,98, 487–491.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Ellison, N. B., Steinfeld, C., & Lampe, C. (2007). The benefits of Facebook’friends’: Social capital and college students’ use of online social network sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication,12, 1143–1168.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Engels, T. C. E., Ossenblok, T. L. B., & Spruyt, E. H. J. (2012). Changing publication patterns in the Social Sciences and Humanities, 2000–2009. Scientometrics,93, 373–390.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Falagas, M. E., Pitsouni, E. I., Malietzis, G. A., & Pappas, G. (2008). Comparison of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar: strengths and weaknesses. The FASEB Journal,22, 338–342.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Fell, C. B., & König, C. J. (2016). Is there a gender difference in scientific collaboration? A scientometric examination of co-authorships among industrial–organizational psychologists. Scientometrics,108, 113–141.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Filipovic, J. (2012). Management of a diaspora virtual university as a complex organization: serbian diaspora virtual university: An emerging leadership of a nation. Saarbrücken: LAP Lambert Academic Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Filipović, J., Devjak, S., & Putnik, G. (2012). Knowledge based economy: The role of expert diaspora. Panoeconomicus,59, 369–386.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Finardi, U., & Buratti, A. (2016). Scientific collaboration framework of BRICS countries: An analysis of international coauthorship. Scientometrics,109, 433–446.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Franceschini, F., Galetto, M., & Maisano, D. (2007). Management by measurement: Designing key indicators and performance measurement systems. Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Frolov, I. T. (2003). Vvedenie v filosofiyu, 3-e izd. prerab. i dop. Moscow: Respublika.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Fukuyama, F. (2000). Social capital and civil society. In Working Paper WP/00/74. Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund.

  45. Gallopin, G. (2002). Planning for resilience: Scenarios, surprises, and branch points. In L. H. Gunderson & C. S. Holling (Eds.), Panarchy: Understanding transformation in human and nature systems. Washington, DC: Island Press.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Gerson, L. L. (1964). The hyphenate in recent american politics and diplomacy. Lawrence, KS: University of Kansas Press.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Glänzel, W. (2001a). Coauthorship patterns and trends in the sciences (1980–1998): A bibliometric study with implications for database indexing and search strategies. Library Trends,50, 461–473.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Glänzel, W. (2001b). National characteristics in international scientific co-authorship relations. Scientometrics,51, 69–115.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Glänzel, W., & Schlemmer, B. (2007). National research profiles in a changing Europe (1983–2003) An exploratory study of sectoral characteristics in the Triple Helix. Scientometrics,70, 267–275.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Glänzel, W., & Schubert, A. (2004). Analysing scientific networks through co-authorship. In H. F. Moed, W. Glänzel, & U. Schmoch (Eds.), Handbook of quantitative science and technology research. Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Godin, B., & Dore, C. (2005). Measuring the impacts of science: Beyond the economic dimension. INRS: Montreal.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Goudard, M., & Lubrano, M. (2010). Human capital, social capital and scientific production. Paper presented at the conference “Measurement and evaluation of academic research performance: Policy implications”, Portugal.

  53. Grant, A. M., & Wade-Benzoni, K. A. (2009). The hot and cool of death awareness at work: Mortality cues, aging, and self-protective and prosocial motivations. Academy of Management Review,34, 600–622.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Hargreaves, A., & Fink, D. (2004). The seven principles of sustainable leadership. Educational Leadership,61, 8–13.

    Google Scholar 

  55. Harris, S. (2005). Rethinking academic identities in neo-liberal times. Teaching in Higher Education,10, 421–433.

    Google Scholar 

  56. Harzing, A.-W., & Alakangas, S. (2016). Google Scholar, Scopus and the Web of Science: A longitudinal and cross-disciplinary comparison. Scientometrics,106, 787–804.

    Google Scholar 

  57. Hemlin, S. (2006). Creative knowledge environments for research groups in biotechnology. The influence of leadership and organizational support in universities and business companies. Scientometrics,67, 121–142.

    Google Scholar 

  58. Imran, S., Alam, K., & Beaumont, N. (2014). Reinterpreting the definition of sustainable development for a more ecocentric reorientation. Sustainable Development,22, 134–144.

    Google Scholar 

  59. Ionescu, D. (2006). Engaging diasporas as development partners for home and destination countries: Challenges for policymakers. Geneva: International Organization for Migration.

