Approaching bibliometrics and prosopography: The comprehensive publishing landscape of CNPq (Brazil) and CONICET (Argentina) and its coverage in global databases
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5007/1518-2924.2025.e103528Palabras clave:
Bibliometric Coverage, Brazil-Argentina, Wos-Scopus, National Publishing Databases, ProsopographyResumen
Objective: Global databases such as Web of Science and Scopus have determined the standard indicators to measure the research output in national comparisons and its quality evaluation for decades. Already classic studies of science proved that this landscape of scientific production was distorted by using overly selective bibliographical indexes that were considered “international databases” while their coverage was severely limited. A relevant part of the bibliometric literature in the last 10 years has revolved around the limitations of these global data sources and the search for alternatives to explore more comprehensive universes of the scholarly output, considering all disciplines and languages.
Methods: Particularly relevant in this debate are some recently created bibliographic services and search engines that provide new opportunities: Dimensions, Lens, Open Alex, CrossRef and Google Scholar. Our specific contribution to these studies relies on a methodological shift based on a convergence between prosopography and bibliometrics. For that end, we selected two countries that can be considered “peripheral centers” in the Latin American region.
Results: Firstly, we determined a universe of national researchers of the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq, Brazil) and the National Council for Scientific and Technical Research (CONICET, Argentina). The target populations are composed of 10,619 tenured researchers at CONICET and 14,418 holders of the CNPq’s “research productivity fellowship”. Secondly, we built a database with their comprehensive publishing performance uploaded in the national curricular information systems, the Brazilian Lattes and Argentina’s SIGEVA, that includes metadata for all articles. After computational and manual data cleaning of this database, we retained a total 464,361 articles for Brazil and 81,005 for Argentina published in 2013-2020.
Conclusions: The comparative study shows that Argentina and Brazil have similar patterns of coverage in the global databases, although they differ in terms of collaboration practices and national publishing.
Descargas
Citas
Akbaritabar, A., Castro Torres, A. F. & Larivière, V. (2023) MPIDR Working Paper, Rostock, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research. https://doi.org/10.4054/MPIDR-WP-2023-029 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4054/MPIDR-WP-2023-029
Aksnes, D. W. & Sivertsen, G. (2023). Global trends in international research collaboration, 1980-2021. Journal of Data and Information Science, 8(2), 26–42. https://doi.org/10.2478/jdis-2023-0015 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/jdis-2023-0015
Archambault, E. et al. (2006). Benchmarking scientific output in the social sciences and humanities: The limits of existing databases. Scientometrics, 68(3):329-342. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-006-0115-z DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-006-0115-z
Arvanitis, R. & Gaillard, J. (1992) Vers un renoveau des indicateurs de science pour les pays en developpement. Paris: L’Orstom.
The author & The author (2021). La publication en Ibéro-Amérique en tant que mode d’internationalisation des chercheurs en sciences humaines et sociales du Conicet (Argentine). Revue d’anthropologie des connaissances, 15(15-3). http://journals.openedition.org/rac/23440 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4000/rac.23440
The author (2014). Publishing from the periphery: Structural heterogeneity and segmented circuits. The evaluation of scientific publications for tenure in Argentina’s CONICET. Current Sociology. Vol.62 n5. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011392114533977 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0011392114533977
The author. (2017). Peripheral Scientists: Institutional Know-How, Styles of Publication and Circuits of Recognition in Argentina. The “Career-Best Publications” of CONICET Researchers. DADOS, Revista de Ciências Sociais, 60(3), p. 825 a 865. https://doi.org/10.1590/001152582017136 English version: https://www.scielo.br/j/dados/a/BFBdN8RRZVzcVcbnJznFYPs/?lang=en DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/001152582017136
The author. (2024a) “Research Assessment in Uruguay, a reflexive perspective” https://cecic.fcp.uncuyo.edu.ar/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/URUGUAY-FINAL-REPORT-2024-1.pdf
The author. (2024b) “The transformative relation between publishers and editors: research quality and academic autonomy at stake” Preprint: https://osf.io/z4xb6/ https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/Z4XB6
The author., The author & Bekerman, F. (2018). Institutional expansion and scientific development in the periphery. The structural heterogeneity of Argentina’s academic field (1983-2015). Minerva. A Review of Science, Learning and Policy, 56(3), 305-331. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-017-9340-2 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-017-9340-2
The author. & Bekerman, F. (2019). Culturas evaluativas: Impactos y dilemas del Programa de Incentivos a Docentes-Investigadores en Argentina (1993-2018). CLACSO, 2019. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvt6rksm DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvt6rksm
The author. & The author (2021). “Publishing Performance, Bibliodiversity and Bilingualism in a Complete Corpus of Scientific Publications” in Revista Iberoamericana de Ciencia, Tecnología y Sociedad-CTS, 16(46), 41-71. https://www.revistacts.net/contenido/numero-46/productividad-bibliodiversidad-y-bilinguismo-en-un-corpus-completo-de-producciones-cientificas/
Biagioli, M., Lippman, A., Csiszar, A., Gingras, Y., Power, M., Wouters, P., Griesemer, J. R., Kehm, B. M., de Rijcke, S., Stöckelová, T., Fanelli, D., Sismondo, S., Oransky, I., Barbour, B., Stell, B., Guaspare, C., Didier, E., Brookes, P. S., Antkare, I., Morgenstern, B., Lin, J., Wager, E., Brunton, F., Jacob, M.-A., & Delfanti, A. (2019). Introduction: Metrics and the new ecologies of academic misconduct. En Gaming the metrics: Misconduct and manipulation in academic research (pp. 1-23). MIT Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/11087.003.0001
Bourdieu, P. (1998). Les Règles de l'art. Genèse et structure du champ littéraire. Paris: Éditions du Seuil.
