Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The national system of researchers in Mexico: implications of publication incentives for researchers in social sciences

  • Published:
Scientometrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This article explores the effects of the Mexican National System of Researchers (SNI) on social science researchers’ scientific output and publication practices. SNI operates as a system of pecuniary bonuses for scientific activity; these are granted monthly and calculated according to a combination of an ex-post peer review with bibliometric assessment of researchers based on five criteria: scientific output, participation in academic activities, academic initiatives, infrastructure and popularization of science. The admitted members are classified in a ranking system in one of the four categories: SNI III (seniors), SNI II (established), SNI I (early-stage), and candidates (young researchers). The SNI appointment provides the recognition of national investigator that constitutes the most prestigious reward among researchers in the country. The distribution of the 2977 active members in 2013 in the area of social sciences shows a greater concentration of seniors and established researchers within the federal public higher education institutions, while early-stage and young researchers were mostly affiliated with states public universities. Our analysis focuses on general characteristics of SNI members: affiliations, gender, country of graduation, and scientific output. Also, we identify their career pathway through revocation, promotion and retention rates for each category: SNI III, SNI II, SNI I, and Candidates.

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Academia Mexicana de Ciencias. (2013). Atlas de la Ciencia Mexicana. Mexico City: National System of Researchers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Åkerlind, G. S. (2005). Postdoctoral researchers: roles, functions and career prospects. Higher Education Research and Development,24(1), 21–40. https://doi.org/10.1080/0729436052000318550.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alonso, W. J., & Fernández-Juricic, E. (2002). Regional network raises profile of local journals. Nature,415, 471. https://doi.org/10.1038/415471c.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Archambault, É., & Larivière, V. (2010). World social science report 2009/2010. In U. P. E. I. S. S. Council (Ed.) (pp. 251–254). Paris.

  • Archambault, É., & Vignola-Gagné, É. (2004). L’utilisation de la bibliométrie dans les sciences sociales et les humanités (Préparé pour le Conseil de recherches en sciences humaines du Canada (CRSH)). Montréal: Science-Metrix.

    Google Scholar 

  • Archambault, É., Vignola-Gagné, É., Côté, G., Larivière, V., & Gingras, Y. (2006). Benchmarking scientific output in the social sciences and humanities: The limits of existing databases. Scientometrics,68(3), 329–342.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Área de Política Social del Senado de la República. (2002). La educación superior privada en México: Una aproximación. Perfiles Educativos,24, 128–146.

    Google Scholar 

  • Becerril-García, A., & Aguado-Lopez, E. (2018). The end of a centralized open access project and the beginning of a community-based sustainable infrastructure for Latin America: redalyc.org after fifteen years the open access ecosystem in Latin America. In L. Chan & P. Mounier (Eds.), ELPUB. Toronto: ELPUB.

    Google Scholar 

  • Becerril-García, A., Aguado-López, E., Batthyány, K., Melero, R., Beigel, F., Vélez Cuartas, G., et al. (2019). AmeliCA: Una estructura sostenible e impulsada por la comunidad para el Conocimiento Abierto en América Latina y el Sur Global.

  • Bensusán, G. (Ed.). (2013). Estudio sociológico sobre las perspectivas de jubilación de los miembros del SNI. México: Foro Consultivo Científico y Tecnológico, AC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buendía Espinoza, A., García-Salord, S., Grediaga, R., Landesmann, M., Rodríguez-Gómez, R., Rondero, N., et al. (2017). Queríamos evaluar y terminamos contando: alternativas para la evaluación del trabajo académico. Perfiles Educativos,XXXIX(157), 200–218.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cámara de Diputados. (2002). Ley de Ciencia y Tecnología. In H. C. D. I. Unión (Ed.). México: Diario Oficial de la Federación.

  • Casas-Guerrero, R., & Luna, M. (Eds.). (1997). Gobierno, Academia y Empresas en México: Hacia una Nueva Configuración de Relaciones. México: Plaza y Vladés.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chubin, D. E., & Hackett, E. J. (1990). Peerless science: Peer review and U. S. science policy. New York: State University of New York Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • CONACYT. (2016). Informe General de la Ciencia, la Tecnologia y la Innovacion (pp. 348). México: Gobierno de la República.  

  • CONACYT-SNI. (2017). Reglamento del Sistema Nacional de Investigadores México. Mexico: Diario Oficial de la Federación.

