Nobel Prize as an influencing factor in researchers' citations: an analysis of Chemistry and Physics laureates (2005 to 2015)
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5007/1518-2924.2021.e73786Keywords:
Nobel Prize, Analysis of Citations, Chemistry, PhysicsAbstract
Objective: Analyzes the influence on citation rates by researchers who were awarded the Nobel Prize in the areas of Physics and Chemistry from 2005 to 2015. It investigates the relationship between being awarded the Nobel Prize and the increase in citation rates from award-winning researchers. To do so, it sought to: a) characterize the performance evaluation process of the Nobel Prize and the citation indexes; b) present the citation indexes of Nobel winners; c) identify whether citation rates are influenced by the Nobel Prize.
Methods: Conducts an exploratory research and comparative study, based on the citation studies for analysis and discussion of the collected data.
Results: The Nobel Prize shows signs of influence on the citation rates of researchers in the areas studied. He considers that the survey of information had the purpose of understanding this dynamic in science that provided data on scientific production and researchers through a Nobel Prize that is important and that cooperates for the advancement of knowledge.
Conclusions: In the Web of Science and Scopus databases, situations were identified in which the peak citation of most researchers in the field of Physics pointed to the peak after being contemplated with NOBEL. In the area of ??Chemistry, at the Scopus Base, although the peak had occurred in the majority after the award, such difference was not as evident as in the Web of Science. It is suggested for future studies more detailed analysis of the citation indexes (and even the inclusion of other indexes, such as the h-index); coverage of other scientific areas of the Nobel Prize; inclusion of the Google Scholar base in the comparison.
Downloads
References
ADAMS, J. Early citation counts correlate with accumulated impact. Scientometrics, v.63, n.3, p.567–581.2005. Disponível em: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11192-005-0228-9 Acesso em: 20 jun.2020.
BAR-ILAN, J. Which h-index? A comparison of WoS, Scopus and Google Scholar. Scientometrics, v. 74, n. 2, p. 257-271, 2008. Disponível em: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11192-008-0216-y Acesso em: 19 jun.2020.
BARBOSA, L. Igualdade e meritocracia: a ética do desempenho nas sociedades modernas. 4. ed. Rio de janeiro: Ed. FVG, 2003.
BOURDIEU, P. Pierre Bourdieu: sociologia. São Paulo Ática, 1983.
BOURDIEU, P. Usos sociais da ciência: por uma sociologia do campo científico. São Paulo: UNESP, 2004.
DAHLER-LARSEN, P. The Evaluation Society: Critique, Contestability And Skepticism. Spazio Filosófico, 2015. Disponível em: http://www.spaziofilosofico.it/en/numero-13/5241/the-evaluation-society-critique-contestability-and-skepticism/. Acesso em: 03 abr. 2020.
DAVYT, A.; VELHOS, L. A avaliação da ciência e a revisão por pares: passado e presente. Como será o futuro? História, ciência, saúde, v.7, n.1, p.93-116, mar./jun. 2000.
DONATO, H. As novas métricas de avaliação da produção científica. Acta Pediátrica Portuguesa, p.173-174, 2014. Disponível em: https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/61498055.pdf. Acesso em: 15 abr. 2020.
ERIKSON, M.G.; ERLANDSON, P. A taxonomy of motives to cite.Social Studies of Science.v. 44, n.4, p.625-637.2014. Disponível em: https://www.jstor.org/stable/43284164 Acesso em: 22 jun.2020.
FOUCAULT, M. Vigiar e Punir. Petrópolis: Editora Vozes, 1989.
GARFIELD, E. Premature discovery or delayed recognition—why. Current Contents, 21, 5–10.1980. Disponível em: http://garfield.library.upenn.edu/essays/v4p488y1979-80.pdf Acesso em: 26 jun.2020.
GARFIELD, E., & WELLJAMS-DOROF, A. Of Nobel class: A citation perspective on high-impact research authors. Theoretical Medicine, 13, 117–135.1992. Disponível em: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF02163625 Acesso em: 22 jun.2020.
