Does funded research have a greater scholarly impact? A study of funded and non-funded research published in high-impact library and information science journals

IF 2.1 Q2 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE
Altaf Ali, Mohammad Nazim
{"title":"Does funded research have a greater scholarly impact? A study of funded and non-funded research published in high-impact library and information science journals","authors":"Altaf Ali, Mohammad Nazim","doi":"10.1108/gkmc-03-2023-0102","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nThis study aims to examine the scholarly impact of funded and non-funded research published in ten core library and information science (LIS) journals published in 2016.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nIn total, ten high-impact LIS journals were selected using Google Scholar metrics. The source title of each selected journal was searched in the Scopus database to retrieve the articles published in 2016. The detailed information of all the retrieved articles for every journal was exported in a CSV Excel file, and after collecting all the journal articles’ information, all CSV Excel files were merged into a single MS Excel file for data analysis.\n\n\nFindings\nThe study analyzed 1,064 publications and found that 14% of them were funded research articles. Funded articles received higher average citation counts (24.56) compared to non-funded articles (20.49). Funded open-access articles had a higher scholarly impact than funded closed-access articles. The research area with the most funded articles was “Bibliometrics,” which also received the highest number of citations (1,676) with an average citation count of 24.64. The National Natural Science Foundation of China funded the most papers (30), while the USA funded the highest number of research publications (36) in the field of LIS.\n\n\nPractical implications\nThis study highlights the importance of securing funding, open access publishing, discipline-specific differences, diverse funding sources and aiming for higher citations. Researchers, practitioners and policymakers can use these findings to enhance research impact in LIS.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nThis study explores the impact of funding on research LIS and provides valuable insights into the intricate relationship between funding and research impact.\n","PeriodicalId":43718,"journal":{"name":"Global Knowledge Memory and Communication","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Knowledge Memory and Communication","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/gkmc-03-2023-0102","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose This study aims to examine the scholarly impact of funded and non-funded research published in ten core library and information science (LIS) journals published in 2016. Design/methodology/approach In total, ten high-impact LIS journals were selected using Google Scholar metrics. The source title of each selected journal was searched in the Scopus database to retrieve the articles published in 2016. The detailed information of all the retrieved articles for every journal was exported in a CSV Excel file, and after collecting all the journal articles’ information, all CSV Excel files were merged into a single MS Excel file for data analysis. Findings The study analyzed 1,064 publications and found that 14% of them were funded research articles. Funded articles received higher average citation counts (24.56) compared to non-funded articles (20.49). Funded open-access articles had a higher scholarly impact than funded closed-access articles. The research area with the most funded articles was “Bibliometrics,” which also received the highest number of citations (1,676) with an average citation count of 24.64. The National Natural Science Foundation of China funded the most papers (30), while the USA funded the highest number of research publications (36) in the field of LIS. Practical implications This study highlights the importance of securing funding, open access publishing, discipline-specific differences, diverse funding sources and aiming for higher citations. Researchers, practitioners and policymakers can use these findings to enhance research impact in LIS. Originality/value This study explores the impact of funding on research LIS and provides valuable insights into the intricate relationship between funding and research impact.
受资助的研究是否有更大的学术影响?一项对发表在高影响力图书馆和信息科学期刊上的资助和非资助研究的研究
目的本研究旨在考察2016年发表在10种核心图书馆情报学期刊上的资助和非资助研究的学术影响。设计/方法/方法使用Google Scholar的指标共选择了10本高影响力的LIS期刊。在Scopus数据库中检索各入选期刊的源标题,检索2016年发表的文章。将每份期刊的所有检索文章的详细信息导出为CSV Excel文件,在收集完所有期刊文章信息后,将所有CSV Excel文件合并为一个MS Excel文件进行数据分析。研究结果该研究分析了1064份出版物,发现其中14%是受资助的研究论文。资助文章的平均引用数(24.56)高于非资助文章(20.49)。资助的开放获取文章比资助的封闭获取文章具有更高的学术影响力。被资助论文最多的研究领域是“文献计量学”,被引用次数最多(1676次),平均被引用次数为24.64次。中国国家自然科学基金资助的论文数量最多(30篇),而美国资助的研究论文数量最多(36篇)。本研究强调了确保资金、开放获取出版、学科特定差异、多样化资金来源和以更高引用为目标的重要性。研究人员、从业人员和政策制定者可以利用这些发现来提高LIS的研究影响。原创性/价值本研究探讨了经费对科研成果的影响,并对经费与科研成果之间错综复杂的关系提供了有价值的见解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Global Knowledge Memory and Communication
Global Knowledge Memory and Communication INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE-
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
16.70%
发文量
77
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信