    Google Scholar 

  • CONACYT-SNI. (2018). Criterios Específicos Área V—Ciencias Sociales. In D. O. D. I. Federación (Ed.). México.

  • de Castro Moreira, I. (2003). Brazilian science at a crossroads. Science. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.301.5630.141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Moya-Anegón, F., & Herrero-Solana, V. (1999). Science in America latina: A comparison of bibliometric and scientific-technical indicators. Scientometrics,46(2), 299–320. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02464780.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Didou-Aupetit, S., & Gérard, É. (2010). El Sistema Nacional de Investigadores, veinticinco años después. La comunidad científica, entre distinción e internacionalización. México: ANUIES.

    Google Scholar 

  • Didou-Aupetit, S., & Gérard, E. (2011). El Sistema Nacional de Investigadores en 2009.¿ Un vector para la internacionalización de las élites científicas? Perfiles Educativos,XXXIII(32), 29–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • DOF. (1984). Acuerdo por el cual se estable la creación del Sistema Nacional de Investigadores. Mexico: Diario Oficial de la Federación.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dubois, M. (1999). Introduction à la sociologie des sciences. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fernández-Zayas, J. L. (Ed.). (2005). Una reflexión sobre el Sistema Nacional de Investigadores a 20 años de su creación. México: FCCyT/AMC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Franzoni, C., Scellato, G., & Stephan, P. (2011). Changing incentives to publish. Science Policy, 333(6043), 702–703.

    Google Scholar 

  • Galaz Fontes, J. F., & Viloria Hernández, E. (2014). La carrera del académico mexicano a principios del siglo XXI: Una exploración con base en la encuesta RPAM 2007–2008. Revista de la Educación Superior,43, 37–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galaz, J. F., Padilla, L. E., Gil, M., & Sevilla, J. J. (2008). Los dilemas del profesorado en la educación superior mexicana. Calidad en la Educación. https://doi.org/10.31619/caledu.n28.202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galaz-Fontes, J. F., & Gil-Antón, M. (2013). The impact of merit-pay systems on the work and attitudes of Mexican academics. Higher Education,66(3), 357–374. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-013-9610-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galaz-Fontes, J. F., Sevilla-García, J. J., Padilla-González, L. E., Arcos-Vega, J. L., Gil-Antón, M., & Martínez-Stack, J. (2011). México: A portrait of a managed profession. In W. Locke, W. K. Cummings, & D. Fisher (Eds.), Changing governance and management in higher education: The perspectives of the academy (pp. 57–81). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Gamba, G. (2012). Reflexiones sobre el proceso de evaluación del investigador. (30 de Mayo de 2012). La Crónica de Hoy.

  • García-Bátiz, M. L. (2015). Reflexiones sobre los retos para ingreso, permanencia y promoción en el SNI de las investigadoras. In A. Mendieta-Ramírez (Ed.), ¿Legitimidad o Reconocimiento? Las investigadoras del SNI. Retos y Propuestas (pp. 29–35). PUebla: La Biblioteca, S.A. de C.V.

  • Gaudin, J.-P., & Livet, P. (2008). Processus d’évaluation des sciences sociales: acteurs et valeurs. Revue Européenne des Sciences Sociales,XLVI(141), 7–10. https://doi.org/10.4000/ress.143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gil Antón, M., & Contreras Gómez, L. E. (2017). El Sistema Nacional de Investigadores: ¿ espejo y modelo? Revista de la Educación Superior,46, 1–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gingras, Y. (2013). Sociologie des sciences (Que sais-je?). Paris: PUF.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gingras, Y. (2014). Les dérives de l’évaluation de la recherche. Du bon usage de la bibliométire. France: Raisons d’agir.

    Google Scholar 

  • González, J. (2009). El Sistema Nacional de Investigadores y su productividad docente. (18 de marzo de 2009). La Crónica Hoy.