    Google Scholar 

  60. ISO. (2018). ISO 30414:2018—Human resource management—Guidelines for internal and external human capital reporting. Geneva: International Organization for Standardization.

    Google Scholar 

  61. Jonkers, K., & Tijssen, R. (2008). Chinese researchers returning home: Impacts of international mobility on research collaboration and scientific productivity. Scientometrics,77, 309–333.

    Google Scholar 

  62. Kaufmann, S. (1995). At home in the universe: The search for laws of self-organization and complexity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  63. Kazlauskiene, A., & Rinkevicius, L. (2006). Lithuanian “brain drain” causes: Push and pull factors. Engineering Economics,46, 27–37.

    Google Scholar 

  64. Klein, C. (2004). Crouching tiger, hidden dragon: A diasporic reading. Cinema Journal,43, 18–42.

    Google Scholar 

  65. Kuhn, L. (2008). Complexity and educational research: A critical reflection. Educational Philosophy and Theory,40, 177–189.

    Google Scholar 

  66. Kuhn, L., & Woog, R. (2005). Vortical postmodern ethnography: Introducing a complexity approach to systemic social theorizing. System Research and Behavioral Science,22, 139–150.

    Google Scholar 

  67. Kuznetsov, Y. N. (2006). Diaspora networks and the international migration of skills. Washington, DC: The World Bank.

    Google Scholar 

  68. Kwon, D.-B. (2009). Human capital and its measurement. Paper presented to The 3rd OECD World Forum on “Statistics, Knowledge and Policy”, Busan, Korea.

  69. Kyriacou, G. A. (1991). Level and growth effects of human capital: a cross country study of the convergence hypothesis. Working Paper 91-26. New York: C.V. Starr Centre.

  70. Lazega, E., Mounier, L., Jourda, M.-T., & Stofer, R. (2006). Organizational vs. personal social capital in scientists’ performance: A multi-level network study of elite French cancer researchers (1996–1998). Scientometrics,67, 27–44.

    Google Scholar 

  71. Levin, S. (1999). Fragile dominion: Complexity and the commons. Reading, PA: Perseus.

    Google Scholar 

  72. Leydesdorff, L., & Meyer, M. (2007). The scientometrics of a Triple Helix of university-industry-government relations (Introduction to the topical issue). Scientometrics,70, 207–222.

    Google Scholar 

  73. Leydesdorff, L., & Van Den Besselaar, P. (1997). Scientometrics and communication theory: Towards theoretically informed indicators. Scientometrics,38, 155–174.

    Google Scholar 

  74. Lin, N. (2000). Inequality in social capital. Contemporary Sociology,29, 785–795.

    Google Scholar 

  75. Lukovits, I., & Vinkler, P. (1995). Correct credit distribution: A model for sharing credit among coauthors. Social Indicators Research,36, 91–98.

    Google Scholar 

  76. Lyotard, J. F. (1993). The postmodern explained: Correspondence, 1982–1985. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

    Google Scholar 

  77. Maddocks, J., & Beaney, M. (2002). See the invisible and intangible. Knowledge Management, March 2002, 16–17.

  78. Maggino, F. (2017a). Dealing with syntheses in a system of indicators. In F. Maggino (Ed.), Complexity in society: From indicators construction to their synthesis. Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  79. Maggino, F. (2017b). Developing indicators and managing the complexity. In F. Maggino (Ed.), Complexity in society: From indicators construction to their synthesis. Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  80. Magner, T. (2006). Digraphia in the territories of the Croats and Serbs. International Journal of the Sociology of Language,2001, 11–26.

    Google Scholar 

  81. Marmolejo-Leyva, R., Perez-Angon, M. A., & Russell, J. M. (2015). Mobility and international collaboration: Case of the Mexican scientific diaspora. PLoS ONE,10, e0126720.

    Google Scholar 

  82. Matthews, W. (1952). The latinisation of cyrillic characters. The Slavonic and East European Review,30, 531–548.

    Google Scholar 

  83. McNeill, W. H. (1998). History and the scientific worldview. History & Theory,37, 1–13.

    Google Scholar 

  84. Mendoza, P. (2012). The role of context in academic capitalism: The industry-friendly department case. The Journal of Higher Education,83, 26–48.

    Google Scholar 

  85. Milosevic, D., Filipovic, J., Djuric, M., & Dobrota, M. (2014). Benchmarking diaspora performance as an input for policy makers: A comparative statistical analysis. Current Science,107, 1253–1259.

