arXiv subjects

Flavia Di Costa

Publications and source records attributed to Flavia Di Costa.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2021

Does the geographic proximity effect on knowledge spillovers vary across research fields?

Policy makers are interested in the influence of geographic distance on knowledge flows, however these can be expected to vary across research fields. The effects of geographic distance on flows are analyzed by means of citations to scientific literature. The field of observation consists of the 2010-2012 Italian publications and relevant citations up to the close of 2017. The geographic proximity effect is analyzed at national, continental, and intercontinental level in 244 fields, and results as evident at national level and in some cases at continental level, but not at intercontinental level. For flows between Italian municipalities, citations decrease with distance in all fields. At continental level, four fields are identified having knowledge flows that grow with distance; at intercontinental level, this occurs in 26 fields. The influence of distance is more limited in the fields of Humanities and Social sciences, much more significant in the Sciences, mainly in the Natural sciences.

cs.DL↗

arXiv2021

Knowledge spillovers: does the geographic proximity effect decay over time? A discipline-level analysis, accounting for cognitive proximity, with and without self-citations

This work analyzes the variation over time of the effect of geographic distance on knowledge flows. The flows are measured through the citations exchanged between scientific publications, including and excluding self-citations. To calculate geographic distances between citing and cited publication, each publication is associated with a "prevailing" territory, according to the authors' affiliations. We then apply a gravity model to account for the research size of the territories, in terms of cognitive proximity of citing-cited publications. The field of observation is the 2010-2017 world publications citing the 2010-2012 Italian publications, as indexed in the Web of Science. The results show that in domestic knowledge flows, geographic proximity remains an influential factor through time, although with differences among disciplines and trends of attenuating effects. Finally, we replicate the analyses of knowledge flows but with the exclusion of self-citations: in this manner the effect of geographic proximity seems reduced, particularly at the national scale, but the differences (with vs without self-citations) lessen through time. As shown in previous works, the effect of distance on continental flows is modest (imperceptible for intercontinental flows), yet here too time has some influence, including concerning exclusion of self-citations.

cs.DL↗

arXiv2021

On the relation between the degree of internationalization of cited and citing publications: A field level analysis, including and excluding self-citations

The growing complexity of scientific challenges demands increasingly intense research collaboration, both domestic and international. The resulting trend affects not only the modes of producing new knowledge, but also the way it is disseminated within scientific communities. This paper analyses the relationship between the "degree of internationalization" of a country's scientific production and that of the relevant citing publications. The empirical analysis is based on 2010-2012 Italian publications. Findings show: i) the probability of being cited increases with the degree of internationalization of the research team; ii) totally domestic research teams tend to cite to a greater extent totally domestic publications; iii) vice versa, publications resulting from international collaborations tend to be more cited by totally foreign publications rather than by publications including domestic authors. These results emerge both at overall and at discipline level. Findings might inform research policies geared towards internationalization.

cs.DL↗

arXiv2020

The relative impact of private research on scientific advancement

Literature about the scholarly impact of scientific research offers very few contributions on private sector research, and the comparison with public sector. In this work, we try to fill this gap examining the citation-based impact of Italian 2010-2017 publications distinguishing authorship by the private sector from the public sector. In particular, we investigate the relation between different forms of collaboration and impact: how intra-sector private publications compare to public, and how private-public joint publications compare to intra-sector extramural collaborations. Finally, we assess the different effect of international collaboration on private and public research impact, and whether there occur differences across research fields.

econ.GN↗

arXiv2020

The role of geographic proximity in knowledge diffusion, measured by citations to scientific literature

This paper analyses the influence of geographic distance on knowledge flows, measured through citations to scientific publications. Previous works using the same approach are limited to single disciplines. In this study, we analyse the Italian scientific production in all disciplines matured in the period 2010-2012. To calculate the geographic distances between citing and cited publications, each one is associated with a "prevalent" territory on the basis of the authors' affiliations. The results of the application of a gravity model, estimated using ordinary least squares regression, show that despite the spread of IT, geographic distance continues to be an influential factor in the process of knowledge flows between territories. In particular, the analysis reveals that the effect of geographic distance on knowledge flows is significant at the national level, not negligible at the continental level, but completely irrelevant at the intercontinental level.

cs.DL↗

arXiv2019

The collaboration behavior of top scientists

The intention of this work is to analyze top scientists' collaboration behavior at the "international", "domestic extramural" and "intramural" levels, and compare it to that of their lesser performing colleagues. The field of observation consists of the entire faculty of the Italian academic system, and so the coauthorship of scientific publications by over 12,000 professors. The broader aim is to improve understanding of the causal nexus between research collaboration and performance. The analysis is thus longitudinal, over two successive five-year periods. Results show a strong increase in the propensity to collaborate at domestic level (both extramural and intramural), however this is less for scientists who remain or become top, than it is for their lower-performing colleagues. In contrast, the increase in international collaboration behavior is greater for scientists who become or remain top than it is for their peers. The increase in productivity by those who acquire top scientist status is due precisely to the greater average impact of the publications achieved in collaboration with foreign colleagues.