  • Gonzalez-Brambila, C., & Veloso, F. M. (2007). The determinants of research output and impact: A study of Mexican researchers. Research Policy,36(7), 1035–1051. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2007.03.005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haustein, S., & Larivière, V. (2015). The use of bibliometrics for assessing research: Possibilities, limitations and adverse effects. In I. M. Welpe, J. Wollersheim, S. Ringelhan, & M. Osterloh (Eds.), Incentives and performance: Governance of research organizations (pp. 121–139). Cham: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hicks, D. (1999). The difficulty of achieving full coverage of international social science literature and the bibliometric consequences. Scientometrics,44(2), 193–215. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02457380.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hicks, D. (2004). The four literatures of social sciences. In H. Moed (Ed.), Handbook of quantitative science and technology research. Alphen aan den Rijn: Kluwer Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hicks, D. (2013). One size doesn’t fit all: On the co-evolution of national evaluation systems and social science publishing. Confero,1(1), 67–90. https://doi.org/10.3384/confero13v1130117.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Howitt, P. (2000). The economics of science and the future of Universities. The 16th Timlin Lecture, University of Saskatchewan.  

  • Kosmopoulos, C., & Pumain, D. (2008). Révolution numérique et évaluation bibliométrique dans les sciences humaines et sociales. Revue Européenne des Sciences Sociales,XLVI(141), 73–86. https://doi.org/10.4000/ress.151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laclette, J. P., & Zúñiga-Bello, P. (2008). Evaluación de impacto del programa de formación de científicos y tecnológos 1997–2006 (p. 240). México: CONACYT/FCCYT.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laclette, J. P., & Zúñiga-Bello, P. (Eds.). (2010). El debate de la ciencia en México. Múltiples visiones, un mismo compromiso. México: Foro Consultivo Científico y Tecnológico, AC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lamont, M. (2009). How professors think. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Larivière, V. (2015). Bibliométrie. In J. Prud’homme, P. Doray, & F. Bouchard (Eds.), Sciences, technologies et sociétés de A à Z. Montréal: Les Presses de l’Université de Montréal.

    Google Scholar 

  • Larivière, V., Desrochers, N., Macaluso, B., Mongeon, P., Paul-Hus, A., & Sugimoto, C. R. (2016). Contributorship and division of labor in knowledge production. Social Studies of Science,46(3), 417–435. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312716650046.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larivière, V., Ni, C., Gingras, Y., Cronin, B., & Sugimoto, C. (2013). Global gender disparities in science. Nature,504, 211–213.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leite, P., Mugnaini, R., & Leta, J. (2011). A new indicator for international visibility: Exploring Brazilian scientific community. Scientometrics,88(1), 311–319. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-011-0379-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Llyod, M. (2018). El sector de la investigación en México: Entre privilegios, tensiones y jerarquías. Revista de la Educación Superior,47(185), 1–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • López-Hernández, A. (2009). El emeritazgo del Sistema Nacional de Investigadores. (11 de marzo de 2009). La Crónica Hoy.

  • Martin, B. R. (2013). Whither research integrity? Plagiarism, self-plagiarism and coercive citation in an age of research assessment. Research Policy,42(5), 1005–1014. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2013.03.011.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merton, R. K. (1968). The Matthew Effect in science. Science, 159(3810), 56–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mongeon, P., & Paul-Hus, A. (2016). The journal coverage of web of science and scopus: A comparative analysis. Scientometrics,106(1), 213–228. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1765-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neff, M. W. (2017). Publication incentives undermine the utility of science: Ecological research in Mexico. Science and Public Policy. https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scx054.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nerad, M., & Cerny, J. (1999). Postdoctoral patterns, career advancement, and problems. Science,285(5433), 1533–1535. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.285.5433.1533.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Norman, I., & Griffiths, P. (2008). Duplicate publication and ‘salami slicing’: Ethical issues and practical solutions. International Journal of Nursing Studies,45(9), 1257–1260. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2008.07.003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olivier, J.-P. (2011). L’évaluation de la qualité des recherches qualitatives. In P. Servais (Ed.), L’évaluation de la recherche en sciences humaines et sociales (pp. 231–241). Louvain-la-Neuve: Academia Bruylant.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perc, M. (2014). The Matthew effect in empirical data. Journal of The Royal Society Interface,11(98), 20140378.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pinto, R., Galaz Fontes, J. F., & Padilla González, L. E. (2012). Estudios nacionales sobre académicos en México: Una comparación metodológica. Revista de la Educación Superior,41, 9–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pontille, D. (2004). La signature scientifique: Une sociologie pragmatique de l’attribution. Paris: CNRS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pontille, D., & Torny, D. (2010). The controversial policies of journal ratings: Evaluating social sciences and humanities. Research Evaluation,19(5), 347–360. https://doi.org/10.3152/095820210x12809191250889.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pontille, D., & Torny, D. (2013). La manufacture de l’évaluation scientifique: Algorithmes, jeux de données, outils bibliométriques. Réseaux. https://doi.org/10.3917/res.177.0025.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Quan, W., Chen, B., & Shu, F. (2017). Publish or impoverish: An investigation of the monetary reward system of science in China (1999–2016). Aslib Journal of Information Management, 69(5), 486–502. https://doi.org/10.1108/AJIM-01-2017-0014.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rodríguez Miramontes, J., González Brambila, C. N., & Maqueda Rodríguez, G. (2018). El Sistema Nacional de Investigadores en México: 21 años de producción científica en las instituciones de educación superior (1991–2011). 2018, 33. https://doi.org/10.22201/iibi.24488321xe.2017.nesp1.57890.