Chinchilla-Rodríguez Z., Sugimoto C.R.& Larivière V. (2019). Follow the leader: On the relationship between leadership and scholarly impact in international collaborations. PLoS ONE 14(6): e0218309. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0218309
The author, Mena-Chalco, J., Alcazar, J. J. P., Tuesta, E. F., Delgado, K. V., Mugnaini, R., & Silva, G. S. (2012). Minerando e Caracterizando Dados de Currículos Lattes. Brazilian Workshop on Social Network Analysis and Mining (BraSNAM). https://sol.sbc.org.br/index.php/brasnam/article/view/6868/6761
The author, Mugnaini, R., Trucolo C., Delgado, K.V., Mena-Chalco, J. P.& A. F. Köhler (2019). “Geographic and Disciplinary Distribution of the Brazilian’s PHD Community: Patterns of the Scientific Collaboration Structure”. Brazilian Journal of Information Science: Research Trends, vol. 13, nº 4, p. 113-31, https://doi.org/10.36311/1981-1640 DOI: https://doi.org/10.36311/1981-1640.2019.v13n4.07.p113
Doğan, G., Taşkın, Z., Kulczycki, E., & Pölönen, J. (2022). What makes top 20 JIF journals “top”?: Exploring characteristics of journals indexed in the Journal Citation Reports. In N. Robinson-Garcia, D. Torres-Salinas, & W. Arroyo-Machado (Eds.), 26th International Conference on Science and Technology Indicators, STI 2022 (sti2242). https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6906891
Engels, T. C. E., Starčič, A. I., Kulczycki, E., Pölönen, J. & Sivertsen, G. (2018). Aslib Journal of Information Management, 70(6), 592-607. https://doi.org/10.1108/AJIM-05-2018-0127 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/AJIM-05-2018-0127
Gareau, F. (1988). Another Type Of Third World Dependency: The Social Sciences, International Sociology. (Vol. 3, nº 2, pp.171-178). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/026858088003002005
Harzing, A. W. & Alakangas, S. (2016). Google Scholar, Scopus and the Web of Science: A longitudinal and cross-disciplinary comparison. Scientometrics, 106(2), 787-804. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1798-9 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1798-9
Kwiek, M. (2020). Internationalists and Locals: International Research Collaboration in a Resource-Poor System. Scientometrics. Vol. 125. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03460-2
Kousha, K., & Thelwall, M. (2007). Google scholar citations and Google Web/URL Citations: A multiple-discipline exploratory analysis. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(7), 1055-1065. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.20584
Marginson, S. (2020). The world research system. En Changing higher education for a changing world (pp. 35-51). Bloomsbury Publishing. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5040/9781350108448.0010
Martinez-Avila, D. Qualis Periódicos: el sistema brasileño de evaluación de revistas. https://recyt.fecyt.es/index.php/ThinkEPI/article/view/thinkepi.2019.e13e01/42168 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3145/thinkepi.2019.e13e01
Martin-Martin, A. et al., 2018 “Google Scholar, Web of Science, and Scopus: A systematic comparison of citations in 252 subject categories” Journal of Informetrics 12 (2018) 1160–1177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2018.09.002 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2018.09.002
Martín-Martín, A., Thelwall, M., Orduna-Malea, E., & Delgado López-Cózar, E. (2021). Google Scholar, Microsoft Academic, Scopus, Dimensions, Web of Science, and OpenCitations’ COCI: a multidisciplinary comparison of coverage via citations. Scientometrics, 126(1), 871–906. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03690-4 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03690-4
Mugnaini, R. et al. (2019). Panorama da produção científica do Brasil além da indexação: uma análise exploratória da comunicação em periódicos. Transinformação, v.31, e190033, 2019. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/2318-0889201931e190033 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/2318-0889201931e190033
Nguyen, B. X., Luczak-Roesch, M., Dinneen, J.D., & Larivière, V. (2022) Assessing the Quality of Bibliographic Data Sources for Measuring International Research Collaboration. Quantitative Science Studies. Advance Publication. https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00211 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00211
Rafols, I., Ciarli, T. & Chavarro, D. (2015). Biases in the representation of knowledge on rice. Ponencia presentada en la Globelics Conference, La Habana, Cuba.
