Bibliometrics as a Tool for Analysis of R&D Impacts

  • Julia Melkers
Chapter

Abstract

The evaluation of research and development activities is one of the most challenging, and significant issues in R&D managment today. The last few decades have seen considerable efforts in the development and testing of various measures and quantitative techniques in order to aid in project selection, project appraisal, and measurement of research outputs. These techniques are distributed across a methodological spectrum, ranging from the qualitative case study to the highly quantitative econometric analyses.

Keywords

Science Citation Index Citation Analysis Citation Count Bibliometric Analysis Scientific Output 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Bibliography

  1. Bozeman, B. 1990. “Peer review and evaluation of RD impacts.” Paper in monograph series, “Techniques for evaluating RD impacts” for the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority.Google Scholar
  2. Broadus, R.N. 1987. “Toward a Definition of Bibliometrics” in Scientometrics 12:373–377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Callon, M., Courtial, W.A., Turner, S., amd S.Bauin 1983. “From translation oproblematic network: an introduction to co-word analysis.” Social Science Information, 23.Google Scholar
  4. Ciba Foundation Conference, 1989. The Evaluation of Scientific Research. ( New York: John Wiley and Sons. )Google Scholar
  5. Cole, S. 1989. “Citations and the Evaluation of Individual Scientists” in Trends in Biochemical Sciences January, Vo1,14.Google Scholar
  6. Collins, P. and Wyatt, S., 1988. “Citations in patents to the basic research literature.” Research Policy. 17.Google Scholar
  7. Cozzens, S. 1989. “What do Citations Count?: The Rhetoric-First Model” in Scientometrics 15:437–447CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cozzens, S., 1989. Literature-Based Data in Research Evaluation:A Manager’s Guide to Bibliometrics (Report to NSF). ( Troy, NY: Department of Science and Technology Studies. )Google Scholar
  9. Crane, D. 1972. Invisible Colleges ( Chicago: Chicago University Press. )Google Scholar
  10. Cronin, B., 1984 The Citation Process ( Taylor Graham, London. )Google Scholar
  11. Elkana, Y., et al (eds.) 1978. Toward A Metric of Science: The Advent of Science Indicators ( New York: John Wiley and Sons. )Google Scholar
  12. Ezrahi, Y., 1978. “Political Contexts of Science Indicators” in Y. Elkana, et al (eds.) Toward A Metric of Science: The Advent of Science Indicators ( New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1978 ).Google Scholar
  13. Franklin, J.J. and R. Johnston 1988. “Co-citation bibliometric modeling as a tool for ST and RD management: Issues, applications, and developments.” in A.F.J. VanRaan (ed) Handbook of Quantitative Studies of Science and Technology ( North-Holland: Elsevier Publishers. )Google Scholar
  14. Garfield, E. 1979. “Is Citation Analysis a Legitimate Evaluation Tool?” in Scientometrics 1:359–375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Garfield, E., I.H. Sher, and R.J. Torpie 1964. The Use of Citation Data for Writing the History of Science ( Philadelphia, Institute for Scientific Information. )Google Scholar
  16. Garfield, E., Malin, M.V., and Small, H. 1978. “Citation Data as Science Indicators.” in The Metric of Science: The Advent of Science Indicators (Ed. Y. Elkana et. al.) ( New York: John Wiley and Sons. )Google Scholar
  17. Garfield, E., 1979. Citation Indexing. ( New York: Wiley Publishing. )Google Scholar
  18. Griliches, Z. 1978. “Economic Problems of Measuring Returns on Research.” in The Metric of Science: The Advent of Science Indicators (Ed. Y. Elkana et. al.) ( New York: John Wiley and Sons. )Google Scholar
  19. Healey, P., H. Rothman, and P. Hoch 1986. “An experiment in science mapping for research planning.” Research Policy 15: 233–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Irvine, J. and B. Martin 1989. “International Comparisons of Scientific Performance Revisited” in Scientometrics 17:369–392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Irvine, J. and Martin, B.R. 1989. “Intenational comparisons of scientific performance revisited.” Scientometrics 15,5–6:369–392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Irvine, J., 1983. “Assessing basic research: Some partial indicators of scientific progress in radio astronomy. Research Policy. 12: 61–90.Google Scholar
  23. Irvine, J., 1989. “Evaluation of scientific institutions: lessons from a bibliomentric study of UK universities” in The Evaluation of Scientific Research. (Eds., D. Evered and S. Harnett.) Ciba Foundation Conference. ( New York: John Wiley and Sons. )Google Scholar
  24. Leydesdorff, L. 1989. “The Science Citation Index and the Measurement of National Performance in Terms of Numbers of Scientific Publications” in Scientometrics 17: 111–120.Google Scholar
  25. Lindsey, D. 1989. “Using Citation Counts as a Measure of Quality in Science: Measuring Whats Measureable Rather than What’s Valid” in Scientometrics 15: 189–203.Google Scholar
  26. Menard, H.W. 1971. Science: Growth and Change ( Cambridge: Harvard University Press. )Google Scholar
  27. MacRoberts, Michael H. and Barbara R. MacRoberts 1989. “Citation Analysis and the Science Policy Arena” in Trends in Biochemical Sciences January, 14.Google Scholar
