1. art and entertainment
2. books and literature

CHAPTER – I
INTRODUCTION
1.0
BACKGROUND
1.0.1
Bibliometrics
Bibliometrics is a quantitative study of various aspects of literature on a
topic and is used to identify the pattern of publication, authorship and secondary
journal coverage with the objective of getting an insight into the dynamics of
growth of knowledge in the areas under consideration. This consequently leads to
the better organization of Information resources which is essential for its most
effective and efficient use. Bibliometrics today has attained sophistication and
complexity having national, international, and interdisciplinary character.1 It is a
tool by which the state of science and technology can be observed through the
traces of communication in the science-technology system, most notably the
published documents which comprise books, monographs, reports, theses, papers
in serials and periodicals, and nowadays also e-books and e-journals as well as –
in the broadest sense – the WEB2. Researchers in several disciplines have been
interested in publication productivity as a means of assessing scholarly excellence
of individual researchers within a field.3–7 Publication productivity, as measured
by the number of papers, has also been regarded as one of the main indicators of
reputation of institutions in general8–11 and academic institutions in particular.12–13
There is a growing awareness that the advantages of basing research, and
subsequent political choices, on criteria that lend themselves for more quantitative
evaluation.14 The researchers of Library and Information Science extensively use
bibliometrics as a tool to identify the pattern of publication, authorship and
secondary journal coverage with the objective of getting an insight into the
dynamics of growth of knowledge in the areas under consideration.
This
consequently leads to better organization of information resources which is
essential for its most effective and efficient use.
1.0.1.1
Origin of the term ‘Bibliometrics’
The terms ‘bibliometrics’ and ‘scientometrics’ were almost simultaneously
introduced by Pritchard and by Nalimov and Mulchenko in 1969. While Pritchard
explained the term bibliometrics as “the application of mathematical and
statistical methods to books and other media of communication”, Nalimov and
Mulchenko defined scientometrics as “the application of those quantitative
methods which are dealing with the analysis of science viewed as an information
process”. According to these interpretations the speciality scientometrics is
restricted to the measurement of science communication, whereas bibliometrics is
designed to deal with more general information processes. The anyhow fuzzy
borderlines between the two specialities almost vanished during the last three
decades, and nowadays both terms are used almost as synonyms. Instead, the field
informetrics took the place of the originally broader speciality bibliometrics. The
term informetrics was adopted by VINITI15 and stands for a more general subfield
of information science dealing with mathematical and statistical analysis of
2
communication processes in science. In contrast to the original definition of
bibliometrics, informetrics also deals with electronic media and thus includes
topics such as the statistical analysis of the (scientific) text and hypertext systems,
library circulations, information measures in electronic libraries, models for
Information Production Processes and quantitative aspects of information retrieval
as well.
1.0.1.2
Definitions of Bibliometrics
The term ‘bibliometrics’ has been defined differently by the people
engaged in the study of information. Some of the well-known definitions are
provided below chronologically:
The term ‘Bibliometrics’ was coined by two words ‘biblio’ and ‘metrics’.
The word ‘biblio’ is derived from combination of a Latin and Greek word
‘biblion’ means book, paper. On the other hand the word ‘metrics’ indicates the
science of metre i.e. measurement.
Merton and Garfield16 defined it as the “field of inquiry given over to the
quantitative analysis of science and scientific field”.
Pritchard17 defined it as “the application of mathematical and statistical
methods to books and other media of communication”. He also explained it as
“the metrology of the information transfer process and its purpose is analysis and
control of the process”.
3
Fairthrone18 defined the term as, “the quantitative treatment of the
properties of recorded discourse and behaviour pertaining to it”.
The British Standard Glossary of Documentation of Terms19 explained
bibliometrics as, “the study of the use of documents and patterns of publication in
which mathematical and statistical methods have been applied”, which is basically
similar to Pritchard’s definition.
Hawkins20 interpreted bibliometrics as “quantitative analysis of the
bibliographic features of a body of literature.” Nicholas and Ritchie21 in their
book entitled literature on bibliometrics stated that bibliometrics “provides
information about the structure of knowledge and how it is communicated”
Potter22, Editor of Library Trends defined the term as “the study and
measurement of the publication patterns of all forms of written communication
and their authors”.
