Factors associated with the scientific production indexed in Scopus of a Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos
Abstract
One of the challenges faced by research managers is to identify the factors associated with the scientific production of a university, because in this they can allocate resources to expand the frontiers of academic knowledge. In this study we present a model of factors associated with the scientific production indexed in Scopus of a Peruvian public university. For the data modeling, a longitudinal design based on time-series analysis was used, considering lags from one to ten years. Initially (lag = 1 year), the number of international partners and graduated doctors were the two factors associated with scientific production indexed in Scopus, but when incorporating the temporal perspective (lag = 5 years), only the number of doctors remained as predictor, in a statistical sense, of the scientific production of the Peruvian public university analyzed in this investigation.Downloads
Métricas alternativas
References
Ali, J. (2010). Manuscript rejection: Causes and remedies. Journal of Young Pharmacits, 2(1), 3-6. https://doi.org/10.4103/0975-1483.62205
Bhattacharya, M. & Smyth, R. (2003). The life cycle research output of professors in Australian economics department: An empirical analysis based on survey questionnaires. Economic Papers, 22(2), 30-46. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1759-3441.2003.tb00341.x
Borrego, A., Barrios, M., Villarroya, A., & Ollé, C. (2010). Scientific output and impact of postdoctoral scientists: a gender perspective. Scientometrics, 83(1), 93-101. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0025-y
Buela-Casal, G.; Gutiérrez-Martínez, O., Bermúdez-Sánchez, M., & Vadillo-Muñoz, O. (2007). Comparative study of international academic rankings of universities. Scientometrics, 71(3), 349-365. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-007-1653-8
Castellacci, F. & Natera, J. M. (2013). The dynamics of national innovation systems: A panel cointegration analysis of the coevolution between innovative capability and absorptive capacity. Research Policy, 42(3), 579-594. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2012.10.006
Cheng, Y. & Liu, N. C. (2006). A first approach to the classification of the top 500 world universities by their disciplinary characteristics using scientometrics. Scientometrics, 68(3), 135-150. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-006-0087-z
Defazio, D., Lockett, A., & Wright, M. (2009). Funding incentives, collaborative dynamics and scientific productivity: Evidence from the EU framework program. Research Policy, 38(2), 293-305. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2008.11.008
Dobrota, M., Bulajic, M., Bornmann, L., & Jeremic, V. (2016). A new approach to the QS University Ranking using composite I-distance indicator: Uncertainty and sensitivity analysis. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 67(1), 200-211. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23355
Echeverria, M., Stuart, D., & Blanke, T. (2015). Medical theses and derivative articles: Dissemination of contents and publication patterns. Scientometrics, 102(1), 559-586. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-014-1442-0
Fathelrahman, A. I. (2015). Rejection of good manuscripts: Possible reasons, consequences and solutions. Journal of Clinical Research & Bioethics, 6, 204-208. https://doi.org/10.4172/2155-9627.1000204
Goldfarb, B. (2008). The effect of government contracting on academic research: Does the source of funding affect scientific output? Research Policy, 37(1), 41-58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2007.07.011
González-Brambila, C. & Veloso, F. M. (2007). The determinants of research output and impact: A study of Mexican researchers. Research Policy, 36(7), 1035-1051. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2007.03.005
Grupp, H., Schmoch, U., & Hinze, S. (2001). International alignment and scientific regard as macro-indicators for international comparison of publications. Scientometrics, 51(2), 359-380. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1012703117727
Hagen, N. T. (2010). Deconstructing doctoral dissertations: How many papers does it take to make a PhD? Scientometrics, 85(2), 567-579. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-010-0214-8
He, Z.-L., Geng, X.-S., & Campbell-Hunt, C. (2009). Research collaboration and research output: A longitudinal study of 65 biomedical scientists in a New Zealand university. Research Policy, 38(2), 306-317. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2008.11.011
Huamaní, C. & Mayta-Tristán, P. (2010). Producción científica peruana en medicina y redes de colaboración, análisis del Science Citation Index 2000-2009. Revista Peruana de Medicina Experimental y Salud Pública, 27(3), 315-325. Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.1590/S1726-46342010000300003
Huang, M.-H. (2012). Opening the black box of QS World University Rankings. Research Evaluation, 21(1), 71-78.
