Abstract
This study examines the research productivity, publication quality, and collaboration patterns of researchers from the top-ranked library and information science (LIS) schools in China and the United States using Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus data. In particular, this study investigates the monetary reward policies of the Chinese LIS schools that might influence their researchers’ publishing activities. The results show that most of the top-ranked LIS schools in China offer monetary rewards to their faculty to publish in journals indexed in WoS as first authors. In addition, the findings indicate that the number of WoS papers by researchers working in Chinese LIS schools has increased rapidly and the ratio of this number to that of such papers by their US counterparts has been rising over the past decade. However, we observe no such rising trend in papers that are indexed only in Scopus. Although the Chinese LIS schools have a higher average annual growth rate of WoS publications than US LIS schools, they still lag considerably behind their US counterparts in publication quality, as measured by citations. We also find that Chinese LIS researchers are less likely to be supporting authors on their international collaborative publications than their US counterparts.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Adams, J. (2005). Early citation counts correlate with accumulated impact. Scientometrics, 63(3), 567–581.
Adkins, D., & Budd, J. (2006). Scholarly productivity of US LIS faculty. Library & Information Science Research, 28(3), 374–389.
Bao, W., & Wu, H. (2016). Salary in the Ivory Tower: The influencing mechanism of university salary in China. Peking University Education Review, 14(2), 113–132. (191).
Bordons, M., Gomez, I., Fernandez, M. T., Zulueta, M. A., & Mendez, A. (1996). Local, domestic and international scientific collaboration in biomedical research. Scientometrics, 37(2), 279–295.
Budd, J. M. (2000). Scholarly productivity of US LIS faculty: An update. The Library Quarterly, 70(2), 230–245.
Budd, J. M. (2015). Productivity of US LIS and ischool faculty. Library & Information Science Research, 37(4), 290–295.
Budd, J. M., & Seavey, C. A. (1996). Productivity of US library and information science faculty: The Hayes study revisited. The Library Quarterly, 66(1), 1–20.
Cao, C., Li, N., Li, X., & Liu, L. (2013). Reforming China’s S&T system. Science, 341(6145), 460–462.
Chu, C. M., & Wolfram, D. (1991). Α survey of the growth of Canadian research in information science. Canadian Journal of Information and Library Science, 16(1), 12–28.
Cyranoski, D. (2004). China increases share of global scientific publications. Nature, 431, 116.
China Academic Degrees and Graduate Education Development Centre. (2017). China university subject ranking. Retrieved January 14, 2019 from http://www.chinadegrees.cn/xwyyjsjyxx/xkpgjg/2016phden/index.shtml.
Hayes, R. M. (1983). Citation statistics as a measure of faculty research productivity. Journal of Education for Librarianship, 23(3), 151–172.
He, T., & Wang, W. (2006). Library and information science research in China: An international perspective. The International Information & Library Review, 38(4), 185–191.
Hofstede, G. (2011). Dimensionalizing cultures: The Hofstede model in context. Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, 2(1), 2307-0919.
Horri, A. (2004). Bibliometric overview of library and information science research productivity in Iran. Journal of Education for Library and Information Science, 45(1), 15–25.
Hvistendahl, M. (2013). China’s publication bazaar. Science, 342(6162), 1035–1039.
King, D. A. (2004). The scientific impact of nations. Nature, 430(6997), 311.
Lane, J. (2009). Assessing the impact of science funding. Science, 324(5932), 1273–1275.
Lane, J., & Bertuzzi, S. (2011). Measuring the results of science investments. Science, 331(6018), 678–680.
Levitt, J. M., & Thewall, M. (2009). Citation levels and collaboration within library and information science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60(3), 434–442.
Leydesdorff, L., & Wagner, C. (2009). Is the United States losing ground in science? A global perspective on the world science system. Scientometrics, 78(1), 23–36.
Leydesdorff, L., Wagner, C. S., & Bornmann, L. (2014). The European Union, China, and the United States in the top-1% and top-10% layers of most-frequently cited publications: Competition and collaborations. Journal of Informetrics, 8(3), 606–617.
Li, J., & Li, Y. (2015). Patterns and evolution of coauthorship in China’s humanities and social sciences. Scientometrics, 102(3), 1997–2010.
Liu, W., Hu, G., Tang, L., & Wang, Y. (2015). China’s global growth in social science research: Uncovering evidence from bibliometric analyses of SSCI publications (1978–2013). Journal of Informetrics, 9(3), 555–569.
Manzari, L. (2013). Library and information science journal prestige as assessed by library and information science faculty. The Library Quarterly, 83(1), 42–60.
Meadows, J. (2008). Fifty years of UK research in information science. Journal of Information Science, 34(4), 403–414.
Meho, L. I., & Spurgin, K. M. (2005). Ranking the research productivity of library and information science faculty and schools: An evaluation of data sources and research methods. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 56(12), 1314–1331.