  • Sandoval-Romero, V., Mongeon, P., & Larivière, V. (2018). Science, technology and innovation policies in Latin-America: fifteen years of scientific output, impact and international collaboration. In Paper presented at the 23th conference on science and technology indicators (STI 2018). Leiden.

  • Schmitt, J. (2018). Paywall. The Business of Scholarship (65 min). The Netherlands.

  • SciELO. (2018). Scientific Electronic Library Online. About SciELO. São Paulo, Brasil: SciELO – Scientific Electronic Library Online.

  • Shu, F., Julien, C.-A., & Larivière, V. (2019). Does the web of science accurately represent Chinese scientific performance? Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stephan, P. E. (2008). Science and the university: Challenges for future research. CESifo Economic Studies, 54(2), 313–324.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stephan, P., & Ma, J. (2005). The increased frequency and duration of the postdoctorate career stage. The American Economic Review,95(2), 71–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sugimoto, C. R., & Larivière, V. (2018). Meassuring research. What everyone needs to know. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vasen, F. (2011). Los sentidos de la relevancia en la política científica. CTS,19(7), 11–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vasen, F. (2018). La ‘Torre de Marfil’ como Apuesta Segura: Políticas Científicas y Evaluación Académica en México. Archivos Analíticos de Políticas Educativas,26(96), 24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vasen, F., & Lujano, I. (2017). National systems of classification of academic journals in Latin America: Recent trends and implications for academic evaluation in the social sciences. Revista Mexicana De Ciencias Politicas Y Sociales,62(231), 199–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vinck, D. (1995). Sociologie des sciences. Paris: Armand Colin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waltman, L., Van Eck, N. J., Van Leeuwen, T. N., Visser, M. S., & Van Raan, A. F. J. (2011a). Towards a new crown indicator: An empirical analysis. Scientometrics,87(3), 467–481. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-011-0354-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waltman, L., Van Eck, N. J., Van Leeuwen, T. N., Visser, M. S., & Van Raan, A. F. J. (2011b). Towards a new crown indicator: Some theoretical considerations. Journal of Informetrics,5(1), 37–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2010.08.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

Funding was provided by Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnología, Chaire de recherche du Canada sur les transformations de la communication savante (Grant No. Postdoctoral scholarship) and CIRST (Grant No. Postdoctoral scholarship).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Chaire de recherche du Canada sur les transformations de la communication savante, Université de Montréal, C.P. 6128, Succ. Centre-Ville, Montréal, QC, H3C 3J7, Canada

    Vanessa Sandoval-Romero & Vincent Larivière

  2. Centre interuniversitaire de recherche sur la science et la technologie, C.P. 8888, Succ. Centre-Ville, Montréal, QC, H3C 3P8, Canada

    Vanessa Sandoval-Romero & Vincent Larivière

  3. Department of International Studies, Universidad Iberoamericana, Ciudad de México, Prolongación Paseo de la Reforma 880, Lomas de Santa Fe, 01219, Mexico, D.F., Mexico

    Vanessa Sandoval-Romero

Authors
  1. Vanessa Sandoval-Romero
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Vincent Larivière
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Vanessa Sandoval-Romero.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sandoval-Romero, V., Larivière, V. The national system of researchers in Mexico: implications of publication incentives for researchers in social sciences. Scientometrics 122, 99–126 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-019-03285-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-019-03285-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation