arXiv subjects

Ciriaco Andrea D'Angelo

Publications and source records attributed to Ciriaco Andrea D'Angelo.

At least 109 records · Page 6Linked to original sources

arXiv2018

Gender differences in research collaboration

The debate on the role of women in the academic world has focused on various phenomena that could be at the root of the gender gap seen in many nations. However, in spite of the ever more collaborative character of scientific research, the issue of gender aspects in research collaborations has been treated in a marginal manner. In this article we apply an innovative bibliometric approach based on the propensity for collaboration by individual academics, which permits measurement of gender differences in the propensity to collaborate by fields, disciplines and forms of collaboration: intramural, extramural domestic and international. The analysis of the scientific production of Italian academics shows that women researchers register a greater capacity to collaborate in all the forms analyzed, with the exception of international collaboration, where there is still a gap in comparison to male colleagues.

cs.DL↗

arXiv2018

The relationship between the number of authors of a publication, its citations and the impact factor of the publishing journal: Evidence from Italy

Empirical evidence shows that co-authored publications achieve higher visibility and impact. The aim of the current work is to test for the existence of a similar correlation for Italian publications. We also verify if such correlation differs: i) by subject category and macro-area; ii) by document type; iii) over the course of time. The results confirm world-level evidence, showing a consistent and significant linear growth in the citability of a publication with number of co-authors, in almost all subject categories. The effects are more remarkable in the fields of Social Sciences and Art & Humanities than in the Sciences-a finding not so obvious scrutinizing previous studies. Moreover, our results partly disavow the positive association between number of authors and prestige of the journal, as measured by its impact factor.

cs.DL↗

arXiv2018

A methodology to compute the territorial productivity of scientists: The case of Italy

Policy-makers working at the national and regional levels could find the territorial mapping of research productivity by field to be useful in informing both research and industrial policy. Research-based private companies could also use such mapping for efficient selection in localizing R&D activities and university research collaborations. In this work we apply a bibliometric methodology for ranking by research productivity: i) the fields of research for each territory (region and province); and ii) the territories for each scientific field. The analysis is based on the 2008-2012 scientific output indexed in the Web of Science, by all professors on staff at Italian universities. The population is over 36,000 professors, active in 192 fields and 9 disciplines.

cs.DL↗

arXiv2018

The spin-off of elite universities in non-competitive, undifferentiated higher education systems: an empirical simulation in Italy

Higher education systems featuring intense competition have developed world-class universities, capable of attracting top professors and students and considerable public-private funding. This does not occur in non-competitive systems, where highly-talented faculty and students are dispersed across all institutions. In such systems, the authors propose the budding of spin-off universities, staffed by migration of top scientists from the entire public research system. This work illustrate the proposal through an example: the spin-off of a new university in Rome-Italy staffed with the best professors from the three current public city universities. Such a faculty would offer top national research productivity, a magnet to attract the other critical ingredients of a world-class university: talented students, abundant resources and visionary governance.

cs.DL↗

arXiv2018

Selecting competent referees to assess research projects proposals: a study of referees' registers

The selection of referees for evaluation of research projects under competitive financing appears particularly critical: the greater the competence of the referee concerning the core topic, the more their judgment is trustworthy and the more the financing of the best proposals is probable. The current work analyzes registers of experts used to select referees for the evaluation of research proposals in public programs with competitive funding. The work has the objective to present a methodology to verify the degree of "coverage" of the register compared to the spectrum of competencies necessary for the evaluation of such wide-ranging national programs; and to evaluate the level of scientific performance of the register's referees in the hard sciences, compared to the their national colleagues from the same fields.

cs.DL↗

arXiv2018

An individual-level assessment of the relationship between spin-off activities and research performance in universities

One of the most problematic aspects in the creation of spin-offs by university personnel concerns the relationship between entrepreneurial activity and research activity by researcher-entrepreneurs. The literature has expressed varying and opposing views as to the nature of the relationship but very little has been produced to empirically legitimate one position or another. The present work proposes to address this shortcoming by exploring the relationship existing between academic spin-off generation and the research performance of enterprise founders. The study investigates whether, and to what extent, scientific performance by academic entrepreneurs is different than that of their colleagues, and if the involvement in entrepreneurial activity has an influence on the individual's research activity. The research questions are answered by considering all spin-offs generated by Italian universities over the period 2001-2008 and evaluating, through a bibliometric approach, the scientific performance of founders relative to that of their colleagues who carry out research in the same field. The data show better scientific performance by the researcher-entrepreneurs than that of their colleagues and in addition, although there are some variations across fields, the creation of a spin-off does not seem, on average, to have negative effects on the scientific performance of the founders.