Rafols, I., Muthu, M., Rodríguez-Gairín, J. -M., Somoza-Fernández, M. & Urbano, C. (2023). Why coverage matters: Invisibility of agricultural research from the Global South may be an obstacle to development. Recuperado a partir de https://www.leidenmadtrics.nl/articles/why-coverage-matters-invisibility-of-agricultural-research-from-the-global-south-may-be-an-obstacle-to-development DOI: https://doi.org/10.59350/c78x1-y9253
Shu, Quan, Chen & Sugimoto (2020) “The role of Web of Science publications in China’s tenure system”,in Scientometrics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-019-03339-x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-019-03339-x
Shu, Wang, Liu, Qiu & Larivière, V. (2022) “Global impact or national accessibility? A paradox in China’s science”, Scientometrics https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-022-04537-w DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-022-04537-w
Siler, K & Larivière, V. (2022) Who games metrics and rankings? Institutional niches and journal impact factor inflation, Research Policy 51, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2022.104608 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2022.104608
Van Leeuwen, T. N., Moed, H.F., Tijssen, R.J.W. et al. (2001) Language biases in the coverage of the Science Citation Index and its consequences for international comparisons of national research performance. Scientometrics 51, 335–346. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010549719484 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010549719484
Van Leeuwen, T. (2022). Using research metrics in support of assessing social sciences research performance: A comparison of major bibliographic systems. In Handbook on research assessment in the social sciences (pp. 148-161). Edward Elgar Publishing. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4337/9781800372559.00017
Vélez Cuartas, G. J., The author., Quintero, D. R., Tirado, A. U., Gutiérrez, G. G., Pallares, C. & The author (2022). La producción argentina en acceso abierto y pagos de APC. CONICET: Buenos Aires. https://www.conicet.gov.ar/wp-content/uploads/INFORME-CONICET-Argentina-Publicaciones-y-Pagos-de-APC-REVISADO-2023.pdf
Vessuri, H., Guédon, J.-C., & Cetto, A. M. (2014). Excellence or quality? Impact of the current competition regime on science and scientific publishing in Latin America and its implications for development. Current Sociology, 62(5). https://doi.org/10.1177/0011392113512839 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0011392113512839
Descargas
Publicado
Cómo citar
Número
Sección
Licencia
Derechos de autor 2025 Luciano Digiampietri, Osvaldo Gallardo, Denis Baranger, Fernanda Beigel
Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución 4.0.
El autor debe garantizar:
que existe un consenso total de todos los coautores para aprobar la versión final del documento y su presentación para su publicación.
que su trabajo es original, y si se han utilizado el trabajo y / o las palabras de otras personas, estos se han reconocido correctamente.
El plagio en todas sus formas constituye un comportamiento editorial poco ético y es inaceptable. Encontros Bibli se reserva el derecho de utilizar software o cualquier otro método para detectar plagio.
Todas las presentaciones recibidas para su evaluación en la revista Encontros Bibli: revista electrónica de biblioteconomía y ciencias de la información pasan por la identificación del plagio y el auto-plagio. El plagio identificado en los manuscritos durante el proceso de evaluación dará como resultado la presentación de la presentación. En el caso de identificación de plagio en un manuscrito publicado en la revista, el Editor en Jefe llevará a cabo una investigación preliminar y, si es necesario, la retractará.
Esta revista, siguiendo las recomendaciones del movimiento de Acceso Abierto, proporciona su contenido en Acceso Abierto Completo. Por lo tanto, los autores conservan todos sus derechos, permitiendo a Encontros Bibli publicar sus artículos y ponerlos a disposición de toda la comunidad.
Los contenidos de Encontros Bibli están licenciados bajo Licencia Creative Commons 4.0.
Cualquier usuario tiene derecho a:
- Compartir: copiar, descargar, imprimir o redistribuir material en cualquier medio o formato
- Adaptar: mezclar, transformar y crear a partir del material para cualquier propósito, incluso comercial.
De acuerdo con los siguientes términos:
- Atribución: debe otorgar el crédito apropiado, proporcionar un enlace a la licencia e indicar si se han realizado cambios. Debe hacerlo bajo cualquier circunstancia razonable, pero de ninguna manera sugeriría que el licenciante lo respalde a usted o su uso.
- Sin restricciones adicionales: no puede aplicar términos legales o medidas tecnológicas que restrinjan legalmente a otros de hacer cualquier cosa que permita la licencia.
As obras deste periódico estão licenciadas com 