Hábitos de publicación de la élite científica de España

Salvador-Oliván, José Antonio, Marco-Cuenca, Gonzalo and Arquero-Avilés, Rosario Hábitos de publicación de la élite científica de España. Anales de Documentación, 2020, vol. 23, n. 2. [Journal article (Unpaginated)]

[thumbnail of Anales_Documentación_2020.pdf]
Preview
 Text
Anales_Documentación_2020.pdf
Download (1MB) | Preview

English abstract

Abstract: This paper aims to analyze the authorship patterns and publication habits of the most productive and / or cited researchers in Spain. Method: Spanish researchers or those who work in Spanish institutions with the highest H index and number of citations received in Google Scholar (GS) have been selected from the Webometrics Ranking of World Universities. Publication data was obtained from the main Web of Science (WOS) collection. Results and conclusions: The productivity and impact of researchers in Social Sciences and Humanities is much less in the WOS database than in GS. As hyperprolific authors highlight researchers in the field of Particle Physics, where the publication of 90 articles per year signed by more than 2000 authors is common. To a lesser extent, Health Sciences researchers are also highly productive in multi-author.

['eprint_fieldopt_linguabib_' not defined] abstract

El objetivo de este estudio consiste en analizar los patrones de autoría y hábitos de publicación de los investigadores de España más productivos y/o citados. Método: Se han seleccionado los investigadores españoles o extranjeros que trabajan en instituciones españolas, con mayor índice H y número de citas recibidas en Google Scholar (GS) a partir del Webometrics Ranking of World Universities. Los datos de las publicaciones se han obtenido de la colección principal de Web of Science (WOS). Resultados y conclusiones: La productividad e impacto de los investigadores en Ciencias Sociales y Humanidades es mucho menor en la base de datos WOS que en GS. Como autores hiperprolíficos destacan los investigadores en el campo de Física de Partículas, donde es habitual la publicación de 90 artículos al año firmados por más de 2000 autores. Los investigadores de Ciencias de la Salud también son altamente productivos y en multiautoría.

Item type: Journal article (Unpaginated)
Keywords: Multiautoría: autores prolíficos; productividad científica; hábitos de publicación
Subjects: B. Information use and sociology of information > BA. Use and impact of information.
B. Information use and sociology of information > BB. Bibliometric methods
B. Information use and sociology of information > BJ. Communication
Depositing user: Jose Antonio Salvador-Oliván
Date deposited: 13 Nov 2020 20:30
Last modified: 13 Nov 2020 20:30
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/10760/40615

References

ADAMS, J.; PENDLEBURY, D; POTTER, R. y SZOMSZOR, M. Global Research Report. Multi-authorship and research analytics. Clarivate Analytics, ISI, Web of Science Group, 2019 [en línea]. Disponible en: https://clarivate.com/webofsciencegroup/campaigns/global-research-report-multi-authorship-and-research-analysis/. [Consultado: 23 julio 2020].

ALLEA - All European Academies. The European code of conduct for research integrity. Berlin: ALLEA, 2017 [en línea]. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1142/9789814340984_0003. [Consultado: 25 julio 2020]

ANGELL, M. 1986. Publish or perish: A proposal. Annals of Internal Medicine, 1986, vol. 104, nº 2, p. 261–262. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-104-2-261

BASU, A. Using ISI’s “highly cited researchers” to obtain a country level indicator of citation excellence. Scientometrics, 2006, vol. 68, nº 3, p. 361–375. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-006-0117-x

BIRNHOLTZ, J. What does it mean to be an author? The intersection of credit, contribution, and collaboration in science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 2006, vol. 57, nº 13, p. 1758–1770. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.20380

BORNMANN, L. y TEKLES, A. Productivity does not equal usefulness. Scientometrics, 2019, vol. 118, nº 2, p. 705–707. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2982-5

BRAND, A.; ALLEN, L.; ALTMAN, M.; HLAVA, M. y SCOTT, J. Beyond authorship: Attribution, contribution, collaboration, and credit. Learned Publishing, 2015, vol. 28, nº 2, p. 151–155. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1087/20150211

CRONIN, B. Hyperauthorship: A postmodern perversion or evidence of a structural shift in scholarly communication practices?. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 2001, vol. 52, nº 7, p. 558–569. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.1097

