Effects of funding on the collaboration and citation in environmental papers and the relationship with nation’s science and technology budgets

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5327/Z217694781043

Keywords:

number of authors; collaboration; citation; environmental science; structural equation modeling.

Abstract

Input, output, impact, and processes are central indicators of the science, technology, and innovation production. The input is usually associated to investments made in science and technology, and it varies among different countries and scientific fields. Thus, the input can influence other impact indicators. Here, we evaluated the effect of the input data (i.e., number of funding) on process (i.e., collaboration) and output (i.e., number of citation) indicators of ecological research. Moreover, we detailed the effect of the number of funding on the collaboration and number of citations by each country (based on the nationality of authors). We found that most of published papers had some degrees of financial support, and that the production of papers with funding increased over the years. Funding had a positive effect on the collaboration and citation of papers; however, we observed that: in countries with higher investments in Science and Technology, the number of funding impacts positively and directly on the number of authors (collaboration) and in countries with low levels of investments in Science and Technology, the number of funding impacts positively and directly on the number of citations. Our models presented a low predictive power, but similar to other informetric studies. Our results indicated that impact indicators evaluated have an integrated structure, and the effects at one level can affect other levels. Nonetheless, the impact of the number of funding on informetric data can vary among countries; therefore, these results are important to the development of national policies and future informetric studies.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Angelo, C., 2019. Brazil’s government freezes nearly half of its science spending. Nature, v. 568, 155-156.

Bag, S., 2015. A short review on structural equation modeling: applications and future research directions. Journal of Supply Chain Management Systems, v. 4, (3) 64-69.

Bai, X.; Zhang, F.; Lee, I., 2019. Predicting the citations of scholarly paper. Journal of Informetrics, v. 13, (1), 407-418. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2019.01.010.

Bar-Ilan, J., 2008. Review Informetrics at the beginning of the 21st century – A review. Journal of Informetrics, v. 2, (1), 1-52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2007.11.001.

Bentler, P.M., 1990. Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, v. 107, (2), 238-246. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.107.2.238.

Bornmann, L.; Leydesdorff, L.; Wang, J., 2014. How to improve the prediction based on citation impact percentiles for years shortly after the publication date? Journal of Informetrics, v. 8, (1), 175-180. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2013.11.005.

Bowen, A.; Casadevall, A., 2015. Increasing disparities between resource inputs and outcomes, as measured by certain health deliverables, in biomedical research. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, v. 112, (36), 11335-11340. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1504955112.

Cimini, G.; Zaccaria, A.; Gabrielli, A., 2016. Investigating the interplay between fundamentals of national research systems: Performance, investments and international collaborations. Journal of Informetrics, v. 10, (1), 200-211. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2016.01.002.

Dranev, Y.; Kotsemir, M.; Syomin, B., 2018. Diversity of research publications: relation to agricultural productivity and possible implications for STI policy. Scientometrics, v. 116, (3), 1565-1587. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2799-2.

Fan, Y.; Chen, J.; Shirkey, G.; John, R.; Wu, S. R.; Park, H.; Shao, C., 2016. Applications of structural equation modeling (SEM) in ecological studies: an updated review. Ecological Processes, v. 5, (1), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13717-016-0063-3.

Fanelli, D., 2013. Positive results receive more citations, but only in some disciplines. Scientometrics, v. 94, (2), 701-709. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-012-0757-y.

Fortin, J.-M.; Currie, D.J., 2013. Big science vs. little science: how scientific impact scales with funding. Plos One, v. 8, (6), e65263. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0065263.

Geisler, E. 2000. The metrics of science and Technology. Quorum Books, New York.

Gök, A.; Rigby, J.; Shapira, P., 2016. The impact of research funding on scientific outputs: Evidence from six smaller European countries. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, v. 67, (3), 715-730. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23406.

Hu, L.T.; Bentler, P.M. 1999. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, v. 6, (1), 1-55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118.

