Scientometric Dimension of Research Productivity of a Leading Private University in India

Rautaray, Bijayalaxmi and Swain, Dillip K and Swain, Chandrakanta Scientometric Dimension of Research Productivity of a Leading Private University in India. Library Philosophy and Practice, 2013. [Journal article (Unpaginated)]

Scientometric Dimension@E-Lis.pdf

Download (505kB) | Preview

English abstract

The study examines the research productivity of KIIT University, Odisha, India in regard to 361 papers indexed in Scopus from the year 2000 to till February, 2013. The study attempts to measure authorship pattern, degree of collaboration, Year wise distribution of articles and corresponding citations, domain wise distribution of articles, ranking of authors, ranking of highly cited papers, collaborating countries and such other parameters. The study finds that the major chunk of research is contributed by three joint authors and the trend of collaborative research is rightly at its peak. The study further reveals that authors of this University have published maximum number of articles in Communications in Computer and Information Science, followed by World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology, Comparative Clinical Pathology, and International Journal of Information and Management Sciences. The top author of this university is found to have published 25 articles that have been indexed in Scopus. Taken together all the articles published during this period the university has h index of 11.

Item type: Journal article (Unpaginated)
Keywords: Scientometric, bibliometric, citation counts, h-index, research productivity, KIIT University
Subjects: B. Information use and sociology of information > BB. Bibliometric methods
Depositing user: Dr. Dillip K Swain
Date deposited: 07 Jun 2013 11:43
Last modified: 02 Oct 2014 12:26


"SEEK" links will first look for possible matches inside E-LIS and query Google Scholar if no results are found.

1. Baby, K., & Kumaravel, J. P. S. (2012). Research productivity of Periyar University: A bibliometric analysis. International Research Journal of Library, Information and Archival Studies, 1(1). Retrieved February 19, 2013, from

2. Bonilla-Calero, A. I. (2008). Scientometric analysis of a sample of physics-related research output held in the institutional repository Strathprints (2000-2005). Library Review, 57 (9), 700 – 721.

3. Davarpanah, M. R. (2010). A scientometric model for the assessment of strength and weakness of scientific disciplines: A domain-based analysis. Library Review, 59 (8), 596 – 605.

4. Garfield. E., & Merton, R. K.(1979). Citation indexing: Its theory and application in science, technology, and humanities. Wiley, New York.

5. Glossary of Thompson Scientific Terminology.(2008). The Thompson Corporation.Retrieved February 20, 2013, from

6. Inzelt, A., Schubert, A., & Schubert, M. (2009). Incremental citation impact due to international co-authorship in Hungarian higher education institutions. Scientometrics, 78(1), 37-43.

7. Jeevan, V. K..J., & Gupta, B. M. (2002). A scientometric analysis of research output from Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur. Scientometrics, 53 (1), 165–168.

8. Kademani, B. S., Kumar, V., Sagar, A. & Kumar, A.(2006). Scientometric dimensions of Nuclear Science and Technology research in India: a study based on INIS (1970-2002) Database. Malaysian Journal of Library & Information Science. Retrieved March 10, 2013

9. Kim, M. J., & Kim B. J.(2000). A bibliometric analysis of publications by the Chemistry Department, Seoul National University, Korea, 1992-1998. Journal of Information Science, 26 (2), 111-119.

10. Lee, C. K.(2003). A scientometric study of the research performance of the Institute of Molecular and Cell Biology in Singapore. Scientometrics. 55(1), 95-110.

11. Majhi, S., & Maharana, B. (2012). Research productivity of physical science disciplines in Sambalpur University (Orissa): a scientometric study. Researchers World, 3(4), 108-115.

12. Martin, B. R., & Irvine. J. (1983). Assessing basic research: some partial indicators of scientific progress in radio astronomy. Research Policy, 12(2), 61-90.

13. Mooghali, A., et al.(2011). Scientometric analysis of the scientific literature. International Journal of Information Science and Management. 9(1), 19-31.

14. Nikzad, M.(2012). Foreigners' point of view towards collaboration with Iranian authors. Webology, 9(2), Article 101. Retrieved February 20, 2013, from

15. Repanovici, A. (2011). Measuring the visibility of the university's scientific production through scientometric methods: An exploratory study at the Transilvania University of Brasov, Romania. Performance Measurement and Metrics, 12(2), 106-117.

16. Serenko, et al.(2010). A Scientometric analysis of knowledge management and intellectual capital academic literature (1994-2008). Journal of Knowledge Management, 14(1), 3-23.

17. Sharma, R.M. (2009). Research publication trend among scientists of Central Potato Research Institute: A bibliometric study. Annals of Library and Information Studies, 56 (1), 29-34.

18. Subramanyam, K. (1983). Bibliometric studies of research collaboration: a review. Journal of Information Science, 6, 35-37.

19. Swain, D. K. (2011), “Library Philosophy and Practice, 2004-2009: a scientometric appraisal”, Library Philosophy and Practice.Retrieved February 19, 2013, from

20. Thirumangal, A. (2012). Scientific publications of Manonmaniam Sundaranar University, Tirunelveli, Tamilnadu: scientometric analysis. Library Philosophy and Practice (e-journal). Retrieved February 19, 2013, from

21. Tague-Sutcliffe, J. M. (1992). An introduction to informetrics. Information Processing & Management, 28, 1-3.


Downloads per month over past year

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item