-
Scientific mobility indicators in practice: International mobility profiles at the country level
Authors:
Nicolas Robinson-Garcia,
Cassidy R. Sugimoto,
Dakota Murray,
Alfredo Yegros-Yegros,
Vincent Larivière,
Rodrigo Costas
Abstract:
This paper presents and describes the methodological opportunities offered by bibliometric data to produce indicators of scientific mobility. Large bibliographic datasets of disambiguated authors and their affiliations allow for the possibility of tracking the affiliation changes of scientists. Using the Web of Science as data source, we analyze the distribution of types of mobile scientists for a…
▽ More
This paper presents and describes the methodological opportunities offered by bibliometric data to produce indicators of scientific mobility. Large bibliographic datasets of disambiguated authors and their affiliations allow for the possibility of tracking the affiliation changes of scientists. Using the Web of Science as data source, we analyze the distribution of types of mobile scientists for a selection of countries. We explore the possibility of creating profiles of international mobility at the country level, and discuss potential interpretations and caveats. Five countries (Canada, The Netherlands, South Africa, Spain, and the United States) are used as examples. These profiles enable us to characterize these countries in terms of their strongest links with other countries. This type of analysis reveals circulation among and between countries with strong policy implications.
△ Less
Submitted 20 June, 2018;
originally announced June 2018.
-
The many faces of mobility: Using bibliometric data to measure the movement of scientists
Authors:
Nicolas Robinson-Garcia,
Cassidy R. Sugimoto,
Dakota Murray,
Alfredo Yegros-Yegros,
Vincent Larivière,
Rodrigo Costas
Abstract:
This paper presents a methodological framework for developing scientific mobility indicators based on bibliometric data. We identify nearly 16 million individual authors from publications covered in the Web of Science for the 2008-2015 period. Based on the information provided across individuals' publication records, we propose a general classification for analyzing scientific mobility using insti…
▽ More
This paper presents a methodological framework for developing scientific mobility indicators based on bibliometric data. We identify nearly 16 million individual authors from publications covered in the Web of Science for the 2008-2015 period. Based on the information provided across individuals' publication records, we propose a general classification for analyzing scientific mobility using institutional affiliation changes. We distinguish between migrants--authors who have ruptures with their country of origin--and travelers--authors who gain additional affiliations while maintaining affiliation with their country of origin. We find that 3.7 percent of researchers who have published at least one paper over the period are mobile. Travelers represent 72.7 percent of all mobile scholars, but migrants have higher scientific impact. We apply this classification at the country level, expanding the classification to incorporate the directionality of scientists' mobility (i.e., incoming and outgoing). We provide a brief analysis to highlight the utility of the proposed taxonomy to study scholarly mobility and discuss the implications for science policy.
△ Less
Submitted 13 November, 2018; v1 submitted 9 March, 2018;
originally announced March 2018.
-
How does undone science get funded? A bibliometric analysis linking rare diseases publications to national and European funding sources
Authors:
Alex Rushforth,
Alfredo Yegros-Yegros,
Philippe Mongeon,
Thed van Leeuwen
Abstract:
One of the notable features of undone science debates is how formation of new interest groups becomes pivotal in mobilizing and championing emerging research on undone topics. Clearly money is one of the most important mediums through which different types of actors can support and steer scientists to work on undone topics. Yet which actors are more visible in their support for scientific research…
▽ More
One of the notable features of undone science debates is how formation of new interest groups becomes pivotal in mobilizing and championing emerging research on undone topics. Clearly money is one of the most important mediums through which different types of actors can support and steer scientists to work on undone topics. Yet which actors are more visible in their support for scientific research is something which has seldom been measured. This study delves into research funding in the context of rare diseases research, a topic which has evolved from the margins of medical research into a priority area articulated by many contemporary funding agencies. Rare diseases refer to conditions affecting relatively few people in a population. Given low incidences, interest groups have articulated a lack of attention within medical research compared to more common conditions. The rise to prominence of rare diseases in research funding policies is often explained in the science studies literature in terms of effective lobbying by social movements Likewise, innovative fundraising initiatives, infrastructure building, and close partnerships with research groups are other means through which interested actors have sought to build capacity for research into rare medical conditions. To date however systematic empirical evidence to compare the relative importance of different actors in funding rare disease research has not been produced. Building on interest in undone science in STS and science policy studies, our study hopes to map-out different kinds of funding actors and their influence on leading scientific research on rare diseases, by use of bibliometric tools. The approach we are developing relies on the use of Funding Acknowledgement data provided in Web of Science database.
△ Less
Submitted 16 February, 2018;
originally announced February 2018.
-
Developing indicators on Open Access by combining evidence from diverse data sources
Authors:
Thed van Leeuwen,
Ingeborg Meijer,
Alfredo Yegros-Yegros,
Rodrigo Costas
Abstract:
In the last couple of years, the role of Open Access (OA) publishing has become central in science management and research policy. In the UK and the Netherlands, national OA mandates require the scientific community to seriously consider publishing research outputs in OA forms. At the same time, other elements of Open Science are becoming also part of the debate, thus including not only publishing…
▽ More
In the last couple of years, the role of Open Access (OA) publishing has become central in science management and research policy. In the UK and the Netherlands, national OA mandates require the scientific community to seriously consider publishing research outputs in OA forms. At the same time, other elements of Open Science are becoming also part of the debate, thus including not only publishing research outputs but also other related aspects of the chain of scientific knowledge production such as open peer review and open data. From a research management point of view, it is important to keep track of the progress made in the OA publishing debate. Until now, this has been quite problematic, given the fact that OA as a topic is hard to grasp by bibliometric methods, as most databases supporting bibliometric data lack exhaustive and accurate open access labelling of scientific publications. In this study, we present a methodology that systematically creates OA labels for large sets of publications processed in the Web of Science database. The methodology is based on the combination of diverse data sources that provide evidence of publications being OA
△ Less
Submitted 8 February, 2018;
originally announced February 2018.