    Google Scholar 

  86. Monteleone, S., & Torrisi, B. (2012). Geographical analysis of the academic brain drain in Italy. Scientometrics,93, 413–430.

    Google Scholar 

  87. Muscanell, N., & Utz, S. (2017). Social networking for scientists: An analysis on how and why academics use ResearchGate. Online Information Review,41, 744–759.

    Google Scholar 

  88. Naugle, D. K. (2002). Worldview: The history of a concept. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  89. Nederhof, A. J. (2006). Bibliometric monitoring of research performance in the social sciences and the humanities: A Review. Scientometrics,66, 81–100.

    Google Scholar 

  90. NSF. (1957). Basic research: A national resource. NSF 57-35. Washington: U. S. Government Printing Office.

  91. OECD. (2005). New fields of science classification of the Frascati manual. OECD NESTI, June 2005.

  92. Ostriker, J. P., Kuh, C. V., & Voytuk, J. A. (2003). Assessing research-doctorate programs: A methodology study. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  93. Palmberg, K. (2009). Complex adaptive systems as metaphors for organizational management. Learning Organization,16, 483–498.

    Google Scholar 

  94. Palmer, G. B. (1996). Toward a theory of cultural linguistics. Austin: University of Texas Press.

    Google Scholar 

  95. Pavitt, K. (1998). The social shaping of the national science base. Research Policy,27, 793–805.

    Google Scholar 

  96. Plant, R. W., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and the effects of selfconsciousness, self-awareness and ego-involvement: An investigation of internally controlling styles. Journal of Personality,53, 435–449.

    Google Scholar 

  97. Putnam, R. D. (1995). Tuning in, tuning out: The strange disappearance of social capital in America. Political Science and Politics,28, 664–683.

    Google Scholar 

  98. Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. New York: Simon and Schuster.

    Google Scholar 

  99. Ribeiro, L. C., Rapini, M. S., Silva, L. A., & Albuquerque, E. M. (2017). Growth patterns of the network of international collaboration in science. Scientometrics,114, 159–179.

    Google Scholar 

  100. Roeser, R. W., & Peck, S. C. (2009). An education in awareness: self, motivation, and self-regulated learning in contemplative perspective. Educational Psychologist,44, 119–136.

    Google Scholar 

  101. Rowlands, I., Nicholas, D., Russell, B., Canty, N., & Watkinson, A. (2011). Social media use in the research workflow. Learned Publishing,24, 183–195.

    Google Scholar 

  102. Sabatier, P. (1986). Top-down and bottom-up approaches to implementation research: A critical analysis and suggested synthesis. Journal of Public Policy,6, 21–48.

    Google Scholar 

  103. Salter, A. J., & Martin, B. R. (2001). The economic benefits of publicly funded basic research: A critical review. Research Policy,30, 509–532.

    Google Scholar 

  104. Schubert, A., & Braun, T. (1986). Relative indicators and relational charts for comparative assessment of publication output and citation impact. Scientometrics,9, 281–291.

    Google Scholar 

  105. Schubert, A., & Braun, T. (1990). International collaboration in the sciences, 1981–1985. Scientometrics,19, 3–10.

    Google Scholar 

  106. Schuller, T. (2007). Reflections on the use of social capital. Review of Social Economy,65, 11–28.

    Google Scholar 

  107. Schutlz, T. (1961). Investment in human capital. The American Economic Review,51, 1–17.

    Google Scholar 

  108. Sciacovelli, L., & Plebani, M. (2009). The IFCC Working Group on laboratory errors and patient safety. Clinica Chimica Acta,404, 79–85.

    Google Scholar 

  109. Shain, Y. (1999). Marketing the American creed abroad: Diasporas in the U.S. and their homelands. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  110. Sharma, D. (2014). Bridging human capital and social capital theories. In M. Russ (Ed.), Value creation, reporting, and signaling for human capital and human assets. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  111. Sheffer, G. (1986). Modern diasporas in international politics. London: Croom Helm.

    Google Scholar 

  112. Shin, J. C., & Cummings, W. K. (2010). Multilevel analysis of academic publishing across disciplines: research preference, collaboration, and time on research. Scientometrics,85, 581–594.