cs.DL↗

arXiv2018

Measuring institutional research productivity for the life sciences: the importance of accounting for the order of authors in the byline

Accurate measurement of institutional research productivity should account for the real contribution of the research staff to the output produced in collaboration with other organizations. In the framework of bibliometric measurement, this implies accounting for both the number of co-authors and each individual's real contribution to scientific publications. Common practice in the life sciences is to indicate such contribution through the order of author names in the byline. In this work, we measure the distortion introduced to university-level bibliometric productivity rankings when the number of co-authors or their position in the byline is ignored. The field of observation consists of all Italian universities active in the life sciences (Biology and Medicine). The analysis is based on the research output of the university staff over the period 2004-2008. Based on the results, we recommend against the use of bibliometric indicators that ignore co-authorship and real contribution of each author to research outputs.

cs.DL↗

arXiv2018

The suitability of h and g indexes for measuring the research performance of institutions. Scientometrics, 97(3), 555-570

It is becoming ever more common to use bibliometric indicators to evaluate the performance of research institutions, however there is often a failure to recognize the limits and drawbacks of such indicators. Since performance measurement is aimed at supporting critical decisions by research administrators and policy makers, it is essential to carry out empirical testing of the robustness of the indicators used. In this work we examine the accuracy of the popular "h" and "g" indexes for measuring university research performance by comparing the ranking lists derived from their application to the ranking list from a third indicator that better meets the requirements for robust and reliable assessment of institutional productivity. The test population is all Italian universities in the hard sciences, observed over the period 2001-2005. The analysis quantifies the correlations between the three university rankings (by discipline) and the shifts that occur under changing indicators, to measure the distortion inherent in use of the h and g indexes and their comparative accuracy for assessing institutions.

cs.DL↗

arXiv2018

Career advancement and scientific performance in universities

Many governments have placed priority on excellence in higher education as part of their policy agendas. Processes for recruitment and career advancement in universities thus have a critical role. The efficiency of faculty selection processes can be evaluated by comparing the subsequent performance of competition winners against that of the losers and the pre-existing staff of equal academic rank. Our study presents an empirical analysis concerning the recruitment procedures for associate professors in the Italian university system. The results of a bibliometric analysis of the hard science areas reveal that new associate professors are on average more productive than the incumbents. However a number of crucial concerns emerge, in particular concerning occurrence of non-winner candidates that are more productive than the winners over the subsequent triennium, and cases of winners that are completely unproductive. Beyond the implications for the Italian case, the analysis offers considerations for all decision-makers regarding the ex post evaluation of the efficiency of the recruitment process and the desirability of providing selection committees with bibliometric indicators in support of evaluation (i.e. informed peer review).

cs.DL↗

arXiv2018

Variability of research performance across disciplines within universities in non-competitive higher education systems

Many nations are adopting higher education strategies that emphasize the development of elite universities able to compete at the international level in the attraction of skills and resources. Elite universities pursue excellence in all their disciplines and fields of action. The impression is that this does not occur in "non-competitive" education systems, and that instead, within single universities excellent disciplines will coexist with mediocre ones. To test this, the authors measure research productivity in the hard sciences for all Italian universities over the period 2004-2008 at the levels of the institution, their individual disciplines and fields within them. The results show that the distribution of excellent disciplines is not concentrated in a few universities: top universities show disciplines and fields that are often mediocre, while generally mediocre universities will often include top disciplines.

cs.DL↗

arXiv2018

Inefficiency in selecting products for submission to national research assessment exercises

One of the critical issues in national research assessment exercises concerns the choice of whether to evaluate the entire scientific portfolio of the institutions or a subset composed of the best products. Under the second option, the capacities of the institutions to select the appropriate researchers and their best products (the UK case) or simply the best products of every researcher (the Italian case) becomes critical, both for purposes of correct assessment of the real quality of research in the institutions evaluated, and for the selective funding that follows. In this work, through case studies of three Italian universities, we analyze the efficiency of the product selection that is intended to maximize the universities' scores in the current national research assessment exercise, the results of which will be the basis for assigning an important share of public financing over the coming years.

cs.DL↗

arXiv2018

How do you define and measure research productivity?

