Abstract
The growing digitalization of scientific research practices is reflected in the content that academic and governmental institutions put on their websites, many of which are not optimized so that their contents reach visibility in search results of Google. Through the mapping of search engine results, this article analyzes the visibility of Ibero-American governmental, educational and research institutions in the results of Google in relation to a group of keywords related to the areas of Science, Research and Innovation. By analyzing the results of these pages in the search results in a specific period we can determine that, although few exceptions, the algorithms used by Google increase the visibility of educational and research institutions in Ibero-America (IA) along with those of each country in function of the national search option offered by the search engine. The indicators obtained both for web presence and web visibility indicate that pages that appear more frequently in the first positions in IA countries are not owned by national institutions, but from other countries. Moreover, we have observed that governmental and educational institutions are most visible than research institutions. While previously social networks are not so far popular for this type of institutions, they are recently gaining positions. However, this study is exploratory and a longitudinal research would eliminate fluctuations of web data.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ackland, R., Fry, J., & Schroeder, R. (2007). Scoping the online visibility of e-research by means of e-research tools. In Proceedings of the 3rd international e-social science conference.
Adams, J., Gurney, K., Hook, D., & Leydesdorff, L. (2014). International collaboration clusters in Africa. Scientometrics,98, 547–556. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-013-1060-2.
Almind, T. C., & Ingwersen, P. (1997). Informetric analyses on the world wide web: Methodological approaches to ‘webometrics’. Journal of documentation,53(4), 404–426.
Arslan, M. L., & Seker, S. E. (2014). Web based reputation index of Turkish universities. International Journal of e-Education, e-Business, e-Management and e-Learning,4(3), 197–202.
Bail, C. (2014). The cultural environment: Measuring culture with big data. Theory and Society,43(3–4), 465–482.
Bar-Ilan, J. (2001). Data collection methods on the web for infometric purposes—a review and analysis. Scientometrics,50(1), 7–32.
Beaulieu, A. (2001). Voxels in the brain: Neuroscience, informatics and changing notions of objectivity. Social Studies of Science,31(5), 635–680.
Belli, S., & Baltà, J. (2019). Stocktaking scientific publication on bi-regional collaboration between Europe 28 and Latin America and the Caribbean. Scientometrics,121(3), 1447–1480.
Berman, D. (2004). At bell labs, hard times take toll on pure science. Wall Street.,23, 1–12.
Callon, M., & Law, J. (2004). Introduction: Absence—presence, circulation, and encountering in complex space. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space.,22, 3–11.
Chinchilla, Z., Miguel, S., Perianes-Rodríguez, A., & Sugimoto, C. (2018). Dependencies and autonomy in research performance: Examining nanoscience and nanotechnology in emerging countries. Scientometrics,115(3), 1485–1504.
Codina, L., Gonzalo-Penela, C., Pedraza, R., & Rovira, C. (2017). Posicionamiento web y medios de comunicación: ciclo de vida de una campaña y factores SEO. Barcelona: Departamento de Comunicación. Serie Editorial DigiDoc.
Cortés-Sánchez, J. D. (2019). Innovation in Latin America through the lens of bibliometrics: Crammed and fading away. Scientometrics,121(2), 869–895.
Dominic, P. D. D., & Jati, H. (2010). Evaluation method of Malaysian university website: Quality website using hybrid method). 2010 International symposium in information technology (ITSim (Vol. 1, pp. 1–6). IEEE.
Drèze, X., & Zufryden, F. (2004). Measurement of online visibility and its impact on internet traffic. Journal of interactive marketing,18(1), 20–37.
Fenner, M., & Haak, L. (2014). Unique identifiers for researchers. In S. Bartling & S. Friesike (Eds.), Opening science (pp. 293–296). Cham: Springer.
Finardi, U., & Buratti, A. (2016). Scientific collaboration framework of BRICS countries: An analysis of international co-authorship. Scientometrics,109, 433–446. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-1927-0.
Floridi, L. (2014). The fourth revolution: How the infosphere is reshaping human reality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Foladori, G. (2006). Nanotechnology in Latin America at the crossroads. Nanotechnology Law & Business,3, 205–216.
Gonzalo-Penela, C. (2015). Posicionamiento web y dinámicas de información en motores de búsqueda: propuestas de análisis y estudio comparativo de visibilidad de contenidos digitales en el caso de procesos electorales (Doctoral dissertation, Universitat Pompeu Fabra).
Gusenbauer, M. (2019). Google Scholar to overshadow them all? comparing the sizes of 12 academic search engines and bibliographic databases. Scientometrics,118(1), 177–214.
Hine, C. (2002). Cyberscience and social boundaries: The implications of laboratory talk on the internet. Sociological Research Online,7(2), 1–16.
Jozaghi, E. (2019). A new innovative method to measure the demographic representation of scientists via Google Scholar. Methodological Innovations,12(3), 1–9.