Jacob, B.A.; Lefgren, L., 2011. The impact of research grant funding on scientific productivity. Journal of Public Economics, v. 95, (9-10), 1168-1177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2011.05.005.

Knief, U.; Forstmeier, W., 2021. Violating the normality assumption may be the lesser of two evils. Behavior Research Methods, 1-15. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-021-01587-5.

Lane, J.; Bertuzzi, S., 2011. Measuring the results of science investments. Science, v. 331, (6018), 678-680. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1201865.

Lefcheck, J.S., 2016. Piecewise SEM: Piecewise structural equation modelling inr for ecology, evolution, and systematics. Methods in Ecology and Evolution, v. 7, (5), 573-579. https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210x.12512.

Leimu, R.; Koricheva, J. 2005a. Does scientific collaboration increase the impact of ecological articles? BioScience, v. 55, (5), 438-443. https://doi.org/10.1641/0006-3568(2005)055[0438:DSCITI]2.0.CO;2.

Leimu, R.; Koricheva, J., 2005b. What determines the citation frequency of ecological papers? Trends in Ecology & Evolution, v. 20, (1), 28-32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2004.10.010.

Lewison, G.; Dawson, G., 1998. The effect of funding on the outputs of biomedical research. Scientometrics, v. 41, (1-2), 17-27. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02457963.

Leydesdorff, L.; Bornmann, L.; Wagner, C.S., 2019. The relative influences of government funding and international collaboration on citation impact. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, v. 70, (2), 198-201. https://dx.doi.org/10.1002%2Fasi.24109.

Makkonen, T., 2013. Government science and technology budgets in times of crisis. Research Policy, v. 42, (3), 817-822. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2012.10.002.

Manly, B.F., 2006. Randomization, bootstrap and Monte Carlo methods in biology (Vol. 70). CRC Press, Boca Raton.

May, R.M., 1998. The scientific investments of nations. Science, v. 281, (5373), 49-51. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.281.5373.49.

Mejia, C.; Kajikawa, Y., 2018. Using acknowledgement data to characterize funding organizations by the types of research sponsored: The case of robotics research. Scientometrics, v. 114, (3), 883-904. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2617-2.

Mena-Chalco, J.P.; Digiampietri, L.A.; Lopes, F.M.; Cesar Junior, R.M., 2014. Brazilian Bibliometric Coauthorship Networks. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, v. 65, (7): 1424-1445. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23010.

Moed, H.F., 2017. Applied evaluative informetrics. Springer, Amsterdam.

Nabout, J.C.; Parreira, M.R.; Teresa, F.B.; Carneiro, F.M.; Cunha, H.F.; Souza Ondei, L.; Caramori, S.S.; Soares, T.N., 2015. Publish (in a group) or perish (alone): the trend from single-to multi-authorship in biological papers. Scientometrics, v. 102, 357-364. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-014-1385-5.

Nabout, J.C.; Teresa, F.B.; Machado, K.B.; Prado, V.H.M.; Bini, L.M.; Diniz-Filho, J.A.F., 2018. Do traditional scientometric indicators predict social media activity on scientific knowledge? An analysis of the ecological literature. Scientometrics, v. 115, (2), 1007-1015. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2678-x.

Neff, M.W.; Corley, E.A., 2009. 35 years and 160,000 articles: A bibliometric exploration of the evolution of ecology. Scientometrics, v. 80, (3), 657-682. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-008-2099-3.

Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development – OECD. 2017. OECD Science, Technology and Industry Scoreboard 2017: The digital transformation. OECD, Paris (Accessed December 1, 2019) at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264268821-en.

Ory, D.T.; Mokhtarian, P.L., 2010. The impact of non-normality, sample size and estimation technique on goodness-of-fit measures in structural equation modeling: evidence from ten empirical models of travel behavior. Quality & Quantity, v. 44, (3), 427-445. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-008-9215-6.

Padial, A.A.; Nabout, J.C.; Siqueira, T.; Bini, L.M.; Diniz-Filho, J.A.F., 2010. Weak evidence for determinants of citation frequency in ecological articles. Scientometrics, v. 85, 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-010-0231-7.