cs.DL↗

arXiv2019

A nation's foreign and domestic professors: which have better research performance? (The Italian case)

This work investigates the research performance of foreign faculty in the Italian academic system. Incoming professors compose l'1% of total faculty across the sciences, although with variations by discipline. Their scientific performance measured over 2010-2014 is on average better than that of their Italian colleagues: the greatest difference is for associate professors. Psychology is the discipline with the greatest concentration of top foreign scientists. However there are notable shares of unproductive foreign professors or of those with mediocre performance. The findings stimulate reflection on issues of national policy concerning attractiveness of the higher education system to skilled people from abroad, given the ongoing heavy Italian brain drain.

cs.DL↗

arXiv2019

Diversification versus specialization in scientific research: which strategy pays off?

The current work addresses a theme previously unexplored in the literature: that of whether the results arising from research activity in fields other than the scientist's pri-mary field have greater value than the others. Operationally, the authors proceed by identifying: the scientific production of each researcher under observation; field classifi-cation of the publications; the field containing the greatest number of the researcher's publications; attribution of value of each publication. The results show that diversifica-tion at the aggregate level does not pay off, although there are some exceptions at the level of individual disciplines. The implications at policy level are notable. Since the in-centive systems of research organizations are based on the impact of scientific output, the scientists concerned could resist engaging in multidisciplinary projects.

cs.DL↗

arXiv2019

A gender analysis of top scientists' collaboration behavior: evidence from Italy

This work analyzes the differences in collaboration behavior between males and females among a particular type of scholars: top scientists, and as compared to non top scientists. The field of observation consists of the Italian academic system and the co-authorships of scientific publications by 11,145 professors. The results obtained from a cross-sectional analysis covering the five-year period 2006-2010 show that there are no significant differences in the overall propensity to collaborate in the top scientists of the two genders. At the level of single disciplines there are no differences in collaboration behavior, except in the case of: i) international collaborations, for Mathematics and Chemistry - where the propensity for collaboration is greater for males; and ii) extramural domestic collaborations in Physics, in which it is the females that show greater propensity for collaboration. Because international collaboration is positively correlated to research performance, findings can inform science policy aimed at increasing the representation of female top performers.

cs.DL↗

arXiv2019

Authorship analysis of specialized vs diversified research output

The present work investigates the relations between amplitude and type of collaboration (intramural, extramural domestic or international) and output of specialized versus diversified research. By specialized or diversified research, we mean within or beyond the author's dominant research topic. The field of observation is the scientific production over five years from about 23,500 academics. The analyses are conducted at the aggregate and disciplinary level. The results lead to the conclusion that in general, the output of diversified research is no more frequently the fruit of collaboration than is specialized research. At the level of the particular collaboration types, international collaborations weakly underlie the specialized kind of research output; on the contrary, extramural domestic and intramural collaborations are weakly associated with diversified research. While the weakness of association remains, exceptions are observed at the level of the individual disciplines.

cs.DL↗

arXiv2018

Identifying interdisciplinarity through the disciplinary classification of co-authors of scientific publications

The growing complexity of challenges involved in scientific progress demands ever more frequent application of competencies and knowledge from different scientific fields. The present work analyzes the degree of collaboration among scientists from different disciplines in order to identify the most frequent "combinations of knowledge" in research activity. The methodology adopts an innovative bibliometric approach based on the disciplinary affiliation of publication co-authors. The field of observation includes all publications (173,134) indexed in the Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-E) for the five years 2004-2008, authored by all scientists in the hard sciences (43,223) at Italian universities (68). The analysis examines 205 research fields grouped in nine disciplines. Identifying the fields with the highest potential of interdisciplinary collaboration is useful to inform research polices at national and regional levels, as well as management strategies at the institutional level.

cs.DL↗

arXiv2018

Specialization vs diversification in research activities: the extent, intensity and relatedness of field diversification by individual scientists

We investigate whether and in what measure scientists tend to diversify their research activity, and if this tendency varies according to their belonging to different disciplinary areas. We analyze the nature of research diversification along three dimensions: extent of diversification, intensity of diversification, and degree of relatedness of topics in which researchers diversifies. For this purpose we propose three bibliometric indicators, based on the disciplinary placement of scientific output of individual scientists. The empirical investigation shows that the extent of diversification is lowest for scientists in Mathematics and highest in Chemistry; intensity of diversification is lowest in Earth sciences and highest in Industrial and information engineering; and degree of relatedness is lowest in Earth sciences and highest in Chemistry.

cs.DL↗

arXiv2018

A new bibliometric approach to assess the scientific specialization of regions

The objective of the current work is to identify the territorial scientific specializations present in Italy, at the levels of regions and provinces (NUTS2 and NUTS3). To do this, we take a bibliometric approach based on the scientific production of the entire public research system in the hard sciences sphere, for the five years 2006-2010. In particular, we apply a new index of scientific specialization (Scientific Specialization Index, SSI) that takes account of both the quantity and quality of scientific production achieved by the research institutions of a given territory.

cs.DL↗

arXiv2018

Research collaboration and productivity: is there correlation?