GINGRAS, Y; WALLACE, M.L. Why it has become more difficult to predict Nobel Prize winners: a bibliometric analysis of nominees and winners of the chemistry and physics prizes (1901–2007). Scientometrics, Budapeste, v.82. p. 401–412. 2009. Disponível em: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs11192-009-0035-9 Acesso em: 22 jun.2020.
KULKARNI, A. V.et al.Comparisons of citations in Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar for articles. JAMA, v. 302, n. 10, p. 1092-1096, 2009.Disponível em: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/184519 Acesso em: 25 jun.2020.
MACROBERTS, M.H.;MACROBERTS, B.R.Problems of citation analysis: A critical review. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci., v.40, p.342-349.1989. Disponível em: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF02129604. Acesso em: 29 jun.2020.
MARTÍN, A.A. et al. Google Scholar, Web of Science, andScopus: a systematic comparison of citations in 252 subject categories.Journal of Informetrics. 2018, v. 12, n. 4, p. 1160-1177.2018.Disponível em: Disponível em: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1751157718303249 Acesso em: 19 jun.2020. Acesso em: 20 jun.2020.
MEADOWS, A. J. A comunicação científica. Brasília: Briquet de Lemos, 1999.
MEHO, L. I.; ROGERS, Y. Citation counting, citation ranking, and h-index of human-computer interaction researchers: a comparison of Scopus and Web of Science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, v. 59, n. 11, p. 1711-1726, 2008. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.20874. Acesso em: 29 jun.2020.
MEHO, L. I.; YANG, K. Impact of Data sources on citation counts and rankings of LIS Faculty: Web of Science Versus Scopus and Google Scholar. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, v. 58, n. 13, p. 2105-2125, 2007. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.20677. Acesso em: 28 jun.2020.
MERTON, R. K. A ciência e a estrutura social democrática. In: Ensaios de sociologia da ciência. São Paulo: Associação Filosófica Scientiae Studia; Editora 34, 2013. cap.19. p.651-662. Disponível em: https://ctsadalbertoazevedo.files.wordpress.com/2014/09/merton1968.pdf. Acesso em: 29 março. 2020.
MERTON, R. K. El efecto Mateo en la ciencia. In: MERTON, Robert King. La Sociologia de la Ciencia 2. Madrid: Alianza Editorial SA, 1977, cap. 20, p. 554-578.
MERTON, R. K. Os imperativos institucionais da ciência. In: DEUS, Jorge Dias de. (Org. e Introd.). A crítica de ciência: sociologia e ideologia da ciência. 2. ed. Rio de Janeiro: Azhar, 1979.
MIRANDA, D. B.; PEREIRA, M. N. F. O periódico cientifico como veículo de comunicação: uma revisão de literatura. Ciência da Informação, Brasília, v. 25, n. 3, p. 375-382, 1996.
MUELLER, S. P. M. A ciência, o sistema de comunicação científica e a literatura científica. In: CAMPELLO, B. S.; CENDÓN, B. V.; KREMER, J. M. (Org.). Fontes de informação para pesquisadores e profissionais. Belo Horizonte: UFMG, 2000a. p. 21-34.
MUELLER, S. P. M. O círculo vicioso que prende os periódicos nacionais. Datagramazero, Rio de Janeiro, n. 0, p. 1–8, dez. 1999.
MUELLER, S. P. M. O crescimento da ciência, o comportamento científico e a comunicação científica: algumas reflexões. Revista Biblioteconomia UFMG, Belo Horizonte, v.24, n.1, p.63-84, jan.-jun. 1995.
MUELLER, S. P. M. O periódico científico. In: CAMPELLO, B. S.; CENDÓN,B.V.; KREMER, J. M. (Org.). Fontes de informação para pesquisadores e profissionais. Belo Horizonte: UFMG, 2000. cap. 5, p. 73-95.
OPTHOF, T. Sense and nosense about the impacto fator. Cardiovascular Research, p.1-7, 1997. Disponível em: https://academic.oup.com/cardiovascres/article/33/1/1/295422 . Acesso em: 03 mar. 2020.
