Scientometric Mapping of Defence Life Science Journal

University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Library Philosophy and Practice (e-journal) Libraries at University of Nebraska-Lincoln 2021 SCIENTOMETRIC MAPPING OF DEFENCE LIFE SCIENCE JOURNAL Neha Kumari Teli Mohan Lal Sukhadia University, neha.solanki.udr@gmail.com Naveen Chaparwal Mohan Lal Sukhadia University, naveenchhaparwal56@gmail.com Dr. P. S. Rajput Mohan Lal Sukhadia University, drpsrajput@mlsu.ac.in Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/libphilprac Part of the Library and Information Science Commons Teli, Neha Kumari; Chaparwal, Naveen; and Rajput, Dr. P. S., "SCIENTOMETRIC MAPPING OF DEFENCE LIFE SCIENCE JOURNAL" (2021). Library Philosophy and Practice (e-journal). 4886. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/libphilprac/4886 SCIENTOMETRIC MAPPING OF DEFENCE LIFE SCIENCE JOURNAL Neha Kumari Teli, Naveen Chaparwal and Dr. P. S. Rajput Department of Library and Information Science Mohanlal Sukhadia University, Udaipur, India Email: neha.solanki.udr@gmail.com ABSTRACT This paper analyzes scientometric mapping of 178 articles which was published in the Defence Life Science Journal. 14 issues from 4 volumes during 2016-2019 have been considered for the current study. To analysis the publication year of the articles to know authorship pattern to identify how many single and multiple author contribute to know how many pages in maximum articles to discuss top 10 cited articles to identify author productivity degreeof collaboration; collaboration index: all these are to mainly discussed in the research. This study reveals that out of 178 publications 5(2.8%) paper contributed by single author and rest of articles 173(97.2%) papers contributed from multiple authored. Keywords: Scientometric research, Defence Life Science Journal, Authorship pattern, Productivity of Authors, Top Citation review. INTRODUCTION Scientometric study is used to measure and analyze scientific literature. Nalimov and Mulchenko (1969) introduced the word scientometric for characterizing terms like structure, growth, inter-relationship, and productivity in science studies (Correia et al., 2018). Scientometric can measure and analyze science, technology and innovation (Ahmadi, 2018) according to De Solla Price (2000), scientometrics is the application of mathematical and statistical methods of scientific literature (Tunga, 2014). The present study investigates Defence Life Science Journal (DLSJ) as a source journal on indicator like authorship pattern, degree of collaboration, top 15 most cited paper etc. DLSJ is being published by Defence Scientific Information & Documentation Centre (DESIDOC), DRDO. Defence Life Science Journal is a quarterly publication which follows double-blind peer-review process (Defence Life Science Journal’s Page on Publons). This journal provides open access to its content to the public. First issue of Defence Life Science Journal was published in the June 2016 as Vol. 1, No. 1. (About context/ Defence Life Science Journal). LITERATURE REVIEW K.G. & V., (2020) examine 25,132 biochemistry research contributed by Indian scientists during 2004 to 2013.Data were collected from Web of Science. In this research author reported that study on biochemistry was growing continuously and overall annual rate of growth was 36.84 %. The 97.46 % papers were composed by multiple authors. Co- authorship index was commonly expanding, and it changed through 93 to 105 during the measure of research. Journal articles contribute 89.43 percent of the entire output followed by reviews (7.14 %). Indian researchers do analysis work together with the researchers of USA (2.49 %). The geographical circulation reveals that Tamil Nadu, Uttar Pradesh and Delhi lead the listing. The research also indicates that, C. Abdul Jaleel (58) and L. Pai (37) are the most elevated positioned authors inside the field. Sudarsana & Baba, (2019) carried out scientometric analysis on global nuclear fuel research during 2000 to 2017. Author uses various types of scientometric indicators such as: prolific authors, collaboration networks of authors, productive organization involved and the citation pattern. A total 402 bibliographic records from online Science fundamental collection database were the knowledge source and CiteSpace and VOSviewer software analyzed the data. As half no. of