Kaur, S., Kaur, K., & Kaur, P. (2016). An empirical performance evaluation of universities website. International Journal of Computer Applications,146(15), 53–62.
Kay, L., & Shapira, P. (2009). Developing nanotechnology in Latin America. Journal of Nanoparticle Research,11, 259–278.
Kay, L., & Shapira, P. (2011). The potential of nanotechnology for equitable economic development: The case of Brazil. Nanotechnology and the challenges of equitu, equality, and development (pp. 309–329). New York: Springer.
Khabsa, M., & Giles, C. L. (2014). The number of scholarly documents on the public web. PLoS ONE,9(5), e93949.
Koehler, W. (1999). An analysis of web page and web site constancy and permanence. Journal of the American Society for Information Science,50(2), 162–180.
Koehler, W. (2002). Web page change and persistence—a four-year longitudinal study. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology,53(2), 162–171.
Koehler, W. (2004). A longitudinal study of web pages continued a consideration of document persistence.Information Research, 9(2). http://informationr.net/ir/9-2/paper174.html. Accessed 01 Feb 2020.
Ledford, J. L. (2015). Search engine optimization Bible. London: John Wiley & Sons.
Leydesdorff, L., & Curran, M. (2000). Mapping university-industry-government relations on the Internet: The construction of indicators for a knowledge-based economy. Cybermetrics: International Journal of Scientometrics, Informetrics and Bibliometrics, 4, 1–17.
Mills, K. A. (2018). What are the threats and potentials of big data for qualitative research? Qualitative Research,18(6), 591–603.
Minniti, S., Santoro, V., & Belli, S. (2018). Mapping the development of open access in Latin America and Caribbean countries. An analysis of web of science core collection and SciELO citation index (2005–2017). Scientometrics,117(3), 1905–1930.
Nentwich, M. (2003). Cyberscience: Research in the age of the internet (pp. 479–489). Vienna: Austrian Academy of Sciences Press.
Nentwich, M., Konig, R., & König, R. (2012). Cyberscience 2.0: Research in the age of digital social networks (Vol. 11). Frankfurt, New York: CampusVerlag.
Olaleye, S. A., Sanusi, I. T., Ukpabi, D., & Okunoye, A. (2018). Evaluation of Nigeria universities websites quality: A comparative analysis. Libryra Philosophy and Practice, 1717, 1–14.
Orduna-Malea, E., & Aytac, S. (2015). Revealing the online network between university and industry: The case of Turkey. Scientometrics,105(3), 1849–1866.
Orduna-Malea, E., et al. (2015). Methods for estimating the size of Google Scholar. Scientometrics,104(3), 931–949.
Ortega, J. L., Aguillo, I., & Prieto, J. A. (2006). Longitudinal study of content and elements in the scientific web environment. Journal of Information Science,32(4), 344–351.
Payne, N., & Thelwall, M. (2007). A longitudinal study of academic webs: Growth and stabilisation. Scientometrics,71(3), 523–539.
Payne, N., & Thelwall, M. (2008). Do academic link types change over time? Journal of Documentation,64(5), 707–720.
Scott, D. T. (2008). Tempests of the blogosphere: Presidential campaign stories that failed to ignite mainstream media (pp. 271–300). Digital media and democracy: Tactics in hard times.
Siegel, E. (2013). Predictive analytics: The power to predict who will click, buy, lie, or die. Hoboken: John Wiley and Sons.
Thelwall, M. (2000). Web impact factors and search engine coverage. Journal of documentation,56(2), 185–189.
Thelwall, M. (2002). A comparison of sources of links for academic web impact factor calculations. Journal of Documentation,58(1), 66–78.
Thelwall, M., & Harries, G. (2004). Do the web sites of higher rated scholars have significantly more online impact? Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology,55(2), 149–159.
Uyar, A. (2009). Investigation of the accuracy of search engine hit counts. Journal of information science,35(4), 469–480.
van Noorden, R. (2014). Online collaboration: Scientists and the social network. Nature,512, 126–129.
Vaughan, L. (2006). Visualizing linguistic and cultural differences using web co-link data. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology,57(9), 1178–1193.
Wilkinson, D., & Thelwall, M. (2013). Search markets and search results: The case of Bing. Library & Information Science Research,35(4), 318–325.
Acknowledgements
This paper has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation program under grant agreement No 693781 – “Giving focus to the Cultural, Scientific and Social Dimension of EU – CELAC Relations”.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Belli, S., Gonzalo-Penela, C. Science, research, and innovation infospheres in Google results of the Ibero-American countries. Scientometrics 123, 635–653 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03399-4
Received:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03399-4
Keywords
Mathematics Subject Classification
- 91C05 Game theory
- Economics
- Social and behavioral sciences
- Social and behavioral sciences: general topics
- Measurement theory