Scientific productivity and group size: A bibliometric analysis of Norwegian microbiological research
Scientific productivity and group size: A bibliometric analysis of Norwegian microbiological research
复制标题
DOI：
10.1023/a:1005665309719
复制
发表时间：
2000-09-01
期刊：
影响因子：
3.9
通讯作者：
Aksnes, DW
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Seglen, PO;Aksnes, DW
为了分析当代生物医学科学高度合作研究环境中研究小组规模与科学生产力之间的关系，对挪威微生物学进行了调查。通过从ISI的数据库国家科学软盘指标（NSIOD）中对1992-1996年期间参与微生物学研究的挪威科学家发表的期刊文章进行作者控制检索，获得了3,486名作者发表的976篇微生物学文章和938篇非微生物学文章。功能研究小组的定义是基于共同作者的文献计量学，共产生180个研究小组，其规模从一名作者/一篇文章到180名作者/83篇文章不等（包括整个五年期间与一个小组有关的所有作者，因此小组规模很大）。大多数挪威微生物学研究（73%的微生物学文章）似乎是由专家小组进行的（其产出的微生物学文章大于或等于70%），其余的由具有更广泛的生物医学研究背景的小组发表（他们负责95%的非微生物学文章）。生产率（人均文章数）在组间仅显示出适度（泊松分布）的变化，并且在所有子领域中都非常稳定，大约为每位作者每年0.1篇文章。群体规模与生产力之间没有相关性。
To analyse the relationship between research group size and scientific productivity within the highly cooperative research environment characteristic of contemporary biomedical science, an investigation of Norwegian Microbiology was undertaken. By an author-gated retrieval from ISI's database National Science Indicators on Diskette (NSIOD), of journal articles published by Norwegian scientists involved in microbiological research during the period 1992-1996, a total of 976 microbiological and 938 non-microbiological articles, by 3,486 authors, were obtained. Functional research groups were defined bibliometrically on the basis of co-authorship, yielding a total of 180 research groups varying in size from one author/one article to 180 authors/83 articles (all authors associated with a group during the whole five-year period were included, hence the large group size). Most of Norwegian microbiological research (73% of the microbiology articles) appears to be performed by specialist groups (with greater than or equal to 70% of their production as microbiology), the remainder being published by groups with a broader biomedical research profile (who were responsible for 95% of the non-microbiological articles). The productivity (articles per capita) showed only moderate (Poisson-distributed) variability between groups, and was remarkably constant across all subfields, at about 0.1 article per author per year. No correlation between group size and productivity was found.