Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Research quality and diversity of funding: A model for relating research money to output of research

  • Published:
Scientometrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We analyze the relation between funding and output using bibliometric methods with field normalized data. Our approach is to connect individual researcher data on funding from Swedish university databases to data on incoming grants using the specific personal ID-number. Data on funding include the person responsible for the grant. All types of research income are considered in the analysis yielding a project database with a high level of precision. Results show that productivity can be explained by background variables, but that quality of research is more or less un-related to background variables.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Braun, T., Glänzel, W., Schubert, A. (1990), Publication productivity: from frequency distributions to scientometric indicators. Journal of Information Science, 16: 37–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Braun, T., Glänzel, W. (1990), United Germany: The new scientific Superpower? Scientometrics, 19(5–6): 513–521.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Braxton, J., Bayer, A (1986), Assessing faculty scholary performance. In: Creswell (Ed.), Measuring Faculty Research Performance: New directions for institutional research, 50, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, 5–14.

  • Dietz, J. S., Chompalov, I., Bozeman, B., Lane, E. O., Park, J. (2000), Using the curriculum vita to study the career paths of scientists and engineers: an exploratory assessment. Scientometrics, 49(3): 419–442.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dietz, M., Bozeman, B. (2005), Academic careers, patents, and productivity: industry as scientific and technical human capital. Research Policy, 34: 349–367.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dundar, H., Lewis, D. R. (1995), Departmental productivity in American Universities. Economics of Education Review, 14(2): 119–144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fox, M. F. (1983), Publication productivity among scientists: A critical review. Social Studies of Science, 13: 285–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fox, M. F. (1992), Research, teaching, and publication productivity: mutuality versus competition in academia. Sociology of Education, 65: 293–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glänzel, W. (1996), The need for standards in bibliometric research and technology. Scientometrics, 35: 167–176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merton, R. K. (1961), Social Theory and Social Structure. Free Press, Glencoe, IL.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moed, H. F. (2005), Citation Analysis in research Evaluation. Springer Verlag.

  • Nederhof, Visser (2004), Quantitative deconstruction of citation impact indicators. Journal of Documentation, 60: 658–672.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Porter, S., Umbach, P. (2001), Analyzing faculty workload data using multilevel modeling. Research in Higher Education 42: 171–176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Print, M., Hattie, J. (1997), Measuring quality in universities: An approach to weighting research productivity. Higher Education, 33: 453–469.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Raan A. F. J. (2004), Measuring science: Capita selecta of current main issues. In: H. F. Moed, W. Glänzel, U. Schmoch (Eds), Handbook of Quantitative Science and Technology Research, Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Raan A. F. J. (2006), Statistical properties of bibliometric indicators: Research group indicator distributions and correlations. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 57(3): 408–430.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sandström, U., Hällsten, M., Heyman, U. (2005), Svensk forskningsfinansiering: inriktning och styrning (revised version 2005-12-08), Stockholm: Vetenskapsrådet.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sandström, U., Hällsten, M. (2008), Persistent nepotism in peer review. Scientometrics, 74(2) 175–189.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schubert, A., Braun, T. (1996), Cross-field normalization of scientometric indicators. Scientometrics, 36: 311–324.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stephan P. E., Levin, S. G. (1992), Striking the Mother Load in Science. Oxford University Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stephen, R., Porter, Umbach, Paul D. (2001), Analyzing faculty workload data using multilevel modeling. Research in Higher Education, 42(2).

  • Toutkousinan, R., Dundar, H., Becker, W. (1998), The National Research Council graduate program ratings: What are they measuring? Review of Higher Education, 21: 427–443.

    Google Scholar 

  • Toutkousinan, R., Porter, S. R., Danielson, C. Hollis, P. R. (2003), Using publications counts to measure an institution’s research productivity. Research in Higher Education, 44: 121–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Dept. ISAK, Linköping University, SE-58183, Linköping, Sweden

    Ulf Sandström

Authors
  1. Ulf Sandström
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ulf Sandström.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Sandström, U. Research quality and diversity of funding: A model for relating research money to output of research. Scientometrics 79, 341–349 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0422-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0422-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation