Libraries at University of Nebraska-Lincoln

 

Date of this Version

Winter 12-27-2018

Document Type

Article

Citation

  1. Alireza, Noruzi and Mohammadhiwa, Abdekhoda. (2014). Scientometric analysis of Iraqi-Kurdistan universities’ scientific productivity. The Electronic Library, 32 (6), 770-785.
  2. Sadik Batcha M. (2018). Scientometric Analysis of Dentistry Research. Informatics Studies. 5(3). P 27-35.
  3. Giridhari, Landge Rohini & Khaparde, Dr. Vaishali. (2016). Internet Use in ERIC: A Scientometric Study. International Journal of Library & information Science. 6(4).
  4. Uma Devi, Dr L. N. & Thirumal, K. (2018). Social Media Research Publications in Asian Countries - A Scientometric Study. International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology. 3(12).
  5. Madhu Bala & Singh, Dr. M P. (2014). A Scientometric Study of Journal of Bio-chemistry and Biophysics (IJBB). Library Philosophy and Practice (e-journal). http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/libphilprac/1168
  6. Yi, Yong. Qi, Wei and Wu, Dandan. (2013). Are CIVETS the next BRICs? A comparative analysis from scientometrics perspective. Scientometrics, 94, 615-628.
  7. Ajiferuke, I. Burrel Q & T ague, J. (1988). Collaborative coefficient: A single measure of the degree of collaboration in research. Scientometrics, 14(5-6), 421-33.
  8. Sivakumaren, K Set. al. (2011). Research trends in library and inf ormation science in Tamil Nadu: a study. International Journal of Current Research, 3 (12), 373-376.
  9. W, W Hood and C S Wilson. (2001). The literature of bibliometrics, scientometrics, and informatics. Scientometrics, 52(2, 291–314.
  10. Nagpaul, P.S. (1985). Contribution of Indian universities to the mainstream scientific literature a bibliometric assessment. Scientometrics, 32, 11-36.
  11. Garg, K.C. and Padhi, P. (2002). Scientometrics of laser research in India during 1970-1994. Scientometrics, 55(2), 215-241.
  12. Abramo, G., D‘Aneglo, C.A., & Di Costa, F. (2009). Research collaboration and productivity: Is there a correlation? Higher Education, 57(2), 155-171.
  13. Arunachalam S, Doss MJ. (2000). Mapping international collaboration in science in Asia through co-authorship analysis. Current Science, 79, 621‑8.
  14. Beaver, D., & Rosen, R. (1978). Studies in scientific collaboration. Part I. The professional origins of scientific co-authorship. Scientometrics, 1, 65-84.
  15. Chua, Alton Y.K. & Yan, Christopher C., (2008). The Shift towards Multi-Disciplinarity in Information Science. Journal of The American Society For Information Science And Technology, 59(13), 2156–2170,
  16. Corley, E. A., Boardman, P. C. & Bozeman, B. (2006). Design and the management of multi-institutional research collaborations: Theoretical implications from two case studies. Research Policy, 35, 975–993.
  17. Cronin, B., Shaw, D., & La Barre, K. (2003). A cast of thousands: Co-authorship and sub-authorship collaboration in the 20th century as manifested in the scholarly journal literature of Psychology and Philosophy. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 54(9), 855-871.
  18. Gautam, V. & Mishra, R. (2016) Scholarly trends of LIS research in India: a scientometrics study based on web of science during the period of 2005-2014. e-Library Science Research Journal, 5 (5), 1-13.
  19. He, T. (2009). International scientific collaboration of China with the G7 countries. Scientometrics, 80(3), 571-582.
  20. Jeyasekar, J. John & Saravanan, P. (2015). Impact of Collaboration on Indian Forensic Science Research: A Scientometric Mapping from 1975 to 2012. Journal of Scientometric Research, 4(3), 135-142.
  21. Katz, J.S., & Martin, B.R. (1997). What is research collaboration? Research Policy, 26(1), 1-18.
  22. Lariviere, V., Gingras, Y., & Archambault, E. (2006). Canadian collaboration networks: A comparative analysis of the natural sciences, social sciences and the humanities. Scientometrics, 68(3), 519-533.
  23. Lawani. S. M. (1980). Quality collaboration, and citations in cancer research: A bibliometric study (Ph..D thesis). Florida State University, Tallahassee.
  24. Leydesdorff, L., & Sun, Y. (2009). National and international dimensions of the Triple Helix in Japan: University-industry-government versus international co-authorship relations. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 60(4), 778-788.
  25. Lundberg, J. Tomson, G., Lundkvist, I., Skar, J., & Brommels, M. (2006). Collaboration uncovered: Exploring the adequacy of measuring university-industry collaboration through co-authorship and funding. Scientometrics, 69(3), 575-589
  26. Moody, J. (2004). The structure of a social science collaboration network: Disciplinary cohesion from 1963 to 1999. American Sociological Review, 69(2), 213-238.
  27. Onyancha, O.B., & Maluleka, J.R. (2011). Knowledge production through collaborative research in sub-Saharan Africa: how much do countries contribute to each other‘s knowledge output and citation impact? Scientometrics, 87, 315-336.
  28. Price De Solla, D. & Beaver, D.B. (1966). Collaboration in an invisible college. American Psychologist, 21 (11), 1011-18.
  29. Savanur, Kiran & Srikanth, R. (2010). Modified collaborative coefficient: A new measure for quantifying degree of research collaboration. Scientometrics, 84 (2), 365-71.
  30. Schubert, T., & Sooryamoorthy, R. (2010). Can the centre-periphery model explain patterns of international scientific collaboration among threshold and industrialized countries? The case of South Africa and Germany. Scientometrics, 83, 181-203.
  31. Subramanyam, K. (1983). Bibliometric studies of research collaboration: A review. J. of Inf. Sci., 6 (1), 33-8.

Abstract

Scientometric studies can be of great help not only for researchers and academicians but also for the government officials in setting funds for development as well as policy setting and decision making. Various scientometric studies are being done to assess the publication output of the researchers in the various disciplines, to know their collaboration as well as interdisciplinarity. This present study is furthering the level of the study by assessing the LIS research trend in the Asian countries, using AGR, RCI, CC and PEI etc. as indicators.

Download

Share

COinS