论空间科学计量学的研究与应用

doi:10.13998/j.cnki.issn1002-1248.22-0078

Abstract

Abstract: [Purpose/Significance] As an important research field of scientometrics, spatial scientometrics has been specifically proposed by scholars to discuss the spatial aspects of scientific research activities. At present, scholars at home and abroad have carried out quantitative research of spatial scientometrics, covering almost all aspects of scientometrics; however, there is little systematic review of the concept and research progress of spatial scientometrics. This article systematically reviews, analyzes, and summarizes the related research work of spatial scientometrics, with an aim to provide a reference for scholars to carry out spatial scientometrics research. [Method/Process] Based on the introduction of the concept of scientometrics and spatial scientometrics, this paper uses the literature research method to expound from three aspects including research theme, research method and visualization practice. [Results/Conclusions] The research finds that the current spatial scientometrics research is mainly based on the geographical location attributes of scientific information, and comprehensively uses bibliometric methods, network analysis methods, model construction and statistical methods, and multi-indicators construction methods to examine scientific collaboration, scientific research output and knowledge flow. This research also reveals the remaining problems and challenges in spatial scientometrics. First, in terms of the theoretical research system, spatial scientometrics essentially serves a specific field of scientometrics research, drawing on technical methods from the fields of computer science, network science, and economic geography, and has not formed a relatively independent theoretical system. Second, in terms of method applicability and utility research, its method selection is also arbitrary. Regarding the same research problems, researchers usually choose their own and familiar methods and tools based on experience. Thus, it is difficult to accurately evaluate the scientificity and validity of their analysis results, and even different research methods and tools reveal opposed so-called "characteristics and laws". Third, in terms of data analysis sources, the existing research is mostly around the data collected from Web of Science and Scopus databases. However, for a comprehensive and objective analysis of the spatial structure of scientific activities, other forms of data should be considered such as reports, the fund-funded projects and policy documents. Last, for data acquisition, when using the literature database to conduct quantitative research, since many well-known institutions and companies are not centrally distributed organizations, it is difficult to guarantee the author's real address. Due to the different scope and definition criteria of cities in different countries, an analysis of city-level data would affect the accuracy of the analysis results.

Key words: spatial scientometrics, scientific collaboration, scientific output, knowledge flow, visualization

CLC Number:

G250

LI Lanfang, CHEN Yunwei, ZHANG Xue, DENG Yong. Research and Application of Spatial Scientometrics[J].Journal of Library and Information Science in Agriculture, 2022, 34(7): 27-38.