Meho, L. I., & Sugimoto, C. R. (2009). Assessing the scholarly impact of information studies: A tale of two citation databases—Scopus and Web of Science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60(12), 2499–2508.
Mine, S., Ueda, S., & Miwa, M. (2006). Library and information science educators in Japan: Academic qualifications and research productivity. Library and Information Science, 55, 71–82.
Mongeon, P., & Paul-Hus, A. (2016). The journal coverage of Web of Science and Scopus: A comparative analysis. Scientometrics, 106(1), 213–228.
Mukherjee, B. (2010). Assessing Asian scholarly research in library and information science: A quantitative view as reflected in Web of Knowledge. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 36(1), 90–101.
Olmeda-Gomez, C., & de Moya-Anegon, F. (2016). Publishing trends in library and information sciences across European countries and institutions. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 42(1), 27–37.
Pereira, J. C. R., Fischer, A. L., & Escuder, M. M. L. (2000). Driving factors of high performance in Brazilian management sciences for the 1981–1995 period. Scientometrics, 49(2), 307–319.
Persson, O., Glänzel, W., & Danell, R. (2004). Inflationary bibliometric values: The role of scientific collaboration and the need for relative indicators in evaluative studies. Scientometrics, 60(3), 421–432.
Phillips, N. (2017). A close look at China’s rise. Nature, 545(7655), S39.
Pradhan, P., & Chandrakar, R. (2011). Indian LIS literature in international journals with specific reference to SSCI database: A bibliometric study. Library Philosophy and Practice, 657, 1–16.
Qiu, J. (2015). Safeguarding research integrity in China. National Science Review, 2(1), 122–125.
Quan, W., Chen, B., & Shu, F. (2017). Publish or impoverish: An investigation of the monetary reward system of science in China (1999–2016). Aslib Journal of Information Management, 69(5), 486–502.
Sapa, R. (2007). International contribution to library and information science in Poland: A bibliometric analysis. Scientometrics, 71(3), 473–493.
Shapira, P., & Wang, J. (2010). Follow the money. Nature, 468(7324), 627–628.
Teixeira Da Silva, J. A. (2017). Does China need to rethink its metrics-and citation-based research rewards policies? Scientometrics, 112(3), 1853–1857.
Thelwall, M., & Maflahi, N. (2019). Academic collaboration rates and citation associations vary substantially between countries and fields. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 71(8), 968–978.
Thelwall, M., & Sud, P. (2016). National, disciplinary and temporal variations in the extent to which articles with more authors have more impact: Evidence from a geometric field normalised citation indicator. Journal of Informetrics, 10(1), 48–61.
U.S. News & World Report. (2018). Best library and lnformation studies programs. Retrieved January 14, 2019 from https://www.usnews.com/best-graduate-schools/top-library-information-science-programs/library-information-science-rankings.
Walters, W. H., & Wilder, E. I. (2016). Disciplinary, national, and departmental contributions to the literature of library and information science, 2007–2012. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 67(6), 1487–1506.
Wang, C. (2011). The development of China’s scholarly publications in library and information science, 1979–2009: An analysis of ISI literature. Library Management, 32(6/7), 435–443.
Wilson, C. S., Boell, S. K., Kennan, M. A., & Willard, P. (2011). Publications of Australian LIS academics in database. Australian Academic & Research Libraries, 42(3), 211–230.
Wolfram, D. (2012). An analysis of Canadian contributions to the information science research literature: 1989–2008. Canadian Journal of Information and Library Science, 36(1), 52–66.
Woolston, C. (2018). Satisfaction in science. Nature, 562(7728), 611.
Xiao, X., Zhang, F., & Li, J. (2015). Library and information science research in China—a survey based analysis of 10 LIS educational institutes. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 41(3), 330–340.
Yang, K., & Lee, J. (2012). Analysis of publication patterns in Korean library and information science research. Scientometrics, 93(2), 233–251.
Yazit, N., & Zainab, A. N. (2007). Publication productivity of Malaysian authors and institutions in LIS. Malaysian Journal of Library and Information Science, 12(2), 35–55.
Zhou, P., & Leydesdorff, L. (2006). The emergence of China as a leading nation in science. Research Policy, 35(1), 83–104.
Zhou, P., Thijs, B., & Glänzel, W. (2009). Is China also becoming a giant in social sciences? Scientometrics, 79(3), 593–621.
Acknowledgements
This work was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 71704077). We would like to thank Jianjun Sun, Lei Pei, Yun Shi, Jiang Li, Huan Xie at Nanjing University, Hui Yan at Renmin University of China, and Zhenjia Fan at Nankai University for the policy resource collection. Also, we are grateful to Ronald Rousseau at University of Antwerp, Fred Y. Ye at Nanjing University, and the reviewers for very helpful comments.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Zhao, Z., Pan, X. & Hua, W. Comparative analysis of the research productivity, publication quality, and collaboration patterns of top ranked library and information science schools in China and the United States. Scientometrics 126, 931–950 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03796-9
Received:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03796-9