Abstract
In this study, the specialization profiles of eleven countries are compared along two interconnected but distinct dimensions of research, viz. publication output and citation impact in nine subfields of chemistry. The data for comparative analysis were taken from Scientometric Datafiles.1Since raw counts of publications and citations are confounded by the size of the countries and the size of subject fields, cross-national comparison is made, using relative indicators—activity index and attractivity index. The subfields of relative strength and weakness for these countries are identified from the values of these indicators. The similarity structure of specialization profiles of the eleven countries is mapped, using hierarchical cluster analysis and multidimensional scaling. This mapping leads to the representation of chemistry as it is structured by the dynamics of national science policies of these countries.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes and references
A. Schubert, W. Glänzel, T. Braun, Scientometric datafiles. A comprehensive set of indicators on 2649 journals and 96 countries in all major science fields and subfields, 1981–1985,Scientometrics, 16 (1989) 3–478.
R. Barre, Strategic processes and S & T indicators: Towards a key role in R & D management systems, In:S. Cozzens, P. Healey, A. Rip, J. Ziman (Eds),The Research System in Transition, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht/Boston/London, 1990.
ABRC,Evaluation of national performance in basic research: A review of techniques for evaluating national performance in basic research with case studies in Genetics and Solid State Physics, Advisory Board for Research Councils, London, 1986.
See for example,R. Barre, Clustering research fields for macrostrategic analysis: A comparative specialization approach,Scientometrics, 22 (1991) 95–112;J. D. Frame, T. Braun, W. Glänzel, A. Schubert,Scientometric Indicators: A 32-Country Comparative Evaluation of Publication Performance and Citation Impact, World Scientific Publishing Company, Singapore, Philadelphia, 1985;J. D. Frame, F. Narin, M. P. Carpenter, The distribution of world science,Social Studies of Science, 7 (1977) 501–516;B. Martin, J. Irvine, F. Narin, C. Sterrit, K. Steves Recent trends in the output and impact of British science,Science and Public Policy, 17 (1990) 14–26.
J. Irvine, B. R. Martin, Basic research in East and West: A comparison of the scientific performance of high energy physics accelerators,Social Studies of Science, 15 (1985) 293–341.
E. Bujdosó, T. Braun, Publication indicators of relative research efforts in Physics subfields,Journal of the American Society of Information Science, 34 (1983) 15–155.
R. Todorov, Distribution of physics literature,Scientometrics, 7 (1985) 195–209.
A. Schubert, W. Glänzel, T. Braun, (Ref. 1)..
In Scientometric Datafiles, chemistry comprises seven subfields. We have included in this study two more subfields, viz. biochemistry and chemical engineering because of their obvious links with chemistry.
According toIrvine andMartin (Ref. 5) ‘bias is inevitably present in the citation data. If less than 10% of all Soviet (but over 20% of US) Physics journals are scanned by ISI, then Soviet Physics publications are losing a large number of their citations in the unscanned Soviet journals than the (equivalent) American ones’.
P. S. Nagpaul,Scientometric Profile of Academic Science in India, Research Report, National Institute of Science, Technology and Development Studies, 1992.
This index has been used in the literature under various names: revealed scientific advantage, revealed publication advantage and relative specialization advantage.
J. D. Frame, Mainstream research in Latin America and Caribbean,Interciencia, 2 (1977) 143–148.
A. Schubert, T. Braun, Relative indicators and relational charts for comparative assessment of publication output and citation impact,Scientometrics, 9 (1986) 281–291.
M. P. Carpenter, F. Gibb, M. Harris, J. Irvine, B. R. Martin, F. Narin, Bibliometric profile for British academic institutions: An experiment to develop research output indicators,Scientometrics, 14 (1988) 213–233.
R. Barre, A strategic assessment of the scientific performance of five countries,Science and Technology Studies, 5 (1987) 32–38.
A. C. Gatrell, Describing the structure of a research literature: Spatial diffusion modelling in geography,Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 11 (1984) 29–45.
See for exampleH. Small, E. Sweeny, Clustering the Science Citation Index using cocitations — A comparison of methods,Scientometrics, 7 (1985) 391–409;J. P. Courtial, J. Law, A coword study of artificial intelligence,Social Studies of Science, 19 (1989) 301–311;P. Lenk, Mapping of fields based on nominations,Journal of the American Society of Information Science, 34 (1983) 115–122;R. R. Braam, H. F. Moed, A. F. J. Van Raan, Mapping of science by combined cocitation and coword analysis,Journal American Society of Information Science, 43 (1991) 233–251.
R. J. W. Tijssen, J. de Leeuw, Multivariate data analysis methods in bibliometric studies of science and technology, In:A. F. J. Van Raan (Ed.)Handbook of Quantitative Studies of Science and Technology, North-Holland, Amsterdam 1988.
R. Barre (Ref. 4)
J. E. Miller, R. N. Sheppard, J. J. Chang, An interpretation of multidimensional scaling solutions, paper presented at the 1964 meeting of American Psychological Association, 1964.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Nagpaul, P.S., Pant, N. Cross-national assessment of specialization patterns in chemistry. Scientometrics 27, 215–235 (1993). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02016551
Received:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02016551