https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvr003
Inglesi-Lotz, R., Balcilar, M., y Gupta, R. (2014). Time-varying causality between research output and economic growth in US. Scientometrics, 100(1), 203-216. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-014-1257-z
Leydesdorff, L., Park, H. W., y Wagner, C. (2014). International coauthorship relations in the Social Sciences Citation Index: Is internationalization leading the network? Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 65(10), 2111-2126. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23102
Leydesdorff, L. y Wagner, C. (2009). Macro-level indicators of the relations between research funding and research output. Journal of Informetrics, 3(4), 353-362. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2009.05.005
Marginson, S. (2012). Global university rankings: The strategic issues. http://www.encuentro-rankings.unam.mx/Documentos/ConferenciaMagistralMarginsontexto.pdf
Marginson, S. (2013). University rankings and social science. European Journal of Education, 49(1), 45-59. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12061
Mayta-Tristán, P., Huamaní, C., Montenegro-Idrogo, J., Samanez-Figari, C. & Gonzáles-Alcaide, G. (2013). Producción científica y redes de colaboración en cáncer en el Perú 2000-2011: un estudio bibliométrico en Scopus y Science Citation Index. Revista Peruana de Medicina Experimental y Salud Pública, 30(1), 31-36. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1726-46342013000100006
Moed, H. (2017). A critical comparative analysis of five world university rankings. Scientometrics, 110(2), 967-990.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-2212-y
Morales Morante, L. (2016a). Producción e impacto de las revistas peruanas del ámbito de las ciencias sociales en el catálogo Latindex. Investigación Bibliotecológica, 30(69), 179-204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibbai.2016.04.017
Morales Morante, L. (2016b). Visibilidad e impacto de las revistas peruanas de ciencias sociales en acceso abierto. Biblios, 65, 29-51. https://doi.org/10.5195/BIBLIOS.2016.320
Navarro Rodríguez, M. (2013). La redacción de artículos de investigación, desde la construcción de tesis doctorales. Visión Educativa IUNAES, 7(15), 8-20. https://dialnet.unirioja.es/descarga/articulo/4713343.pdf.
Rosseau, R. y Ding, J. (2016). Does international collaboration yield a higher citation potential for US scientists publishing in highly visible interdisciplinary journals. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 67(4), 1009-1013. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23565
Russell, J. M., Del Río, J. A., & Cortés, H. D. (2007). Highly visible science: A look at three decades of research from Argentina, Brazil, Mexico and Spain. Interciencia, 32(9), 629-634. http://www.scielo.org.ve/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0378-18442007000900012&lng=es&nrm=iso&tlng=en.
Salmi, J. (2009). El desafío de crear universidades de rango mundial. Washington, D. C.: Banco Mundial. Recuperado de http://repositorio.minedu.gob.pe/handle/123456789/1435.
Sin, S.-C. J. (2011). International coauthorship and citation impact: A bibliometric study of six LIS journals, 1980-2008. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62(9), 1770-1783. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.21572
Soh, K. (2015). What the overall doesn't tell about world university rankings: Examples from ARWU, QSWUR, and THEWUR in 2013. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 37(3), 295-307. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360080X.2015.1035523
Taype-Rondán, A., Lajo-Arauzo, Y., y Huamaní, C. (2012). Producción científica peruana sobre transtornos en SciELO-Perú, 2006-2011. Revista Médica Herediana, 23(3). https://doi.org/10.20453/rmh.v23i3.1025
Van Raan, A. (2005). Fatal attraction: Conceptual and methodological problems in the ranking of universities by bibliometric methods. Scientometrics, 62(1), 111-112. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-005-0008-6
Vílchez-Román, C. (2014). Bibliometric factors associated with h-index of Peruvian researchers with publications indexed on Web of Science and Scopus databases. Transinformação, 26(2), 143-154. https://doi.org/10.1590/0103-37862014000200004
Woolley, K. L. & Barron, J. P. (2009). Handling manuscript rejection: insights from evidence and experience. Chest, 135(2), 573-577. https://doi.org/10.1378/chest.08-2007
Este obra está bajo una licencia de Creative Commons Reconocimiento 4.0 Internacional