References

[1] 左丽华, 祝清松, 肖仙桃. 空间科学计量学的概念及应用研究进展[J]. 情报理论与实践, 2014, 37(2): 141-144.
ZUO L H, ZHU Q S, XIAO X T.Progress in research on the concept and application of spatial scientometrics[J]. Information studies: Theory & application, 2014, 37(2): 141-144.
[2] FRENKEN K, HOEKMAN J.Spatial scientometrics and scholarly impact: A review of recent studies, tools, and methods[J]. Measuring scholarly impact, 2014: 127-146.
[3] MINGERS J, LEYDESDORFF L.A review of theory and practice in scientometrics[J]. European journal of operational research, 2015, 246(1): 1-19.
[4] HOOD W W, CONCEPCION, WILSON S.The literature of bibliometrics, scientometrics, and informetrics[J]. Scientometrics, 2001, 52(2): 291-314.
[5] SENGUPTA I N.Bibliometrics, informetrics, scientometrics and librametrics: An overview[J]. Libri, 1992, 42(2): 75-98.
[6] 梁立明, 武夷山. 简介科学计量学. 自然科学基金委员会内部资料[EB/OL]. [2021-07-20]. http://blog.sciencenet.cn/home.php?mod=space&uid=1557&do=blog&id=19355.
LIANG L M, WU Y S. Introduction to scientometrics. Internal information of the natural science foundation of China[EB/OL].[2021-07-20]. http://blog.sciencenet.cn/home.php?mod=space&uid=1557&do=blog&id=19355.
[7] NONE J D F, FRANCIS N, MARK P C. The distribution of world science[J]. Social studies of science, 1977, 7(4): 400.
[8] FRENKEN K, HARDEMAN S, HOEKMAN J.Spatial scientometrics: Towards a cumulative research program[J]. Journal of informetrics, 2009, 3(3): 222-232.
[9] APOLLONI A, ROUQUIER J B, JENSEN P.Collaboration range: Effects of geographical proximity on article impact[J]. The European physical journal special topics, 2013, 222(6): 1467-1478.
[10] WICHMANN M C, WINKEL S A.Scientific centres in Europe: An analysis of research strength and patterns of specialisation based on bibliometric indicators[J]. Urban studies, 1999, 36(3): 453-477.
[11] ANDERSSON D E, GUNESSEE S, MATTHIESSEN C W, et al.The geography of Chinese science[J]. Environment and planning A, 2014, 46(12): 2950-2971.
[12] GROSSETTI M, ECKERT D, GINGRAS Y, et al.Cities and the geographical deconcentration of scientific activity: A multilevel analysis of publications(1987-2007)[J]. Urban studies, 2014, 51(10): 2219-2234.
[13] SCHLAGBERGER E M, BORNMANN L, BAUER J.At what institutions did nobel laureates do their prize-winning work? An analysis of biographical information on nobel laureates from 1994 to 2014[J]. Scientometrics, 2016, 109(2): 723-767.
[14] 门伟莉, 张志强. 机构属性的诺贝尔科学奖分布规律研究[J]. 情报学报, 2019, 38(9): 907-920.
MEN W L, ZHANG Z Q.Research on nobel prizes in science based on institutional attributes[J]. Journal of the China society for scientific and technical information, 2019, 38(9): 907-920.
[15] 任晓亚, 张志强. 主要科技领域国际权威奖项规律及其驱动因素分析[J]. 情报学报, 2019, 38(9): 881-893.
REN X Y, ZHANG Z Q.Analysis of the laws of international au-thoritative awards in main science and technology fields and their driving factors[J]. Journal of the China society for scientific and technical information, 2019, 38(9): 881-893.
[16] JIANG S, SHI A, PENG Z, et al.Major factors affecting cross-city R & D collaborations in China: Evidence from cross-sectional co-patent data between 224 cities[J]. Scientometrics, 2017, 111(3): 1251-1266.
[17] ZHENG J, ZHAO Z, ZHANG X, et al.International collaboration development in nanotechnology: A perspective of patent network analysis[J]. Scientometrics, 2014, 98(1): 683-702.
[18] LIU Y, YAN Z, CHENG Y, et al.Exploring the technological collaboration characteristics of the global integrated circuit manufacturing industry[J]. Sustainability, 2018, 10(1): 196.
[19] MAKHOBA X, POURIS A.A patentometric assessment of selected R & D priority areas in south Africa, a comparison with other BRICS countries[J]. World patent information, 2019, 56: 20-28.
[20] 彭帅, 张春博, 杨阳, 等. 科学-技术-产业关联视角下石墨烯发展国际比较——基于专利的计量研究[J]. 中国科技论坛, 2019(4): 181-188.
PENG S, ZHANG C B, YANG Y, et al.International comparison of the development of graphene from the perspective of science-technology-industry relevancy: Based on the patentometrics analysis[J]. Forum on science and technology in China, 2019(4): 181-188.
[21] NOMALER O, FRENKEN K, HEIMERIKS G.Do more distant collaborations have more citation impact?[J]. Journal of informetrics, 2013, 7(4): 966-971.
[22] CSOMOS, GYRGY, LENGYEL B.Mapping the efficiency of international scientific collaboration between cities worldwide[J]. Journal of information science, 2020, 46(4): 575-578.
[23] YAO X, ZHANG C, QU Z, et al.Global Village or virtual Balkans? Evolution and performance of scientific collaboration in the information age[J]. Journal of the association for information science & technology, 2020, 71(4): 395-408.
[24] AVDEEV S.International collaboration in higher education research: A gravity model approach[J]. SSRN electronic journal, 2021, 126(7): 5569-5588.
[25] LIANG X.The changing impact of geographic distance: A preliminary analysis on the co-author networks in scientometrics(1983-2013)[C]. 2015 48th Hawaii international conference on system sciences, IEEE, 2015: 722-731.
[26] NAGPAUL P S.Exploring a pseudo-regression model of transnational cooperation in science[J]. Scientometrics, 2003, 56(3): 403-416.
[27] PONDS R, OORT F V, FRENKEN K.The geographical and institu-tional proximity of research collaboration[J]. Papers in regional science, 2007, 86(3): 423-443.
[28] HOEKMAN J, FRENKEN K, TIJSSEN R J W. Research collaboration at a distance: Changing spatial patterns of scientific collaboration within Europe[J]. Research policy, 2010, 39(5): 662-673.