Productivity is the quintessential indicator of efficiency in any production system. It seems it has become a norm in bibliometrics to define research productivity as the number of publications per researcher, distinguishing it from impact. In this work we operationalize the economic concept of productivity for the specific context of research activity and show the limits of the commonly accepted definition. We propose then a measurable form of research productivity through the indicator "Fractional Scientific Strength (FSS)", in keeping with the microeconomic theory of production. We present the methodology for measure of FSS at various levels of analysis: individual, field, discipline, department, institution, region and nation. Finally, we compare the ranking lists of Italian universities by the two definitions of research productivity.

cs.DL↗

arXiv2018

Relatives in the same university faculty: nepotism or merit?

In many countries culture, practice or regulations inhibit the co-presence of relatives within the university faculty. We test the legitimacy of such attitudes and provisions, investigating the phenomenon of nepotism in Italy, a nation with high rates of favoritism. We compare the individual research performance of "children" who have "parents" in the same university against that of the "non-children" with the same academic rank and seniority, in the same field. The results show non-significant differences in performance. Analyses of career advancement show that children's research performance is on average superior to that of their colleagues who did not advance. The study's findings do not rule out the existence of nepotism, which has been actually recorded in a low percentage of cases, but do not prove either the most serious presumed consequences of nepotism, namely that relatives who are poor performers are getting ahead of non-relatives who are better performers. In light of these results, many attitudes and norms concerning parental ties in academia should be reconsidered.

cs.DL↗

arXiv2018

A multivariate stochastic model to assess research performance

There is a worldwide trend towards application of bibliometric research evaluation, in support of the needs of policy makers and research administrators. However the assumptions and limitations of bibliometric measurements suggest a probabilistic rather than the traditional deterministic approach to the assessment of research performance. The aim of this work is to propose a multivariate stochastic model for measuring the performance of individual scientists and to compare the results of its application with those arising from a deterministic approach. The dataset of the analysis covers the scientific production indexed in Web of Science for the 2006-2010 period, of over 900 Italian academic scientists working in two distinct fields of the life sciences.

cs.DL↗

arXiv2018

The effect of a country's name in the title of a publication on its visibility and citability

The objective of this research is to determine if the reference to a country in the title, keywords or abstract of a publication can influence its visibility (measured by the impact factor of the publishing journal) and citability (measured by the citations received). The study is based on Italian scientific production indexed in the Web of Science over the period 2004-2011. The analysis is conducted by comparing the values of four impact indicators for two subsets: i) the indexed publications with a country's name in the title, keywords or abstract; ii) the remainder of the population, with no country' name. The results obtained both at the general level and by subject category show that publications with a country name systematically receive lower impact values, with the exception of a limited number of subject categories, Also, the incidence of highly-cited articles is lower for the first subset.

cs.DL↗

arXiv2018

The north-south divide in the Italian higher education system

This work examines whether the macroeconomic divide between northern and southern Italy is also present at the level of higher education. The analysis confirms that the research performance in the sciences of the professors in the south is on average less than that of the professors in the north, and that this gap does not show noticeable variations at the level of gender or academic rank. For the universities, the gap is still greater. The study analyzes some possible determinants of the gap, and provides some policy recommendations for its reduction.

cs.DL↗

arXiv2018

The dispersion of the citation distribution of top scientists' publications

This work explores the distribution of citations for the publications of top scientists. A first objective is to find out whether the 80-20 Pareto rule applies, that is if 80% of the citations to a top scientist's work concern 20% of their publications. Observing that the rule does not apply, we also measure the dispersion of the citation distribution by means of the Gini coefficient. Further, we investigate the question of what share of a top scientist' publications go uncited. Finally, we study the relation between the dispersion of the citation distribution and the share of uncited publications. As well as the overall level, the analyses are carried out at the field and discipline level, to assess differences across them.

cs.DL↗

arXiv2018

Refrain from adopting the combination of citation and journal metrics to grade publications, as used in the Italian national research assessment exercise (VQR 2011-2014)

The prediction of the long-term impact of a scientific article is challenging task, addressed by the bibliometrician through resorting to a proxy whose reliability increases with the breadth of the citation window. In the national research assessment exercises using metrics the citation window is necessarily short, but in some cases is sufficient to advise the use of simple citations. For the Italian VQR 2011-2014, the choice was instead made to adopt a linear weighted combination of citations and journal metric percentiles, with weights differentiated by discipline and year. Given the strategic importance of the exercise, whose results inform the allocation of a significant share of resources for the national academic system, we examined whether the predictive power of the proposed indicator is stronger than the simple citation count. The results show the opposite, for all discipline in the sciences and a citation window above two years.

cs.DL↗