Abstract
The purpose of this study is to present a new scientometric model for measuring individual scientific performance in Scopus article publications in the field of Business, Management, and Accounting (BMA). With the help of this model, the study also compares the publication performance of the top 50 researchers according to SciVal in the field of BMA, in each of the Central European V4 countries (Czech Republic; Hungary; Poland; Slovakia). To analyze the scientific excellence of a total of top 200 researchers in the countries studied, we collected and analyzed the data of a total of 1844 partially redundant and a total of 1492 cleansed BMA publications. In the scope of the study, we determined the quality of the journals using SCImago, the individual contributions to the journal articles, and the number of citations using Scopus data. A comparison of individual performance, as shown by published journal articles, can be made based on the qualities of the journals, the determination of the aggregated co-authorship ratios, and the number of citations received. The performance of BMA researchers in Hungary lags behind the average of V4s in terms of quantity, but in terms of quality it reaches this average. As for BMA journal articles, the average number of co-authors is between two and three; concerning Q4 to Q2 publications, this number typically increases. In fact, in the case of these Q journals multiple co-authorship results in higher citations, but it is not the case concerning Q1 journals.
Highlights
When it comes to evaluating researchers’ publication performance, the number of citations received for publications is still the primary criterion [1,2]), especially in the STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics) field
We have considered that the analyzed publications should belong exclusively to the BMA discipline, and excluded those who are not researchers primarily of this discipline but are still included in the SciVal toplist, as some of their journal publications are indexed in this field
SciVal’s publication performance between 2015 and 2020, given that SciVal indicator does does not take into account citation data, co-authorship weights, or journal qualities
Summary
When it comes to evaluating researchers’ publication performance, the number of citations received for publications is still the primary criterion [1,2]), especially in the STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics) field. We argue that in addition to citations, the ratios of co-authorships present in articles and the quality of the journal that publishes the article influence the researchers’ publication performance. It is true to HASS sciences that, in addition to journal articles, researchers extensively publish other types of works, e.g., conference papers, books, and book chapters. To date, for these types of publications, reliable evaluation methods have not been developed [3]; we do not address them in this study, and for this reason, we only examine journal articles in assessing researchers’ excellence. In the scope of co-authorship-based publishing strategy, or in those disciplines where joint scientific works by larger teams are more common, the proportion of individual authorship is lower, but a higher number of journal articles
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