publications (4166; 56%) were published from 2011-2017, this year has best number of publications (679; 9%). Galyani-Moghaddam, (2019) conducted a study on visualization of collaboration in psychology during the period 1970 to 2016. Author data collected from Web of Science and social network analysis techniques, a network of co-authorship for psychology papers published by Iranian authors have been analyzed. Total 2,204 records were retrieved from Web of Science; single authored papers were 18.11% rest 81.88% papers from multi-authors. The collaboration network has 63% density, which is over the average and shows that the network is moderately interconnected, with researchers cooperating on joint publications. N. & CA., (2018) conduct study of Environmental Management research output between 1989–2014 and investigation that a total 61877 research publication was published and after evaluate it analyzed that 2014, the highest number of research papers were published, and Huang GH was the most popular author with 213 contribution, followed by Change NB with 83 contributions, 0.19 is relative rate of growth and 0.85 degree of collaboration which is maximum within the year 2008 and 2009. OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY The main intention of this study is: 1. To examine the growth of publication output of Defence Life Science Journal. 2. To investigate the authors productivity and authorship pattern of the articles 3. To recognize Degree of collaboration, Co-authorship and Collaboration Index. 4. To construct and analyze the co-authorship network for research output of Defence Life Science Journal 5. To identify the average page length of articles METHODOLOGY For the purpose of the present study, Defence Life Science Journal has been selected as the source journal, fourteen issues of four volumes from 2016 to 2019 (vol.1 to 4) are considered. The relevant 178 papers have been downloaded from the DRDO websites and entered in Microsoft Excel sheet which identified variables like authorship pattern, distribution of articles, degree of collaboration, collaboration Index, author productivity, number of pages etc. The relevant data was stored, tabulated and assimilated in a logical order for interpretation and analysis purpose. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Year wise distribution of articles Table1: Year wise distribution of articles Year Vol. No. No. of issues No. of contribution Percentage 2016 1 2 23 12.92 2017 2 4 61 34.26 2018 3 4 58 32.58 2019 4 4 36 20.22 14 178 100 Total Figure 1: Year wise distribution of articles 200 180 160 140 120 No. of contribution 100 Percentage 80 60 40 20 0 2016 2017 2018 2019 Total Table 1 and figure 1 display chronological distribution of publication. A total of 178 articles were published during the period 2016-2019, in which the highest number of articles 61 (34.26 %) were published in 2017 followed by 58 (32.58%) is 2018, 36 (20.22%) is 2019 and 23 (12.92%) is 2016. The range of articles distributed every year during the period of the study was between 23 and 61. Author Productivity of Defence Life Science Journal Table 2: Author Productivity of Defence Life Science Journal Year Volume No. No. of Authors No. of Publication AAPP APA 2016 1 80 23 3.47 0.28 2017 2 241 61 3.95 0.25 2018 3 254 58 4.37 0.22 2019 4 151 36 4.19 0.23 726 178 4.07 0.24 Total Table 2 shows author productivity of Defence Life Science Journal and it shows that total average of authors per paper is 4.07 for the 178 articles. The average productivity per author (AAPP) is 0.24 and Articles per authors (APA) was 0.24 during the time of research. Author productivity is determining with the below formula: AAPP = Number of authors ÷ Number of papers APA = Number of papers ÷Number of authors Authorship pattern Table 3: Authorship pattern Single Double Three Four Five Six More than No. of Year Author Authors Authors Authors Authors Authors Six authors Publication 2016 0 9 3 5 3 3 0 23 2017 1 11 13 18 7 5 6 61 2018 4 13 10 10 4 6 11 58 2019 0 7 12 1 7 5 4 36 Total 5 40 39 34 20 19 21 178 Percentage 2.8 22.47 21.91 19.1 11.23 10.67 11.79 100 Figure 2: Authorship pattern Figure 2: Authorship Pattern 3% 12% 22% 11% 12% 3% Single Author Two Author 22% 11% Three Author Four Author 11% Five Author 11% 22% Six Authors 19% More than Six authors 22% 19% Table 3 and figure 2 describe the authorship pattern. During the