Morales23 uses the term informetrics to cover almost all the aspects of
bibliometrics and librametrics.
According to Broadus24 “Bibliometrics is the
quantitative study of physical published units or bibliographic units or of
surrogates of either.”
Sengupta25 viewed bibliometrics as “organisation, classification, and
quantitative evaluation of publication patterns of all macro and micro
communications along with their authorship by mathematical and statistical
calculus.”
4
1.0.1.3
The Pioneers of Bibliometrics
Lotka
The statistical analysis of scientific literature began almost 50 years before
the term ‘bibliometrics’ was coined. In 1926, Alfred J. Lotka 26 published his
pioneering study on the frequency distribution of scientific productivity
determined from a decennial index (1907-1916) of Chemical Abstracts. Lotka
concluded that:
“the number (of authors) making n contributions is about 1/n² of
those making one; and the proportion of all contributors, that makes
a single contribution, is about 60 per cent.”
This result can be considered as a rule of thumb even today, 75 years after
its publication.
Gross and Gross
At almost the same time, in 1927, Gross and Gross27 published their
citation-based study in order to aid the decision which chemistry periodicals
should be purchased by small college libraries. In particular, they examined 3633
citations from the 1926 volume of the Journal of the American Chemical Society.
This study is considered the first citation analysis, although it is not a citation
analysis in the sense of present-day bibliometrics.
5
Bradford
Eight years after Lotka’s article appeared, Bradford (1934)28 published his
study on the frequency distribution of papers over journals. He found that:
“if scientific journals are arranged in order of decreasing
productivity on a given subject, they may be divided into a nucleus of
journals more particularly devoted to the subject and several groups
or zones containing the same number of articles as the nucleus when
the numbers of periodicals in the nucleus and the succeeding zones
will be as 1: b : b² …”
Zipf
Zipf (1949)29 formulated an interesting law in bibliometrics and quantitative
linguistics that he derived from the study of word frequency in a text. According
to Zipf rf = C, where r is the rank of a word, f is the frequency of occurrence of
the word and C is a constant that depends on the text being analysed. It can be
considered a generalisation of the laws by Lotka and Bradford. He formulated the
following underlying principle of his law:
"The Principle of Least Effort means… that a person…will strive to
solve his problems in such a way as to minimize the total work that he
must expend in solving both his immediate problems and his probable
future problems…."
6
1.0.1.4
The Three Components of Present-day Bibliometrics and
Their Applications
Present-day bibliometric research is aimed at the following three main
target-groups that clearly determine topics and sub-areas of contemporary
bibliometrics:
Bibliometrics for Bibliometricians (Methodology)
This is the domain of basic bibliometric research and is traditionally
funded by the usual grants. Methodological research is conducted mainly in this
domain.
Bibliometrics
information)
for
Scientific
Disciplines
(Scientific
The researchers in scientific disciplines form the bigger, but also the most
diverse interest-group in bibliometrics. Due to their primary scientific orientation,
their interests are strongly related to their speciality. This domain may be
considered an extension of science information by metric means. Here we also
find joint borderland with quantitative research in information retrieval.
Bibliometrics for Science Policy and Management
This is the domain of research evaluation, at present the most important
topic in the field. Here the national, regional, and institutional structures of
science and their comparative presentation are in the foreground.
7
In light of the above, Figure 1.1 presents diagrammatically how
bibliometrics/scientometrics is linked with related fields and application services.
Figure 1.1 Links of bibliometrics with related fields and application services
(Source: Glänzel, 2003)
1.0.2
Information Age and Knowledge Age
Information is important for any individual to survive in the information
society. It has been a fact irrespective of time. It is evident from the fact that the
present era as the ‘Information Age’. Information Age is a term applied to the
period where movement of information became faster than physical movement,
more narrowly applied to the late 20th century and early 21st century post 1970,
during which, the information became easily accessible through publications and
through the manipulation of information by computers and computer networks. It
is often used in conjunction with the term post-industrial society. The availability
of information easily has been a boon to the researchers. It acts as catalyst to their
8
research. Also, the availability of information has resulted in the development and
growth of knowledge.