CYBERMETRICS LAB. Ranking of Spanish researchers, researchers working in Spanish Institutions (Spain) and Spaniards working abroad according to their Google Scholar Citations public profiles. 15 ed., Consejo superior de Investigaciones Científicas (CSIC), 2020 [en línea]. Disponible en: http://www.webometrics.info/en/GoogleScholar/Spain. [Consultado: 19 julio 2020]

ERREN, T.C.; SHAW, D. y MORFELD, P. 2016. Analyzing the publish-or-perish paradigm with game theory: The prisoner’s dilemma and a possible escape. Science and Engineering Ethics, 2016, vol. 22, nº 5, p. 1431–1446. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-015-9701-x

FORTUNATO, S.; BERGSTROM, C.T.; BÖNER, K.; EVANS, J.A., HELBING, D.; MILOJEVIC, S.; PETERSEN, A.M. y RADICCHI, F. Science of science. Science, 2018, vol. 359, nº 6379, p. eaao0185. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aao0185

GÓMEZ-FERRI, J. y GONZÁLEZ-ALCAIDE, G. Patrones y estrategias en la colaboración científica: La percepción de los investigadores. Revista Española de Documentación Científica, 2018, vol. 41, nº 1, p. 1–17. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.3989/redc.2018.1.1458

HOLCOMBRE, A. Farewell authors, hello contributors. Nature, 2019, vol. 571, p. 147. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-019-02084-8

HOSSEINI, M.; CONSOLI, L.; ZWART, H.A.E. y VAN DEN HOVEN, M.A. Suggestions to improve the comprehensibility of current definitions of scientific authorship for international authors. Science and Engineering Ethics, 2020, vol. 26, p. 597–617. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-019-00106-2

HUMPHREYS, W. J. The Duty of publishing. Science, 1909, vol. 30, nº 762, p. 177–179.

INTERNATIONAL COMMITTEE OF MEDICAL JOURNAL EDITORS (ICMJE). Defining the role of authors and contributors. 2020 [en línea]. Disponible en:

http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/roles-and-responsibilities/defining-the-role-of-authors-and-contributors.html [Consultado: 12 julio 2020].

IOANNIDIS, J.P.A.; KLAVANS, R. y BOYACK, K.W. Thousands of scientists publish a paper every five days. Nature, 2018, vol. 561, p. 167–169. Disponible en:

https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-018-06185-8

JONES, D.G. Is multiple authorship in conceptual bioethics ethically sustainable? American Journal of Bioethics, 2011, vol. 11, nº 10, p. 30–32. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1080/15265161.2011.603809

KENNEDY, D. Multiple authors, multiple problems. Science, 2003, vol. 301, nº 5634, p. 733. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.301.5634.733

KING, C. Multiauthor papers: onward and upward. Science Watch, 2012 [en línea]. Disponible en: http://archive.sciencewatch.com/newsletter/2012/201207/

multiauthor_papers/ [Consultado: 20 junio 2020].

KISER, G.L. No more first authors, no more last authors. Nature, 2018, vol. 561, nº 7724, p. 435. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-018-06779-2

LANGER, N. The fundamentals that contribute to the concept of “Publish or Perish”. Educational Gerontology, 2017, vol. 43, nº 9, p. 429–430. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1080/03601277.2017.1332859

LARIVIÈRE, V. y COSTAS, R. How many is too many? On the relationship between research productivity and impact. PLoS ONE, 2016, vol. 11, nº 9, p. 1–10. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0162709

LARIVIÈRE, V.; DESROCHERS, B.M.; MONGEO, P.; PAUL-HUS, A. y SUGIMOTO, C.R. Contributorship and division of labor in knowledge production. Social Studies of Science, 2016, vol. 46, nº 3, p. 417–435. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312716650046

LEEMING, J. How to manage a multi-author megapaper. Nature, 2019, vol. 575, p. S36–S37. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-019-03544-x

MCNUTT, M.K.; BRADFORD, M.; DRAZEN, J.; HANSON, B.; HOWARD, B.; JAMIESON, K.H.; KIERMER, V., MARCUS, E. y VERMA, I.M. Transparency in authors’ contributions and responsibilities to promote integrity in scientific publication. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2018, vol. 115, nº 11, p. 2557–2560. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1715374115

