Research Productivity of Academics as Reflected in Web of Science: A Scientometric Study

Basavaraja MT; BT Sampath Kumar

Basavaraja MT Librarian, Acharya Institute of Technology, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India.
BT Sampath Kumar Professor, Department of Studies and Research in Library and Information Science Tumkur University, Tumakuru, Karnataka, India.

Abstract

Research productivity refers to an innovative thoughts and ideas which after theoretical and applied studies lead to publication of articles in leading journals, patent registration or documentation. In this context, the present study aims to identify the research productivity of University of Mysore and Bangalore University during 1989 to 2018. The study also tried to retrieve the information regarding the total number of citations, h-index, average citation per article of the faculty members of University of Mysore and Bangalore University using Web of Science. In order to get the research output of the universities, the search terms ‘University of Mysore’ and ‘Bangalore University’ are entered in the search box of the “Web of Science”. The result of the study shows that 4838 records of the University of Mysore and 2784 records of the Bangalore University have been included in the Web of Science database, out of which, majority (University of Mysore-91.28% and Bangalore University-91.38%) of the records are research articles. The study identified that among the faculty members of University of Mysore, Rangappa has received highest number of citations (4027), followed by Yathirajan hasreceived 2425 citations. Similarly, Kamath faculty member of the Bangalore University has received the highest number of citations (3691), Devi has received 2994 citations.In this context, the study recommends that the faculty members of the both universities need to publish their research articles in peer reviewed journals with high Impact Factor.

References

1. Altbach PG. What counts for academic productivity in research universities? Retrieved from http:// www.universityworldnews.com article.php? story= 20140715105656393
2. Bar IJ, Levene M, Lin A. Some measures for comparing citation databases. Journal of Informetrics 2007; 1(1): 26-34.
3. Biswas SK, Akhtaruzzaman M. Scientometric Analysis of Medical Research in Bangladesh. Bangladesh Journal of Medical Biochemistry 2013; 5(1): 3-4.
4. Gupta BM, Bala A. Indian S and T During Fifteen Years: A Quantitative Assessment using Publications Data. DESIDOC Journal of Library and Information Technology 2011; 31(5).
5. Kulkarni AV, Aziz B, Shams I et al. Author self-citation in the general medicine literature. PLoS One 2011; 6(6): e20885.
6. Lopez IC, Anegón DMF, Moed HF. Coverage and citation impact of oncological journals in the Web of Science and Scopus. Journal of Informetrics 2008; 2(4): 304-316.
7. Meho LI, 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 2007; 58(13): 2105-2125.
8. National Science Foundation. Science and engineering indicators 2012: Academic research and development. Retrieved from http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/seind12/ c5/c5h.htm
9. Rasolabadi M, Khaledi S, Ardalan M et al. Diabetes research in Iran: A scientometric analysis of publications output. ActaInformatica Medica 2015; 23(3): 160.
10. Visser MS, Moed HF. Comparing Web of Science and Scopus on a paper-by-paper basis. In Excellence and emergence. A new challenge for the combination of quantitative and qualitative approaches. Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Science and Technology Indicators. 2008; 23-25.