  28. Martin, B. and J. Irvine 1983. “Assessing Basic Research: Some Partial Indicators of Scientific Progress in Radio Astronomy” in Research Policy 12: 61–90.Google Scholar
  29. Moed, H.F. and A.F.J. Van Raan, 1988. “Indicators of research performance: applications in university research performance.” in A.F.J. VanRaan (ed) Handbook of Quantitative Studies of Science and Technology ( North-Holland: Elsevier Publishers. )Google Scholar
  30. 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 14: 131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Mulkay, M.J. 1977. “Sociology of the scientific research community.” in Science, Technology and Society: A Cross Disciplinary Perspective Ed. Spiegel-Rosling, I. and Price, D. de Solla ( Beverly Hills: Sage Publications. )Google Scholar
  32. Mullins, N., W. Snizek, and K. Oehler, 1988. “The structural analysis of a scientific paper.” in A.F.J. VanRaan (ed) Handbook of Quantitative Studies of Science and Technology ( North-Holland: Elsevier Publishers. )Google Scholar
  33. Narin F. and Rozek, R.P. 1988. “Bibliometric analysis of U.S. pharmaceutical industry research performance.” Research Policy, 17: 139–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Narin, F. 1986. Evaluatative Bibliometrics: The Use of Citation Analysis in the Evaluation of Scientific Activity. ( New Jersey: Computer Horizons. )Google Scholar
  35. Narin, F., 1976. Evaluative Bibliometrics. ( Cherry Hill: Computer Horizons. )Google Scholar
  36. Narin, F. and E. Noma 1987. “Patents as Indicators of Corporate Technological Strength” in Research Policy 16:143–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Narin, F. and D. Olivastro, 1988. “Technology indicators based on patents and patent citations.” in A.F.J. VanRaan (ed) Handbook of Quantitative Studies of Science and Technology ( North-Holland: Elsevier Publishers. )Google Scholar
  38. National Science Foundation 1983. Research Planning, Management and Evaluation. Discussion Areas, Background Materials Sessions One and Two. September 25–27, Washington D.C.Google Scholar
  39. Nederhof, A.J. 1988. “The validity and reliability of evaluationof scholarly performance.” in A.F.J. VanRaan (ed) Handbook of Quantitative Studies of Science and Technology ( North-Holland: Elsevier Publishers. )Google Scholar
  40. Office of Technical Assessment, 1986. Research Funding As an Investment: Can We Measure the Returns? - A Technical Memorandum 1986. (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Congress, O.T.A., OTA-TM-SET-36, April, 1986).Google Scholar
  41. Plomp, R. 1989. “Statistical Reliability of Citation Frequency as an Indicator of Scientific Impact” in Scientomterics 17:71–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Price, D. de Solla and Beaver, D. 1966. “Collaboration in an invisible college.” American Psychologist 21: 1011–1018.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Price, D. de Solla 1963. Big Science, Litle Science. ( New York: Columbia University Press. )Google Scholar
  44. Pritchard, A. 1969. “Statistical bibliography or bibliometrics?” Journal of Documentation. 25: 358–359.Google Scholar
  45. Rip, A. 1988. “Mapping of science: possibilities and limitations.” in A.F.J. VanRaan (ed) Handbook of Quantitative Studies of Science and Technology ( North-Holland: Elsevier Publishers. )Google Scholar
  46. Rip, A. and Courtial, J. 1984. “Co-word maps of biotechnology: examples of cognitive scientometrics.” Scientometrics 6: 381–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Shrum, W. and N. Mullins, 1988. “Network analysis in the study of science and technology.” in A.F.J. VanRaan (ed) Handbook of Quantitative Studies of Science and Technology ( North-Holland: Elsevier Publishers. )Google Scholar
  48. Small, H. and B. Griffith 1974. “The structure of scientific literatures.” Science Studies. 4:17–40.Google Scholar
  49. Stephan, P.E. and Levin, S.G. 1988. “Measures of scientific output and the age-productivity relationship.” in A.F.J. VanRaan (ed) Handbook of Quantitative Studies of Science and Technology ( North-Holland: Elsevier Publishers. )Google Scholar
  50. Tijssen, R.J.W. and J. De Leeuw 1988. “Multi-variate data-analysis methods inbibliometric studies of science and technology.” in A.F.J. VanRaan (ed) Handbook of Quantitative Studies of Science and Technology ( North-Holland: Elsevier Publishers. )Google Scholar
  51. Van Raan, A.F.J. (Ed.) 1988. Handbook of Quantitative Studies of Science and Technology ( North Holland: Elsevier Publishers. )Google Scholar
  52. VanEls, W.P., C.N. Jansz, and C. LePair 1989. “The Citation Gap Between Printed and Instrumental Output of Technological Research: The Case of the Electron Microscope” in Scientometrics 17:415–425.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Weingart, P., R. Sehringer and M. Winterhager 1988. “Bibliometric Indicators for Assessing Strengths and Weaknesses of West German Science” in A.F.J. VanRaan (ed) Handbook of Quantitative Studies of Science and Technology ( North-Holland: Elsevier Publishers. )Google Scholar
  54. Zuckerman, H. 1987. “Citation Analysis and the Complex Problem of Intellectual Influence” in Scientometrics 12: 329–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • Julia Melkers
    • 1
  1. 1.University of Alaska SoutheastUSA

Personalised recommendations