The incidence of extramural collaboration in academic research activities is increasing as a result of various factors. These factors include policy measures aimed at fostering partnership and networking among the various components of the research system, policies which are in turn justified by the idea that knowledge sharing could increase the effectiveness of the system. Over the last two decades, the scientific community has also stepped up activities to assess the actual impact of collaboration intensity on the performance of research systems. This study draws on a number of empirical analyses, with the intention of measuring the effects of extramural collaboration on research performance and, indirectly, verifying the legitimacy of policies that support this type of collaboration. The analysis focuses on the Italian academic research system. The aim of the work is to assess the level of correlation, at institutional level, between scientific productivity and collaboration intensity as a whole, both internationally and with private organizations. This will be carried out using a bibliometric type of approach, which equates collaboration with the co-authorship of scientific publications.

cs.DL↗

arXiv2018

Mapping excellence in national research systems: the case of Italy

The study of the concept of "scientific excellence" and the methods for its measurement and evaluation is taking on increasing importance in the development of research policies in many nations. However, scientific excellence results as difficult to define in both conceptual and operational terms, because of its multi-dimensional and highly complex character. The literature on the theme is limited to few studies of an almost pioneering character. This work intends to contribute to the state of the art by exploring a bibliometric methodology which is effective, simple and inexpensive, and which further identifies "excellent" centers of research by beginning from excellence of the individual researchers affiliated with such centers. The study concentrates on the specific case of public research organizations in Italy, analyzing 109 scientific categories of research in the so called "hard" sciences and identifying 157 centers of excellence operating in 60 of these categories. The findings from this first application of the methodology should be considered exploratory and indicative. With a longer period of observation and the addition of further measurements, making the methodology more robust, it can be extended and adapted to a variety of national and supranational contexts, aiding with policy decisions at various levels.

cs.DL↗

arXiv2018

University-industry collaboration in Italy: a bibliometric examination

This work investigates public-private research collaboration between Italian universities and domestic industry, applying a bibliometric type of approach. The study is based on an exhaustive listing of all co-authored publications in international journals that are jointly realized by Italian university scientists and researchers in the private sector: this listing permits the development of a national mapping system for public-private collaboration, which results unique for its extensive and representative character. It is shown that, in absolute terms, most collaborations occur in medicine and chemistry, while it is industrial and information engineering which shows the highest percentage of co-authored articles out of all articles in the field. In addition, the investigation empirically examines and tests several hypotheses concerning the qualitative-quantitative impact of collaboration on the scientific production of individual university researchers. The analyses demonstrate that university researchers who collaborate with those in the private sector show research performance that is superior to that of colleagues who are not involved in such collaboration. But the impact factor of journals publishing academic articles co-authored by industry is generally lower than that concerning co-authorships with other entities. Finally, a further specific elaboration also reveals that publications with public-private co-authorship do not show a level of multidisciplinarity that is significantly different than that of other publications.

cs.DL↗

arXiv2018

Testing the trade-off between productivity and quality in research activities

In recent years there has been an increasingly pressing need for the evaluation of results from public sector research activity, particularly to permit the efficient allocation of ever scarcer resources. Many of the studies and evaluation exercises that have been conducted at the national and international level emphasize the quality dimension of research output, while neglecting that of productivity. This work is intended to test for the possible existence of correlation between quantity and quality of scientific production and determine whether the most productive researchers are also those that achieve results that are qualitatively better than those of their colleagues. The analysis proposed refers to the entire Italian university system and is based on the observation of production in the hard sciences by above 26,000 researchers in the period 2001 to 2005. The results show that the output of more productive researchers is superior in quality than that of less productive researchers. The relation between productivity and quality results as largely insensitive to the types of indicators or the test methods applied and also seems to differ little among the various disciplines examined.

cs.DL↗

arXiv2018

University-industry research collaboration: a model to assess university capability

Scholars and policy makers recognize that collaboration between industry and the public research institutions is a necessity for innovation and national economic development. This work presents an econometric model which expresses the university capability for collaboration with industry as a function of size, location and research quality. The field of observation is made of the census of 2001-2003 scientific articles in the hard sciences, co-authored by universities and private enterprises located in Italy. The analysis shows that research quality of universities has an impact higher than geographic distance on the capability for collaborating with industry. The model proposed and the measures that descend from it are suited for use at various levels of administration, to assist in realizing the "third role" of universities: the contribution to socio-economic development through public to private technology transfer.

cs.DL↗