MERTON, R.K. The Matthew effect in science. Science, 1968, vol. 159, nº 3810, p. 56–63. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.159.3810.56

MILOJEVIC, S. Principles of scientific research team formation and evolution. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2014, vol. 111, nº 11, p. 3984–3989. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1309723111

MUNAFO, M.R. y SMITH, G.D. Repeating experiments is not enough. Nature, 2018, vol. 553, nº 7689, p. 399–401. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-018-01023-3

NABOUT, J.C.; ROSA-PARREIRA, M; BARRETO-TERESA, F.; MELO-CARNEIRO, F.; FERREIRA-DA CUNHA, H.; DE SOUZA-ONDEI, L.; CARAMORI, S. y NASCIMENTO-SOARES, T. Publish (in a group) or perish (alone): The trend from single- to multi-authorship in biological papers. Scientometrics, 2015, vol. 102, nº 1, p. 357–364. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-014-1385-5

PAPATHEODOROU, S.I.; TRIKALINOS, T.A. y IOANNIDIS, J.P.A. Inflated numbers of authors over time have not been just due to increasing research complexity. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 2008, vol. 61, nº 6, p. 546–551. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2007.07.017

PARKER, J.N.; ALLESINA, S. y LORTIE, C.J. Characterizing a scientific elite (B): Publication and citation patterns of the most highly cited scientists in environmental science and ecology. Scientometrics, 2013, vol. 94, nº 2, p. 469–480. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-012-0859-6

PARKER, J.N.; LORTIE, C.J. y ALLESINA, S. Characterizing a scientific elite: The social characteristics of the most highly cited scientists in environmental science and ecology. Scientometrics, 2010, vol. 85, nº 1, p. 129–143. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-010-0234-4

RAFF, H. A suggestion for the multiple author issue. Science, 2003, vol. 302, nº 5642, p. 55–57. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.302.5642.55

SHAW, D. The ICMJE’s definition of authorship is illogical and unethical. British Medical Journal, 2011, vol. 343, p. 1–2. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.d7192

SINGH CHAWLA, D. Hyperauthorship: global projects spark surge in thousand-author papers. Nature, 2019, vol. 576, p. 342. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-019-03862-0

SMITH, G.H. Trends in multiple authorship among papers in astronomy. Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 2016, vol. 128, nº 970, p. 1–14. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1088/1538-3873/128/970/124502

SPRINGER. Publishing ethics for journals: A guide for editors-in-chief, associate editors, and managing editors. 2013 [en línea]. Disponible en:

https://resource-cms.springernature.com/springer-cms/rest/v1/content/4252/data/v1 [Consultado: 27 junio 2020].

SZOMSZOR, M.; PENDLEBURY, D.A. y ADAMS, J. How much is too much? The difference between research influence and self‑citation excess. Scientometrics, 2020, vol. 123, p. 1119–1147. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03417-5

TEIXEIRA DA SILVA, J.A. y DOBRÁNSZKI, J. Multiple authorship in scientific manuscripts: Ethical challenges, ghost and guest/gift authorship, and the cultural/disciplinary perspective. Science and Engineering Ethics, 2016, vol. 22, nº 5, p. 1457–1472. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-015-9716-3

TSCHARNTKE, T.; HOCKBERG, M.E.; RAND, T.A.; RESH, V.H. y KRAUSS, J. Author sequence and credit for contributions in multiauthored publications. PLoS Biology, 2007, vol. 5, nº 1, p. 13–14. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.0050018

WAGER, E. Are prolific authors too much of a good thing? British Medical Journal, 2015, vol. 351, p. 1-2. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.h2782

WAGER, E.; SINGHVI, S. y KLEINERT, S. Too much of a good thing? An observational study of prolific authors. PeerJ, 2015, vol. 3, p. e1154. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.1154

WUTCHY, S.; JONES, B.J. y UZZI, B. The increasing dominance of teams in production of knowledge. Science, 2007, vol. 316, p. 1035–1039. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1136099


Downloads

Downloads per month over past year

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item
Contact us
Send email Sponsors
Sponsor: AIMS Sponsor: D&P Sponsor: UniNa CAB Get connected
Facebook Facebook Twitter Twitter Linkedin LinkedIn RSS RSS