    Google Scholar 

  113. Skute, I. (2019). Opening the black box of academic entrepreneurship: A bibliometric analysis. Scientometrics,120, 237–265.

    Google Scholar 

  114. Smith, R. C. (2003). Diasporic membership in historical perspective: Comparative insights from the Mexican, Italian and Polish Cases. The International Migration Review,37, 724–759.

    Google Scholar 

  115. Stacey, R. D. (1992). Managing the unknowable: Strategic boundaries between order and chaos in organizations. Hoboken: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  116. Stark, B. (2009). A case study of complex adaptive systems theorySustainable global governance: The singular challenge of the twenty-first century. In WISDOM RISC Research Paper 5. Slovenia: University of Ljubljana.

  117. Stephan, P. (1996). The economics of science. Journal of Economic Literature,34, 1199–1235.

    Google Scholar 

  118. Taguchi, G. (1987). System of experimental design: Engineering methods to optimize quality and minimize costs. White Plains, NY: Kraus International Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  119. Tang, E., Liu, F., Sun, J., & Haider, Z. (2013). The relationship between scientists and science: Knowledge-based innovation output. Scientometrics,98, 1827–1835.

    Google Scholar 

  120. UNI. (2003). UNI 11097: Quality management—Quality indicators and quality management synoptical tables—General guidelines. Milano: Ente Nazionale Italiano di Unificazione.

    Google Scholar 

  121. Van Eijnatten, F. M. (2004). Chaordic systems thinking. The Learning Organization,11, 430–449.

    Google Scholar 

  122. Van Raan, A. F. J. (1997). Scientometrics: State-of-the-art. Scientometrics,38, 205–218.

    Google Scholar 

  123. Velema, T. A. (2012). The contingent nature of brain gain and brain circulation: Their foreign context and the impact of return scientists on the scientific community in their country of origin. Scientometrics,93, 893–913.

    Google Scholar 

  124. Waldrop, M. M. (1992). Complexity: The emerging science at the edge of order and chaos. New York: Simon and Schuster.

    Google Scholar 

  125. Walter, S., Schmidt, A., & Walter, A. (2016). Patenting rationales of academic entrepreneurs in weak and strong organizational regimes. Research Policy,45, 533–545.

    Google Scholar 

  126. WCED. (1987). Towards sustainable development. In Our common future. Chapter 2. Retrieved July 3, 2019 from, http://www.un-documents.net/wced-ocf.htm.

  127. Werbner, P. (2002). The place which is diaspora: Citizenship, religion and gender in the making of chaordic transnationalism. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies,28, 119–133.

    Google Scholar 

  128. Westermann, O., Ashby, J., & Pretty, J. (2005). Gender and social capital: The importance of gender differences for the maturity and effectiveness of natural resource management groups. World Development,33, 1783–1799.

    Google Scholar 

  129. Wilson, B. G. (1997). The postmodern paradigm. In C. Dills & A. Romoszowski (Eds.), Instructional development paradigms (pp. 297–309). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  130. Winkler, D. R. (1987). Screening models and education. In G. Psacharopoulos (Ed.), Economics of education: Research and studies. Oxford: Pergamon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  131. Winter, R. (2009). Academic manager or managed academic? Academic identity schisms in higher education. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management,31, 121–131.

    Google Scholar 

  132. Woolcock, M., & Narayan, D. (2000). Social capital: Implications for development theory, research, and policy. World Bank Research Observer,15, 225–249.

    Google Scholar 

  133. Yang, K., & Meho, L. I. (2006). Citation analysis: A comparison Of Google Scholar, Scopus, and Web of Science. Paper presented at the 69th annual meeting of the American society for information science and technology (ASIST), USA.

  134. Zhelyazkova, A., Damjanovski, I., Nechev, Z., & Schimmelfennig, F. (2019). European Union Conditionality in the Western Balkans: External Incentives and Europeanisation. In J. Džankić, S. Keil, & M. Kmezić (Eds.), The Europeanisation of the Western Balkans. New Perspectives on South-East Europe. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mladen Djuric.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Djuric, M., Dobrota, M. & Filipovic, J. Complexity-based quality indicators for human and social capital in science and research: the case of Serbian Homeland versus Diaspora. Scientometrics 124, 303–328 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03428-2

Download citation

Keywords

  • Quality indicators
  • Complexity science
  • Human capital
  • Social capital
  • Scientific and research communities
  • PhD holders