Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Does Monetary Support Increase the Number of Scientific Papers? An Interrupted Time Series Analysis Cover

Does Monetary Support Increase the Number of Scientific Papers? An Interrupted Time Series Analysis

By: Yaşar Tonta  
Open Access
|Mar 2018

References

  1. Abramo, G., & D’Angelo, C.A. (2011). National-scale research performance assessment at the individual level. Scientometrics, 86(2), 347–364.10.1007/s11192-010-0297-2
  2. Abramo, G., & D’Angelo, C.A. (2016). Refrain from adopting the combination of citation and journal metrics to grade publications, as used in the Italian national research assessment exercise (VQR 2011–2014). Scientometrics, 109(3), 1–13.
  3. Abramo, G., D’Angelo, C.A., & Di Costa, F. (2011). National research assessment exercises: A comparison of peer review and bibliometrics rankings. Scientometrics, 89: 929. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-011-0459-x.10.1007/s11192-011-0459-x
  4. Adam, D. (2002). Citation analysis: The counting house. Nature, 415(415), 726–729.10.1038/415726a
  5. Akademik Teşvik Ödeneği Yönetmeliği (By-law of Payment of Academic Incentive). (2015). Resmî Gazete. Retrieved from http://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/eskiler/2015/12/20151218-4.pdf.
  6. Albarrán, P., Crespo, J.A., Ortuño, I., & Ruiz-Castillo, J. (2011). The skewness of science in 219 subfields and a number of aggregates. Scientometrics, 88(2), 385–397.10.1007/s11192-011-0407-9
  7. Auranen, O., & Nieminen, M. (2010). University research funding and publication performance— An international comparison. Research Policy, 39(6), 822–834.10.1016/j.respol.2010.03.003
  8. Butler, L. (2003). Explaining Australia’s increased share of ISI publications—the effects of a funding formula based on publication counts. Research Policy, 32(1), 143–155.10.1016/S0048-7333(02)00007-0
  9. Butler, L. (2004). What happens when funding is linked to publication counts? In H.F. Moed et al., (Ed.), Handbook of Quantitative Science and Technology Research: The Use of Publication and Patent Statistics in Studies of S&T Systems (pp. 389–405). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
  10. Butler, L. (2017). Response to van den Besselaar et al.: What happens when the Australian context is misunderstood. Journal of Informetrics, 11(3), 919–922.10.1016/j.joi.2017.05.017
  11. Casadevall, A., & Fang, F.C. (2012). Causes for the persistence of impact factor mania. mBio, 5(2). Retrieved on April 28, 2017, from http://mbio.asm.org/content/5/2/e00064-14.full.pdf.
  12. Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Review Group. Data Collection Checklist. (2002). Retrieved from http://bit.ly/2pygx2N.
  13. De Boer, H., Jongbloed, B.W.A., Benneworth, S., Cremonini, L. Kolster, R., Kottmann, A., … & Vossensteyn, J.J. (2015). Performance-based Funding and Performance Agreements in Fourteen Higher Education Systems. Enschede: University of Twente. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/274954335_Performance-based_funding_and_Performance_Agreements_in_fourteen_Higher_Education_Systems_Report_for_the_Ministry_of_Education_Culture_and_Science.
  14. European Commission (2010). Assessing Europe’s University-Based Research. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/2oNukmM.
  15. Franzoni, C., Scellato, G., & Stephan, P. (2011). Changing incentives to publish. Science, 33(6043), 702–703.
  16. Garfield, E. (1972). Citation analysis as a tool in journal evaluation. Science, 178(4060), 471–479.507970110.1126/science.178.4060.471
  17. Geuna, A., & Martin, B. (2003). University research evaluation and funding: An international comparison. Minerva, 41(4), 277–304.10.1023/B:MINE.0000005155.70870.bd
  18. Good, B., Vermeulen, N., Tiefenthaler, B., & Arnold, E. (2015). Counting quality? The Czech performance-based research funding system. Research Evaluation, 24(2), 91–105.10.1093/reseval/rvu035
  19. Glänzel, W., & Moed, H.F. (2002). Journal impact measures in bibliometric research. Scientometrics, 53(2), 171–193.10.1023/A:1014848323806
  20. Herbst, M. (2007). Financing public universities: The case of performance funding. Dordrecht: Springer.
  21. Heywood, J.S., Wei, X., & Ye, G. (2011). Piece rates for professors. Economics Letters, 113(3), 285–287.10.1016/j.econlet.2011.08.005
  22. Hicks, D. (2012). Performance-based university research funding systems. Research Policy, 41(2), 251–261.10.1016/j.respol.2011.09.007
  23. Hicks, D. (2017). What year? Difficulties in identifying the effect of policy on university output. Journal of Informetrics, 11(3), 933–936.10.1016/j.joi.2017.05.020
  24. Interrupted time series analysis. (2013). Retrieved on April 28, 2017, from http://bit.ly/2qtEx48.
  25. Kamalski, J. et al. (2017). World of Research 2015: Revealing Patterns and Archetypes in Scientific Research. Elsevier Analytic Services. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/2pMTWjE.
  26. Larivière, V., Kiermer, V., MacCallum, C., … & Curry, S. (2016). A simple proposal for the publication of journal citation distributions. Retrieved from http://biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/early/2016/09/11/062109.full.pdf.