research a total 178 articles are found, in which there are 5 (2.8%) single author articles, 40 (22.47%) two authors articles, 21 (21.91%) three authors articles, 34 (19.1%) four authors articles, 20 (11.23%) five authors articles, 19 (10.67%) six authors and 21 (11.79%) more than five authors articles. In the year 2017 maximum number of authors (61) published their articles. This study reveals that single author contributions are 2.8%, whereas 97.19% are multiple authors contribution. It shows that article publication trend was towards the multiple authors’ approach. Degree of Collaboration Table 4: Degree of Collaboration Single Author Multiple Author Degree of Publications Publications Collaboration Year (Ns) (Nm) Nm+Ns DC=Nm/(Nm+Ns) 2016 0 23 23 0 2017 4 60 61 0.98 2018 1 54 58 0.93 2019 0 36 36 0 Total 5 173 178 0.97 Table 4 demonstrates DC of papers published in the journal of Defence Life Science during the research period and its shows that single author contributed only 5 articles out of 178 articles and rest of 173 articles are contributed by multiple authors which shows that authors published their articles with collaboration. In the year 2016 and 2019 Degree of collaboration was zero and the overall Degree of collaboration during the research was 0.97. To calculate degree of collaboration, the formula recommended by (Subramanyam, 1983). 𝑁𝑚 DC =𝑁𝑚+𝑁𝑠 DC = degree of collaboration Nm = number of multi-authored research articles Ns =number of single authored research articles Collaborative Index It is a mean number of authors per joint paper (Velmurugan &Radhakrishan, 2016). To calculated collaborative Index, the following formula has been used: CI= Total no. of authors Total joint papers Table 5: Collaborative Index Total Authors of Multi-author Year Multi-author Papers Papers Collaborative Index 2016 23 80 3.47 2017 60 240 4 2018 54 250 4.62 2019 36 151 4.19 Total 173 721 4.16 Figure 3: Collaborative Index Collaboration Index Collaboration Index 4.62 5 4 4 4.19 4.16 3.47 3 2 1 0 2016 2017 2018 2019 Total Table 5 and figure 3 provide the year wise mean number of authors per joint authored paper. CI ranges from 3.47 (2016) to 4.19 (2019) were recorded, the highest CI (4.62) was recorded in 2018 and average CI was 4.16 for per Joint authored paper which indicates the researcher team trip between 3 and 4. Co-Authorship Index: Co-authorship index is applying by calculating proportionately the publications by single author, two authors and multiple authored articles; below formula is proposed by (Garg & Padhi, 1999). CAI = 𝑁𝑖𝑗/𝑁𝑖𝑜 X100 𝑁𝑜𝑗/𝑁𝑜𝑜 Where: Nij= Number of papers having authors in block i Njo= Total output of block j Noj= Number of papers having j authors for all blocks Noo= Total number of papers for all authors and all blocks Thus table 6 is calculated by the use of above formula; for example to take single author’s CAI of 2018 CAI = 4/5 58/178 X100 => 2.45517242 X 100 => 245.46 Similarly, all the data in table 6 is calculated by this formula Table 6: Co-Authorship Index Yea Single r autho CAI rs Two CAI Three CAI Four CAI Five CA Six CA More CA Tota I author I than I l 0 0 23 6 83. 61 author author autho author s s rs s s six author s 2016 0 0 9 174. 3 61.1 5 14 2017 1 58.3 11 7 2018 4 245. 13 0 0 99.7 13 86.5 10 l 5 100 40 100 18 80.7 12 156. 10 100 7 90.2 1 14.5 4 100 97. 58. 7 164 5 100 76. 8 6 96. 38 11 92 5 .81 21 122 .2 46 5 34 3 27 7 15 38 154. 110 .56 49 7 3 Tota 99.8 3 5 7 3 82 5 46 2019 80.2 113. 130 .76 4 .12 19 100 160 58 94. 36 18 21 100 178 Table 6 shows Co-Authorship Index and it is analyzed that the value of CAI for single author paper in 2018 was the highest i.e. 245.46, In two authored paper the highest CAI was recorded 174.14 in 2016 in three authored paper the highest CAI was recorded 156.15 in 2019, similarly for four authored paper the highest CAI was recorded in 2017 i.e. 154.49, value of CAI for five authored paper in 2019 was the highest i.e. 164.81, in six authored paper CAI was recorded in 2019 i.e. 130.12 and the value of CAI for more than six author paper in 2018 was the highest i.e. 160.76. Figure 4: Co-authorship (Authors) Network Co-authorship network has been created using VOSviewer software (VOSviewer- Visualizing Scientific Landscapes, n. d.). In the above figure 4 a node symbolizes an author while the size of the node represents the activity of the authors. The curved line between the two