不同 SCI 学科的研究经费:基于 Web of Science 的比较分析

IF 4.1 Q1 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE
Wencan Tian, Ruonan Cai, Zhichao Fang, Qianqian Xie, Zhigang Hu, Xianwen Wang
{"title":"不同 SCI 学科的研究经费:基于 Web of Science 的比较分析","authors":"Wencan Tian, Ruonan Cai, Zhichao Fang, Qianqian Xie, Zhigang Hu, Xianwen Wang","doi":"10.1162/qss_a_00315","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n To provide valuable insights for shaping future funding policies, in this study, we offer a comprehensive panorama of the research funding across 171 SCI disciplines in the past decade (2011–2020), based on more than 13 million scientific literature records from the Web of Science. The relationship between funding and research impact was also explored. To this end, we employ two indicators, i.e., the universality and multiplicity of funding, to indicate the funding level and six indicators to gauge the impact advantages of funding. Our findings reveal an upward trend in both the universality (increasing from 66.30% to 74.26%) and multiplicity (increasing from 2.82 to 3.26) of funding over the past decade. The allocation of funding varies across disciplines, with life sciences and earth sciences receiving the highest percentage of funding (78.31%) and medicine having the highest multiplicity of funding (3.07). Engineering and computer science have seen relatively rapid growth in terms of universality and multiplicity of funding. Funded articles have a greater impact than unfunded ones. And this impact strengthens as the number of funding grants increases. Through regression analysis, the citation advantage of funding was also proven at the article level, although the usage advantage is not significant.\n \n \n https://www.webofscience.com/api/gateway/wos/peer-review/10.1162/qss_a_00315\n","PeriodicalId":34021,"journal":{"name":"Quantitative Science Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Research funding in different SCI disciplines: A comparison analysis based on Web of Science\",\"authors\":\"Wencan Tian, Ruonan Cai, Zhichao Fang, Qianqian Xie, Zhigang Hu, Xianwen Wang\",\"doi\":\"10.1162/qss_a_00315\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n To provide valuable insights for shaping future funding policies, in this study, we offer a comprehensive panorama of the research funding across 171 SCI disciplines in the past decade (2011–2020), based on more than 13 million scientific literature records from the Web of Science. The relationship between funding and research impact was also explored. To this end, we employ two indicators, i.e., the universality and multiplicity of funding, to indicate the funding level and six indicators to gauge the impact advantages of funding. Our findings reveal an upward trend in both the universality (increasing from 66.30% to 74.26%) and multiplicity (increasing from 2.82 to 3.26) of funding over the past decade. The allocation of funding varies across disciplines, with life sciences and earth sciences receiving the highest percentage of funding (78.31%) and medicine having the highest multiplicity of funding (3.07). Engineering and computer science have seen relatively rapid growth in terms of universality and multiplicity of funding. Funded articles have a greater impact than unfunded ones. And this impact strengthens as the number of funding grants increases. Through regression analysis, the citation advantage of funding was also proven at the article level, although the usage advantage is not significant.\\n \\n \\n https://www.webofscience.com/api/gateway/wos/peer-review/10.1162/qss_a_00315\\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":34021,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Quantitative Science Studies\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Quantitative Science Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00315\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Quantitative Science Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00315","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

为了给未来资助政策的制定提供有价值的见解,在本研究中,我们基于 Web of Science 中超过 1300 万条科学文献记录,对过去十年(2011-2020 年)中 171 个 SCI 学科的研究资助情况进行了全面概述。我们还探讨了经费与研究影响力之间的关系。为此,我们采用了两个指标(即资助的普遍性和多重性)来表示资助水平,并采用六个指标来衡量资助的影响优势。我们的研究结果表明,在过去十年中,资助的普遍性(从 66.30% 增加到 74.26%)和多重性(从 2.82 增加到 3.26)都呈上升趋势。各学科的资金分配情况各不相同,生命科学和地球科学获得的资金比例最高(78.31%),医学获得的资金倍数最高(3.07)。工程学和计算机科学在资助的普遍性和多重性方面增长相对较快。获得资助的文章比未获得资助的文章具有更大的影响力。而且这种影响力随着资助数量的增加而增强。https://www.webofscience.com/api/gateway/wos/peer-review/10.1162/qss_a_00315。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Research funding in different SCI disciplines: A comparison analysis based on Web of Science
To provide valuable insights for shaping future funding policies, in this study, we offer a comprehensive panorama of the research funding across 171 SCI disciplines in the past decade (2011–2020), based on more than 13 million scientific literature records from the Web of Science. The relationship between funding and research impact was also explored. To this end, we employ two indicators, i.e., the universality and multiplicity of funding, to indicate the funding level and six indicators to gauge the impact advantages of funding. Our findings reveal an upward trend in both the universality (increasing from 66.30% to 74.26%) and multiplicity (increasing from 2.82 to 3.26) of funding over the past decade. The allocation of funding varies across disciplines, with life sciences and earth sciences receiving the highest percentage of funding (78.31%) and medicine having the highest multiplicity of funding (3.07). Engineering and computer science have seen relatively rapid growth in terms of universality and multiplicity of funding. Funded articles have a greater impact than unfunded ones. And this impact strengthens as the number of funding grants increases. Through regression analysis, the citation advantage of funding was also proven at the article level, although the usage advantage is not significant. https://www.webofscience.com/api/gateway/wos/peer-review/10.1162/qss_a_00315
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Quantitative Science Studies
Quantitative Science Studies INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE-
CiteScore
12.10
自引率
12.50%
发文量
46
审稿时长
22 weeks
期刊介绍:
×
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