  27. McDowall, D., McCleary, R., Meidinger, E.E., & Hay, R.A. (1980). Interrupted Time Series Analysis. Newbury Park: Sage.
  28. Osuna, C., Cruz-Castro, L., & Sanz-Menéndez, L. (2011). Overturning some assumptions about the effects of evaluation systems on publication performance. Scientometrics, 86(3), 575–592.10.1007/s11192-010-0312-7
  29. Önder, C., Şevkli, M., Altinok, T., & Tavukçuoğlu, C. (2008). Institutional change and scientific research: A preliminary bibliometric analysis of institutional influences on Turkey’s recent social science publications. Scientometrics, 76(3), 543–560.10.1007/s11192-007-1878-6
  30. Schneider, J.W. (2009). An outline of the bibliometric indicator used for performance-based funding of research institutions in Norway. European Political Science, 8(3), 364–378.10.1057/eps.2009.19
  31. Seglen, P.O. (1997, February 5). Why the impact factor of journals should not be used for evaluating research. British Medical Journal, 314(7079), 498–502. Retrieved from http://www.dcscience.net/seglen97.pdf.
  32. Shao, J., & Shen, H. (2012). Research assessment: The overemphasized impact factor in China. Research Evaluation, 21(3), 199–203.10.1093/reseval/rvs011
  33. TÜBİTAK Türkiye Adresli Uluslararasi Bilimsel Yayinlari Teşvik (UBYT) Programi Uygulama Usul ve Esaslari. (2016). Retrieved from http://cabim.ulakbim.gov.tr/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2015/09/2016-Y%C4%B1l%C4%B1-UBYT-Program%C4%B1-Uygulama-Esaslar%C4%B1.pdf.
  34. Teixeira da Silva, J.A. (2017). Does China need to rethink its metrics- and citations-based research reward policies?Scientometrics, 112(3), 1853–1857.10.1007/s11192-017-2430-y
  35. Tonta, Y. (2014). Use and misuse of bibliometric measures for assessment of academic performance, tenure and publication support. In the 77th Annual Meeting of the Association for Information Science and Technology, October 31 - November 5, 2014, Seattle, WA. http://bit.ly/2ghe6Ph.
  36. Tonta, Y. (2015). Support programs to increase the number of scientific publications using bibliometric measures: The Turkish case. In A.A. Salah et al. (Eds.). Proceedings of ISSI 2015 Istanbul: 15th International Society of Scientometrics and Informetrics Conference, Istanbul, Turkey, 29 June to 4 July, 2015 (pp. 767–777). Istanbul: Boğaziçi University.
  37. Tonta, Y (2017a). Does monetary support increase the number of scientific papers? An interrupted time series analysis. Paper presented at ISSI 2017: 16th International Scientometrics and Informetrics Conference, 16–20 October 2017, Wuhan University, Wuhan, China. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/2kXc9cJ.
  38. Tonta, Y. (2017b). TÜBİTAK Tüurkiye Adresli Uluslararasi Bilimsel Yayinlari Teşvik (UBYT) Programinin Değerlendirilmesi. Ankara: TÜBİTAK ULAKBİM. Retrieved from http://yunus.hacettepe.edu.tr/~tonta/yayinlar/tonta-tubitak-ubyt-programinin-degerlendirilmesi.pdf.
  39. van den Besselaar, P., Heyman, U., & Sandström, U. (2017). Perverse effects of output-based research funding? Butler’s Australian case revisited. Journal of Informetrics, 11(3), 905–918. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2017.05.016.10.1016/j.joi.2017.05.016
  40. van Raan, A.F. J. (2005). Fatal attraction: Conceptual and methodological problems in the ranking of universities by bibliometric methods. Scientometrics, 62(1), 133–143.10.1007/s11192-005-0008-6
  41. Wouters, P., Thelwall, M., Kousha, K., Waltman, L., de Rijcke, S., Rushforth, A. & Franssen, T. (2015). The metric tide literature review: Supplementary report I to the independent review of the role of metrics in research assessment and management. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/IHliqle.
  42. Yuret, T. (2017). Do researchers pay attention to publication subsidies? Journal of Informetrics, 11(2), 423–434.10.1016/j.joi.2017.02.010
  43. Yurtsever, E., Gülgöz, S., Yedekçioğlu, Ö.A., & Tonta, M. (2001). Sosyal Bilimler Atif Dizini’nde (SSCI) Türkiye 1970–1999 (Turkey in Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI): 1970–1999). Ankara: Türkiye Bilimler Akademisi.
  44. Yurtsever, E., Gülgöz, S., Yedekçioğlu, Ö.A., & Tonta, M. (2002). Sağlik Bilimleri, Mühendislik ve Temel Bilimlerde Türkiye’nin Uluslararasi Atif Dizinindeki Yeri 1973–1999 (Turkey’s Place in Health Sciences, Engineering and Basic Sciences in International Citation Index). Ankara: Türkiye Bilimler Akademisi.
  45. Zhang, L., Rousseau, R., & Sivertsen, G. (2017). Science deserves to be judged by its contents, not by its wrapping: Revisiting Seglen’s work on journal impact and research evaluation. PLoS ONE, 12(3), e0174205. Retrieved from http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0174205.2835084910.1371/journal.pone.0174205
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/jdis-2018-0002 | Journal eISSN: 2543-683X | Journal ISSN: 2096-157X
Language: English
Page range: 19 - 39
Submitted on: Nov 5, 2017
Accepted on: Jan 10, 2018
Published on: Mar 13, 2018
Published by: Chinese Academy of Sciences, National Science Library
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 4 issues per year

© 2018 Yaşar Tonta, published by Chinese Academy of Sciences, National Science Library
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License.