authors shows the publication collaboration relationship between them. The thickness of the curve shows the extent of collaboration between the respective authors. For this analysis the defined criteria were set up. Purely those authors have been taken for the study which has minimum 2 documents and 1 citation. The software analyzes the manually defined criteria and out of 545 such authors 66 meet threshold for each of the 66 authors the total strength of the co-authorship link with other authors has been calculated, the highest number of authors found connected and from clusters were 41. Therefore, the co-authorship analysis of these 41 authors has performed. The software separates these 41 authors into 9 clusters which form 87 links with a total strength of 150. Kumar, Bhuvnesh has the total links strength of 26 with the 13 documents, while the Stobdan, Tsering has the total strength of 25 with the 10 documents. In the figure Cluster 9 have maximum numbers of co-authorship links with others authors i.e. 11 links and 26 total links strength with 13 documents whereas, cluster 6 has minimum numbers of co-authorship links with other authors i.e. 3 links and 5 total link strength with 2 documents (VOSviewer- Visualizing Scientific Landscapes). Distribution of Pages Table 8: Distribution of Pages Page Range 2016 2017 2018 2019 Total Page 1 to 5 6 14 18 9 47 6 to 10 14 43 39 25 121 11 to 15 3 4 1 2 10 Total 23 61 58 36 178 Table 8 reveals the distribution of pages in different volumes of Defence Life Science Journal during 2016 to 2019. Out of 178 papers most of the papers (121) published between 6-10 pages in length while 47 papers covered 1-5 pages and 10 papers have covered 11-15 pages. Top cited articles during 2016-2019: Table 9: Top cited articles Sr. No. No. of Year Tile of the Paper Author Name Citations Green synthesis of iron oxide nanoparticles using 1 2 2017 2016 Lagenariasiceraria and evaluation of its S Kanagasubbulakshmi, K antimicrobial activity Kadirvelu Biopesticides: use of rhizosphere bacteria for Satyavir S Sindhu, Anju Sehrawat, biological control of plant pathogens Ruchi Sharma, Anupma Dahiya 31 15 S Lakshmi, AK Pandey, N Ravi, 3 4 2017 2017 Non-destructive quality monitoring of fresh fruits OP Chauhan, Natarajan Gopalan, and vegetables RK Sharma Seabuckthorn (Hippophaerhamnoides L.) in TseringStobdan, PhuntsogDolkar, trans-Himalayan Ladakh, India OP Chaurasia, Bhuvnesh Kumar 12 8 StanzinAngmo, PhunchokAngmo, DiskitDolkar, TsewangNorbu, Eli 5 6 2017 2017 All year round vegetable cultivation in trenches Paljor, Bhuvnesh Kumar, in cold arid trans-Himalayan Ladakh TseringStobdan Multiscale modelling of blast-induced TBI Raj K Gupta, X Gary Tan, mechanobiology-from body to neuron to Mahadevabharath R Somayaji, molecule Andrzej J Przekwas 8 7 R Kumar, S Vijayalakshmi, S 7 2017 Nadanasabapathi Health benefits of quercetin 7 Nanocurcumin Prevents Oxidative Stress 8 2016 Induced following Arsenic and Fluoride Co- Abhishek Yadav, S Flora, P exposure in Rats Kushwaha 6 Ultrafine particles of diesel exhaust induces 9 2016 cytochrome P450 1A1 mediated oxidative stress Ankita Srivastava, Sanjay Yadav, and DNA damage in cultured blood and lung Alok K Pandey, Uppendra N cells Dwivedi, Devendra Parmar 6 Pratyush Kumar Das 5 Phytoremediation and nanoremediation: emerging techniques for treatment of acid mine 10 2018 drainage water Source: http//scholar.google.co.in/ Table 9 depicts the highly cited papers of Defence life Science Journal during the period of study. The highly cited 10 papers are identified. The data was exported on April 10, 2020. Criteria: Publication Years is 2016 or 2017 or 2018 or 2019; from Google Scholar (Google Scholar Citation). Table shows the list of highest ten most cited publication with their respective authors, title and year of publication. The publication authored by S Kanagasubbulakshmi, K Kadirvelu. Entitled “Green synthesis of iron oxide nanoparticles using Lagenariasiceraria and evaluation of its antimicrobial activity” published in the year 2017 got the maximum 31 citations. The second most cited article entitled “Biopesticides: use of rhizosphere bacteria for biological control of plant pathogens” have published in the year 2016 was cited 15 times. