论文标题
印度在科学研究中的等级和全球份额 - 出版计算方法和主题选择如何改变结果
India's rank and global share in scientific research -- how publication counting method and subject selection can vary the outcomes
论文作者
论文摘要
在过去的二十年中，印度已成为世界上主要的知识生产国，但是不同的报道将其处于不同的等级，从第三名到第9位不等。最近由科学技术系（DST）进行的委托研究报告，由Elsevier和Clarivate Analytics（Clarivate Analytics）分别在第5位第9位对印度排名。另一方面，美国国家科学基金会（NSF）的独立报告（美国）在科学和工程领域的研究产出方面排名第三。有趣的是，Elsevier和NSF报告都使用Scopus数据，但令人惊讶的是它们的结果也不同。因此，本文试图调查由于方法学方法的差异，同一数据库的使用如何仍然可以产生不同的结果。所使用的出版计算方法和主题选择方法是确定引起这些变化的两个主要外源性因素。讨论了分析结果的含义，特别关注政策观点。
During the last two decades, India has emerged as a major knowledge producer in the world, however different reports put it at different ranks, varying from 3rd to 9th places. The recent commissioned study reports of Department of Science and Technology (DST) done by Elsevier and Clarivate Analytics, rank India at 5thand 9th places, respectively. On the other hand, an independent report by National Science Foundation (NSF) of United States (US), ranks India at 3rd place on research output in Science and Engineering area. Interestingly, both, the Elsevier and the NSF reports use Scopus data, and yet surprisingly their outcomes are different. This article, therefore, attempts to investigate as to how the use of same database can still produce different outcomes, due to differences in methodological approaches. The publication counting method used and the subject selection approach are the two main exogenous factors identified to cause these variations. The implications of the analytical outcomes are discussed with special focus on policy perspectives.