Parreira, M.R.; Machado, K.B.; Logares, R.; Diniz-Filho, J.A.F.; Nabout, J.C., 2017. The roles of geographic distance and socioeconomic factors on international collaboration among ecologists. Scientometrics, v. 113, (3), 1539-1550. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2502-z.

Paul-Hus, A.; Desrochers, N.; Costas, R., 2016. Characterization, description, and considerations for the use of funding acknowledgement data in Web of Science. Scientometrics, v. 108, (1), 167-182. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-1953-y.

R Core Team. 2021. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria (Accessed September 19, 2017) at: https://www.R-project.org/.

Rigby, J., 2013. Looking for the impact of peer review: does count of funding acknowledgements really predict research impact? Scientometrics, v. 94, (1), 57-73. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-012-0779-5.

Rosseel, Y., 2012. lavaan: An R Package for Structural Equation Modeling. Journal of Statistical Software, v. 48, (2), 1-36. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v048.i02.

Shaheen, F.; Ahmad, N.; Waqas, M.; Waheed, A.; Farooq, O., 2017. Structural equation modeling (SEM) in social sciences & medical research: a guide for improved analysis. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, v. 7, (5), 132-143. http://dx.doi.org/10.6007/IJARBSS/v7-i5/2882.

Sugimoto, C.R.; Robinson-García, N.; Murray, D.S.; Yegros-Yegros, A.; Costas, R.; Larivière, V., 2017. Scientists have most impact when they're free to move. Nature News, v. 550, (7674), 29-31. https://doi.org/10.1038/550029a.

Tahamtan, I.; Afshar, A. S.; Ahamdzadeh, K., 2016. Factors affecting number of citations: a comprehensive review of the literature. Scientometrics, v. 107, (3), 1195-1225. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-1889-2.

Tang, L.; Hu, G.; Liu, W., 2017. Funding acknowledgment analysis: Queries and caveats. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, v. 68, (3), 790-794. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23713.

Thomé, M.T.C.; Haddad, C.F.B., 2019. Brazil's biodiversity researchers need help. Science, v. 364, (6446), 1144-1145. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aax9478.

Vanclay, J.K., 2013. Factors affecting citation rates in environmental science. Journal of Informetrics, v. 7, (2), 265-271. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2012.11.009.

Wang, X.; Liu, D.; Ding, K.; Wang, X., 2012. Science funding and research output: a study on 10 countries. Scientometrics, v. 91, (2), 591-599. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-011-0576-6.

Web of Science. 2009. Funding Acknowledgements (Accessed December 5, 2017) at: http://wokinfo.com/products_tools/multidisciplinary/webofscience/fundingsearch/.

Xia, J.; Myers, R.L.; Wilhoite, S.K., 2011. Multiple open access availability and citation impact. Journal of Information Science, v. 37, (1), 19-28. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0165551510389358.

Yan, E.J.; Wu, C.J.; Song, M., 2018. The funding factor: a cross-disciplinary examination of the association between research funding and citation impact. Scientometrics, v. 115, (1), 369-384. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2583-8.

Yu, T.; Yu, G.; Li, P.Y.; Wang, L., 2014. Citation impact prediction for scientific papers using stepwise regression analysis. Scientometrics, v. 101, 1233-1252. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-014-1279-6.

Zhao, S.X.; Lou, W.; Tan, A.M.; Yu, S., 2018. Do funded papers attract more usage? Scientometrics, v. 115, (1), 153-168. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2662-5.

Downloads

Published

2021-11-18

How to Cite

Nabout, J. C., Faquim, R. C. P., Carvalho, R. A., & Machado, K. B. (2021). Effects of funding on the collaboration and citation in environmental papers and the relationship with nation’s science and technology budgets. Revista Brasileira De Ciências Ambientais, 56(4), 599–607. https://doi.org/10.5327/Z217694781043