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION Present study represented some general inferences on the basic Scientometric study of research article published in Defence Life Science Journal. These are the major findings of the study: ➢ Maximum number of research papers 61 (34.26%) were published in 2017 and the minimum number of research articles 23 (12.92%) were published in 2016. ➢ The aim of the authorship pattern study was to identify the percentage of single and multiauthorship. It is analyzed that the highest 22.47% contributions have been made by two authors, followed by 21.91% contributions by three authors, 19.1% contributions by four authors, 11.79% contributions by more than six authors, 11.23% contributions by five authors, 10.67% contributions by six authors and minimum contribution 2.8% are by single author. Therefore, it can be concluded that the number of joint- authored articles increases very fast. ➢ The maximum collaboration index is4.62 in 2018 and the average collaboration index are 4.16. ➢ An average Degree of collaboration range is 0.97 during the study time and in the year 2016 and 2019the Degree of collaboration is zero. ➢ Out of 178 articles, the maximum 173 articles are co-authorship index while 5 articles single author index. ➢ The total average number of authors per paper is 4.07 and the average productivity per author is 0.24. ➢ It is observed from distribution of pages that most of the publications are between 6-10 pages. ➢ Kanagasubbulakshmi (2017), Sindhu (2016), Lakshmi (2017) and Stobdan (2017) are the most highly cited publications. REFERENCES 1. About Journal (2020). defence life science journal. Retrieved 26 July 2020, from https://publications.drdo.gov.in/ojs/index.php/dlsj/about 2. Ahmadi, A. (2018). Contribution of indian scientists in plos one: A scientometric analysis. COLLNET Journal of Scientometrics and Information Management, 12(2), 183–196. 3. Correia, A., Paredes, H., & Fonseca, B. (2018). Scientometric analysis of scientific publications in CSCW. Scientometrics, 114(1), 31–89. 4. Defence Life Science Journal, (2020). Defence life science journal’s page on publons. Retrieved 26 July 2020, from https://publons.com/journal/48606/defence-life-science-journal/ 5. Galyani-Moghaddam, G. (2019). Visualization of collaboration in psychology: A case study of Iran. Annals of Library and Information Studies, 66(1), 7-15. 6. Garg, K. C., & Padhi, P. (1999). Scientometrics of laser research literature as viewed through the Journal of Current Laser Abstracts. Scientometrics, 45(2), 251–268. 7. Google Scholar. (2020), Google Scholar Citation. Retrieved 26 July 2020, from https://scholar.google.co.in/citations?hl=en&user=zfShVGAAAAAJ&view_op=list_works 8. K.G., S., & V, D. (2020). Scientometric profile of biochemistry research in india a study based on web of science. DESIDOC Journal of Library & Information Technology, 40(1), 388–396. 9. N, A., & CA, H. (2018). A scientometric analysis of environmental management research output during 1989 to 2014. Library Philosophy and Practice (e-Journal). Available at https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/libphilprac/1846 10. Dimensions Publication year: 2019, 2018, 2017, 2016. Source title: defence life science journal in publications - dimensions. Retrieved 23 May 2020, from https://app.dimensions.ai/discover/publication?order=times_cited&order=times_cited&or_fac et_source_title=jour.1156369&or_facet_year=2019&or_facet_year=2018&or_facet_year=20 17&or_facet_year=2016 11. Subramanyam, K. (1983). Bibliometric studies of research collaboration: A review. Journal of Information Science, 6(1), 33–38. 12. Sudarsana, D., & Baba, M. S. (2019). Global nuclear fuel research during 2000 to 2017: A scientometric analysis. Annals of Library and Information Studies, 66(3), 85-93. 13. Tunga, S. K. (2014). Doctoral dissertations on horticulture in agricultural sciences in West Bengal a bibliometric study 1991 2010. University. Available at: http://shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in:8080/jspui/handle/10603/102394. 14. Velmurugan, C., & Radhakrishnan, N. (2016). Malaysian journal of library and information science: A scientometric profile. Journal of Scientometric Research, 5(1), 62–70. 15. VOSviewer—Visualizing scientific landscapes. (2020). VOSviewer Software. Retrieved 26 July 2020, from https://www.vosviewer.com// 16. Zafrunnisha, N., & Pullareddy, V. (2009). Authorship pattern and degree of collaboration in psychology. Annals of Library and Information Studies, 56(4), 255-261.