Quality vs. Quantity of publications in nanotechnology field from the People's Republic of China

• 来源期刊: 科学通报（英文版）
• 年，卷（期）: 2008,（8）
• 页码范围: 1272-1280
• 页数: 9页
• 语种: 英文
• DOI: 10.1007/s11434-008-0183-y

摘要

This study evaluates trends in quality of nanotechnology and nanoscience papers produced by au-thors from the People's Republic of China (PRC). The metric used to gauge quality is ratio of highly cited nanotechnology papers to total nanotechnology papers produced in sequential time frames. The USA is both the most prolific nanotechnology publishing country and most represented country on highly cited nanotechnology papers (both in absolute numbers of highly cited papers and highly cited papers relative to total publications) over the 1998-2003 time frame, based on the SCI/SSCI databases. Some of the smaller hi-tech countries have relatively high ratios (～2) of highly cited papers to total publications (e.g. Denmark, Netherlands, Switzerland). Countries that have exhibited rapid growth in SCI/SSCI nanotechnology paper production in recent years (e.g. PRC, South Korea) had ratios an order of magnitude less than that of the USA for 1998, but by 2003 had increased to about 20% that of the USA (～2.5). PRC and South Korea have climbed in the publications rankings from 6th and 9th in 1998, re-spectively, to 2nd and 6th in 2005, respectively. PRC's ratio monotonically increased from 0.16 to 0.45 over the 1998-2003 period, and South Korea's ratio increased from 0.11 to about 0.6 over that same period, indicating their papers are getting more and more citations proportionately. Thus, under rapid growth conditions, PRC and South Korea have been able to increase their share of participation in highly cited papers. As of 2003, PRC and South Korea have ratios comparable to nations like Japan, France, Italy, and Australia but not yet approaching those of the highly cited countries. None of the top ten publications producing institutions are from the USA, while all of the top ten highly cited publica-tions producers are from the USA. Over the 1998-2003 time period, the top six total publications pro-ducing institutions (globally) remained the same, with Chinese Academy of Sciences (which consists of many research institutes) wresting the lead from Russian Academy of Sciences in 1999, and thereafter increasing the gap. Over this same time period, the USA institutions constituted about 90% of the top ten most cited papers list. For Chinese institutions specifically in the period 1998-2003, the nanotech-nology publication leading Chinese Academy of Sciences has maintained an average of about 30% of nanotechnology publications over that time frame. The second tier (in terms of quantity) for the last few years has consisted of Tsinghua University, Nanjing University, University of Science and Technology of China, Peking University, Jilin University, Zhejiang University, Shandong University, and Fudan University. Hong Kong institutions have, on average, been strong in ratio, especially City University Hong Kong, and Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, indicating significant citations.