1.1
INTRODUCTION
Bibiometrics method has been employed to conduct the research as it is
especially useful when studying a research intensive subject field such as
Biotechnology, Biochemistry, Microbiology, where the industry is likely to have
close relations with public research organizations (e.g. universities).30 It is the
quantitative evaluation of scientific literature. Scientific productivity is influenced
by a large number of factors, including individual characteristics such as age,
gender, psychological traits, and educational background, as well as structural
features like funding, institutional context, and the organization of the actual
research31-33. Bibliometric analysis is used in the science and technology policy
arena to determine the knowledge outputs of the national systems of innovation.
1.2
STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
As mentioned earlier, bibliometrics is concerned with analysis of the
characteristics of published literature including: studies of dispersion of literature
on various topics; statistical analyses of content types, references, etc.; and citation
and co-citation studies within and across particular disciplines. In academic and
scientific work, research publication is the chief means of
communicating
research, a primary means of recognition and reward, and hence a central social
process in the Universities.
9
Research is the primary function of any educational institution. Qualitative
research provides a pedestal to any university. India has prospered as far as the
number of educational institutions is concerned. Starting with 28 universities in
1950 – 51, it has grown to 354 today registering manifold increase. National
Institutes of Technology in India are the premier institutions in the country next to
Indian Institute of Technology. The Government of India intends to increase the
number of NITs and IITs in the country to produce as many qualitative engineers
and technologists as possible which will ultimately influence the development of
nation in various aspects. Growth in numbers is expected to cater to the increasing
number of students. Research in an educational institution speaks of the fertile
minds and an environment of intellectual interaction in the institution which will
ultimately add credentials to the researchers as well as the institutions concerned.
It is a well known fact that scientific literature is expanding very fast. It is
estimated that it doubles every five years. Immediately, it comes to mind to assess
the performance of faculties in National Institutes of Technology in India to what
extent they have contributed to engineering and technology literature.
In view of the above, the researcher intended to undertake as it was
observed that there was no such study in the literature about the publication
productivity of faculties in National Institutes of Technology in India. The
research topic of the study was on “Evaluation of Research Performance by
Faculties in National Institutes of Technology in India: A Scientometric
Analysis”. The study aims to ascertain the growth of literature, sources of
publications, identification of prolific authors, institutions, identification of core
10
journals, etc. in the field of engineering and technology by faculties in National
Institutes of Technology in India for the period 2001 – 2010. Applicability of
Lotka’s law and Bradford’s law has also been tested.
1.3
OPERATIONAL TERMINOLOGY
The following concepts have operationally been defined for the purpose of
the present study.
Relative Growth Rate
Relative growth rate is a tool to measure the pattern of information growth
when the growth rate of a function is always proportional to the function's current
size. Such growth is said to follow an exponential law. This implies for any
exponentially growing quantity, the larger the quantity gets, the faster it grows.
Doubling Time
The doubling time is the period of time required for a quantity to double in
size. It can be applied to growth of literature, population, inflation, and many
other things which tend to grow over time. When the relative growth rate is
constant, the quantity undergoes exponential growth and has a constant doubling
time or period which can be calculated directly from the growth rate. This time
can be derived by dividing the natural logarithm of 2 by the exponent of growth.
11
Authorship Pattern
It denotes the percentage concentration of single authored papers in
relation to multi-authored papers.
Author Productivity
The productivity of scientific researchers which is normally referred to as
scientific productivity is measured in terms of their scientific output which is
published through different forms viz. papers, reports, books and technical output.
These measures of scientific productivity have been generally accepted and used
since the beginning of the twentieth century. It examines the prevailing trend in
carrying out the research process in science in terms of the extent to which the
research performance is concentrated by single authors.
Degree of Collaboration
It is an indicator used for measuring the extent and strength of
collaboration among the researchers in terms of their research contributions. It
explains the prevalence of proportion of single authored papers and multiauthored papers in research output.
12
REFERENCES
1.
Godin, Benoît (2006). On the Origins of Bibliometrics. Scientometrics,
68(1): 109–133.
2.
Glänzel, W. (2003). Bibliometrics as a Research Field: A Course on
Theory and Application of Bibliometric Indicators. Available at
3.
Gupta, B.M., Kumar, S., Aggarwal, B. S. (1999). A Comparison of
Productivity of Male and Female Scientists of CSIR. Scientometrics,
45:269–289.
4.
