3.8 Article

Identifying Researchers' Publication Strategies by Clustering Publication and Impact Data

期刊

PUBLISHING RESEARCH QUARTERLY
卷 37, 期 3, 页码 347-363

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s12109-021-09832-7

关键词

Researcher publication strategies; Productivity; Collaboration; Impact indicators; Panel data regression; Cluster analysis

资金

  1. CONACYT
  2. Tecnologico de Monterrey

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Identifying strategies for researchers has been investigated from different perspectives, such as choosing research topics or the effect of partner selection. This study aims to identify publication strategies through behavioral observations for researchers belonging to the engineering area, and has identified low-impact and high-impact publication strategies used by Mexican researchers.
Identifying strategies for researchers has been a problem investigated from different perspectives, such as choosing research topics or the effect of partner selection. Its importance lies in the effect these choices have in the long term and the importance of taking them into account at the beginning of the scientific career. This study aims to identify publication strategies through behavioral observations for researchers belonging to the engineering area. We analyzed 3,156 researchers affiliated to Mexican National Researchers System with publication data from 2007 to 2016. Publication strategies are defined as a combination of two-year productivity and collaboration indicators, and their success is reflected in terms of citations received in a three-year time window. Using clustering techniques, we identified differentiated patterns aligned with a given citation level. As a result of our case study, we identified low-impact and high-impact publication strategies used by Mexican researchers, which in turn can be used for designing long-term strategies for researchers. Our methodology can be used to discover publication strategies in other areas and geographical regions.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据