Have Academics’ Citation Patterns Changed in Response to the Rise of World University Rankings? A Test Using First-Citation Speeds
Have Academics’ Citation Patterns Changed in Response to the Rise of World University Rankings? A Test Using First-Citation Speeds
复制标题
DOI：
10.3390/su13179515
复制
发表时间：
2021-08
期刊：
影响因子：
3.9
通讯作者：
S. Lee;C. Schneijderberg;Yangson Kim;Isabel Steinhardt
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
S. Lee;C. Schneijderberg;Yangson Kim;Isabel Steinhardt
学者们可能会积极响应学术地位市场的期望，而这些期望在很大程度上是由世界大学排名（WURs）所塑造的。本研究实证考察了学者的引用模式如何因学术界“评估环境”的兴起而发生变化。我们将世界大学排名视为巩固学术界基于文献计量的评估环境的宏观层面的触发因素。我们对在两本高等教育期刊上发表的论文的引用模式进行分析时，明确考虑了三个不同的时期：世界大学排名之前（1990 - 2003年）、世界大学排名实施期间（2004 - 2010年）以及适应世界大学排名期间（2011 - 2017年）。我们应用非参数的卡普兰 - 迈耶方法来比较在这三个时期发表的论文的首次引用速度。我们发现，随着世界大学排名的出现，不仅首次引用速度变得更快，而且首次引用概率也有所增加。将考克斯比例风险模型应用于首次引用概率，我们确定期刊影响因子和第三方资助是影响首次引用概率的因素，而其他与作者和论文相关的因素影响有限。我们还发现，随着世界大学排名的出现，不同因素对首次引用速度的总体影响已经发生了变化。这些研究结果拓展了我们对世界大学排名兴起过程中学者引用模式的理解，并为研究政策以及高等教育政策提供了实践依据。
Academics may actively respond to the expectations of the academic status market, which have largely been shaped by the World University Rankings (WURs). This study empirically examines how academics’ citation patterns have changed in response to the rise of an “evaluation environment” in academia. We regard the WURs to be a macro-level trigger for cementing a bibliometric-based evaluation environment in academia. Our analyses of citation patterns in papers published in two higher education journals explicitly considered three distinct periods: the pre-WURs (1990–2003), the period of WURs implementation (2004–2010), and the period of adaption to WURs (2011–2017). We applied the nonparametric Kaplan–Meier method to compare first-citation speeds of papers published across the three periods. We found that not only has first-citation speed become faster, but first-citation probability has also increased following the emergence of the WURs. Applying Cox proportional hazard models to first-citation probabilities, we identified journal impact factors and third-party funding as factors influencing first-citation probability, while other author- and paper-related factors showed limited effects. We also found that the general effects of different factors on first-citation speeds have changed with the emergence of the WURs. The findings expand our understanding of the citation patterns of academics in the rise of WURs and provide practical grounds for research policy as well as higher education policy.