Prpic, K. (2000). The Publication Productivity of Young Scientists: An
Empirical Study. Scientometrics, 49: 453–490.
5.
Babu, A.R. and Singh, Y.P. (1998). Determinants of Research
Productivity. Scientometrics, 43: 309–329.
6.
Uzun, A. and Ozel, M.E. (1996).
Publication Patterns of Turkish
Astronomers. Scientometrics, 37: 159–169.
7.
Uzun, A. (1996). A Bibliometric Analysis of Physics Publications from
Middle Eastern Countries. Scientometrics, 36: 259–269.
8.
Garg, K. C. and Padhi, P. (1999). Scientometrics of Institutional
Productivity of Laser Science and Technology. Scientometrics, 46: 19–38.
9.
Abt, H. A. (1993). Institutional Productivities. Publications of the
Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 105: 794–798.
10.
Basu, A. and Nagpaul, P. S. (1998). National Mapping of Science.
NISTADS Report: No. Rep-248/98, New Delhi, 157–169.
11.
Perdew, J. P. and Tipler, F. J. (1996). Ranking the Physics Departments.
Physics Today, October: 96–97.
13
12.
Johns, J. L. (1983). A Study of Institutional Productivity in “Reading
World”: 1978–1983, ERIC Document Re-production service No. ED 248
490, Northern Illinois University.
13.
Thoresen, R. W., Kraauskopf, C. J. and Cox, J. G. (1975). Reputation,
Halo, and Ratings of Counseling Programs, Journal of Counseling
Psychology, 22: 446–450.
14.
Okubo, Yoshiko (1997). Bibliometric Indicators and Analysis of Research
Systems: Methods and Examples. STI working papers, OECD.
15.
Gorkova, V.I., (1988). Informetrics. Informatics, 10, VINITI, Moscow.
16.
Merton, R.K. and Garfield, E. (1963). Foreword to Little Science, Big
Science - and beyond by D J Solla Price. New York: Columbia University.
17.
Pritchard, A. (1969). Statistical Bibliography: An Interim Bibliography.
Journal of Documentation. 24(4): 69.
18.
Fairthrone, R.A. (1969). Emprical Hyperbolic Distributions (Bradford Zipmandelbort) for Bibliometric Description and Prediction. Journal of
Documentation. 25(4): 313-343.
19.
British Standard Institution (1976). British Standards of Documentation
Terms. London: BSI.
20.
Hawkins, D.T. (1977). Unconventional Uses of On-line Information
Retrieval Systems: On-line Bibliometric Studies. Journal of American
Society of Information Sciences, 28(1): 13-18.
21.
Nicholas, D., and Ritchie, M. (1968). Literature on Bibliometrics. London:
Bingley.
22.
Potter, W.G. (1981). Introduction to Bibliometrics. Library Trends, 30: 57.
14
23.
Morales, M. (1985). Information and its Importance. International Forum
for Information and Documentation, 10: 15-21.
24.
Broadus, R.N. (1987). Definition of Bibliometrics. Scientometrics, 12:
373-398.
25.
Sengupta, I.N. (1990). Bibliometrics and its Application. Ed. Pushpa
Dhyani. New Delhi: Atlantic.
26.
Lotka, A.J. (1926). The Frequency Distribution of Scientific Productivity.
Journal of Washington Academy of Sciences, 16: 317-323.
27.
Gross, P.L.K., Gross, E.M. (1927). College Libraries and Chemical
Education. Science, 66: 385-389.
28.
Bradford, S.C. (1934). Sources of Information on Specific Subjects.
Engineering, 137: 85-86.
29.
Zipf, G. K. (1949). Human Behavior and the Principle of Least Effort.
Addison-Wesley.
30.
Long, S.J. and McGinnis, R. (1981).Organisational Context and Scientific
Productivity. American Sociological Review, 46:422-442.
31.
Bunder, Halil and Lewis, Darrell R. (1998). Determinants of Research
Productivity in Higher Education. Higher Education, 39:607-631.
32.
Ramesh Babu, B. and Singh, Y.P. (1998). Determinants of Research
Productivity. Scientometrics, 43:309-329.
33.
Powar, K.S. and Panda, S.K. (1995). Higher Education in India.
Association of Indian Universities. New Delhi, 17-36.
15