PRÊMIO NOBEL. 2019. Disponível em: https://www.nobelprize.org/. Acesso em: 03 abr. 2020.
PRICE, D. J. de. S. A ciência desde a Babilônia. Belo Horizonte: Itatiaia, 1976a.
PRICE, D. J. de. S. O Desenvolvimento da Ciência: análise histórica, filosófica, sociológica e econômica. Rio de Janeiro: Livros Técnicos e Científicos, 1976b.
RODRÍGUEZ‐NAVARRO, A. Measuring research excellence: Number of Nobel Prize achievements versus conventional bibliometric indicators, Journal of Documentation, V. 67, n. 4, p. 582-600.2011. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1108/00220411111145007. Acesso em: 25 jun.2020.
SANTOS, B. S. Da sociologia da ciência à política científica. Revista Crítica de Ciências Sociais, n. 1, jun, p. 11-56, 1978. Disponível em: http://www.boaventuradesousasantos.pt/media/pdfs/Da_sociologia_da_ciencia_a_politica_cientifica_RCCS1.PDF. Acesso em: 02 nov. 2019.
SOERENSEN, B. et al. Cem anos pela estrada do progresso: um século de prêmio Nobel. Adamantina: edições Omnia, 2004.
TARGINO, M. G. Comunicação científica: uma revisão de seus elementos básicos. Informação & Sociedade: estudos, João Pessoa, v.10, n.2, 2000. Disponível em: http://www.ies.ufpb.br/ojs/index.php/ies/article/view/326. Acesso em: 21 março. 2016.
TARGINO, M. G.; GARCIA J. C. R. Ciência brasileira na base de dados do Institute for Scientific Information(ISI). Ciência da Informação, v. 29, n. 1, p. 103-117, jan./abr. 2000.
VANZ, S.; CAREGNATO, S. Estudo de citações: uma ferramenta para entender a comunicação. Em Questão, Porto Alegre, v. 9, n. 2, p. 295-307, jul./dez. 2003. Disponível em: http://seer.ufrgs.br/index.php/EmQuestao/article/view/75/35. Acesso em: 02 de jan. 2019.
WANG, J. Citation time window choice for research impact evaluation. Scientometrics, Budapest, v.94, p. 851–872.2013. DOI 10.1007/s11192-012-0775-9. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-012-0775-9. Acesso em: 21 jun.2020.
WITTER, G. P. Produção científica: escalas de avaliação. In: POPLACION, D. A.; WITTER, G. P.; SILVA, J. F. M. da (Orgs.) Comunicação & produção científica: contexto, indicadores e avaliação. São Paulo: Angellara, 2006. p.287-311.
WITTER, G. P.; SOUZA, J. R. S. British Psychophysiology Society Annual Meeting (2005): análise da produção. Ciência da Informação, Brasília, v. 36, n. 2, p. 85-91, maio/ago. 2007. Disponível em: http://revista.ibict.br/ciinf/article/view/1179. Acesso em: 13 de julho. 2019.
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2020 Fábio Mascarenhas e Silva, Jailiny Fernanda Silva Stanford
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The author must guarantee that:
- there is full consensus among all the coauthors in approving the final version of the document and its submission for publication.
- the work is original, and when the work and/or words from other people were used, they were properly acknowledged.
Plagiarism in all of its forms constitutes an unethical publication behavior and is unacceptable. Encontros Bibli has the right to use software or any other method of plagiarism detection.
All manuscripts submitted to Encontros Bibli go through plagiarism and self-plagiarism identification. Plagiarism identified during the evaluation process will result in the filing of the submission. In case plagiarism is identified in a manuscript published in the journal, the Editor-in-Chief will conduct a preliminary investigation and, if necessary, will make a retraction.
This journal, following the recommendations of the Open Source movement, provides full open access to its content. By doing this, the authors keep all of their rights allowing Encontros Bibli to publish and make its articles available to the whole community.
Encontros Bibli content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Any user has the right to:
- Share - copy, download, print or redistribute the material in any medium or format.
- Adapt - remix, transform and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
According to the following terms:
- Attribution - You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- No additional restrictions - You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything that the license permits.