[29] BERGE L R.Network proximity in the geography of research collaboration[J]. Papers in regional science, 2017, 96(4): 785-816.
[30] BIRNHOLTZ J P.When do researchers collaborate? Toward a model of collaboration propensity[J]. Journal of the American society for information ence and technology, 2007, 58(14): 2226-2239.
[31] FREEMAN R B, HUANG W.Collaborating with people like me: Ethnic coauthorship within the United States[J]. Journal of labor economics, 2015, 33(s1): S289-S318.
[32] ZHANG C, BU Y, DING Y, et al.Understanding scientific collaboration: Homophily, transitivity, and preferential attachment[J]. Journal of the association for information ence and technology, 2018, 69(1): 72-86.
[33] BOSCHMA R.Proximity and innovation: A critical assessment[J]. Regional studies, 2005, 39(1): 61-74.
[34] LAPERCHE B.Knowledge capital and small businesses[J]. Ency-clopedia of creativity, invention, innovation and entrepreneurship, 2020: 1527-1532.
[35] MAIER G, KURKA B, TRIPPL M.Knowledge spillover agents and regional development: Spatial distribution and mobility of star scientists[J]. DYNREG (dynamic regions in a knowledge-driven global economy), 2007, 17: 35.
[36] SCHILLER D, DIEZ J R.The impact of academic mobility on the creation of localized intangible assets[J]. Regional studies, 2012, 46(10): 1319-1332.
[37] 郦苏菲, 王杨, 阮妹, 等. 全球热点城市科研人员流动性分析[J]. 文献与数据学报, 2019, 1(3): 45-55.
LI S F, WANG Y, RUAN M, et al.Analysis of the researchers' mobility of global 20 cities[J]. Journal of library and data, 2019, 1(3): 45-55.
[38] 刘玮辰, 郭俊华, 史冬波. 科学家跨国流动促进了知识扩散吗?——基于青年千人的实证分析[J]. 图书情报知识, 2020(2): 32-41.
LIU W C, GUO J H, SHI D B.International mobility and knowledge diffusion: An empirical study of the thousand youth and talents plan[J]. Documentation, information & knowledge, 2020(2): 32-41.
[39] MICEK G.Geographical proximity paradox revisited: The case of IT service SMEs in Poland[J]. Sustainability, 2019, 11(20): 5770.
[40] GUI Q, LIU C, DU D.International knowledge flows and the role of proximity[J]. Growth and change, 2018, 49(3): 532-547.
[41] ABRAMO G, D'ANGELO C A, DI COSTA F. The role of geographical proximity in knowledge diffusion, measured by citations to scientific literature[J]. Journal of informetrics, 2020, 14(1): 101010.
[42] 赵炎, 王琦, 郑向杰. 网络邻近性、地理邻近性对知识转移绩效的影响[J]. 科研管理, 2016, 37(1): 128-136.
ZHAO Y, WANG Q, ZHENG X J.Impact of network vicinity and geographical proximity to knowledge transfer performance[J]. Science research management, 2016, 37(1): 128-136.
[43] ZHOU Z, XING R, LIU J, et al.Landmark papers written by the Nobelists in physics from 1901 to 2012: A bibliometric analysis of their citations and journals[J]. Scientometrics, 2014, 100(2): 329-338.
[44] BORNMANN L, WAGNER C, LEYDESDORFF L.The geography of references in elite articles: Which countries contribute to the archives of knowledge?[J]. PloS one, 2018, 13(3): E0194805.
[45] DURAN-SANCHEZ A, GARCIA J A, DEL RIO M C, et al. Trends and changes in the international journal of entrepreneurial behaviour & research[J]. International journal of entrepreneurial behavior & re-search, 2019, 25(7): 1491-1514.
[46] YAN E, SUGIMOTO C R.Institutional interactions: Exploring social, cognitive, and geographic relationships between institutions as demonstrated through citation networks[J]. Journal of the American society for information science and technology, 2011, 62(8): 1498-1514.
[47] CHEN Y, BORNER K, FANG S.Evolving collaboration networks in scientometrics in 1978-2010: A micro: macro analysis[J]. Sciento-metrics, 2013, 95(3): 1051-1070.
[48] CHOI S, YANG J S W, PARK H W. The triple helix and internation-al collaboration in science[J]. Journal of the association for informa-tion science and technology, 2015, 66(1): 201-212.
[49] CALIGNANO G.Italian organisations within the European nanotechnology network: Presence, dynamics and effects[J]. DIE ERDE - Journal of the geographical society of Berlin, 2014, 145(4): 241-259.
[50] CALIGNANO G, FITJAR R D.Strengthening relationships in clusters: How effective is an indirect policy measure carried out in a peripheral technology district?[J]. The annals of regional science, 2017, 59(1): 139-169.
[51] TU J.What connections lead to good scientific performance?[J]. Scientometrics, 2019, 118(2): 587-604.
[52] TINBERGEN J.Shaping the world economy: Suggestions for an international economic policy[J]. 1962, 31(123): 327.
[53] ANDERSON J E, VAN WINCOOP E.Gravity with gravitas: A solu-tion to the border puzzle[J]. American economic review, 2003, 93(1): 170-192.
[54] PONDS R, VAN OORT F, FRENKEN K.The geographical and institutional proximity of research collaboration[J]. Papers in regional science, 2007, 86(3): 423-443.
[55] BARBER M J, SCHERNGELL T.Is the European R & D network homogeneous? Distinguishing relevant network communities using graph theoretic and spatial interaction modelling approaches[J]. Regional studies, 2013, 47(8): 1283-1298.
[56] HARDEMAN S, FRENKEN K, NOMALER O, et al.Characterizing and comparing innovation systems by different "modes" of knowledge production: A proximity approach[J]. Science and public policy, 2015, 42(4): 530-548.
[57] CASSI L, MORRISON A, RABELLOTTI R.Proximity and scientific collaboration: Evidence from the global wine industry[J]. Tijdschrift voor economische en sociale geografie, 2015, 106(2): 205-219.
[58] HELLMANZIK C, KULD L.No place like home: Geography and culture in the dissemination of economic research articles[J]. Empiri-cal economics, 2021, 61(1): 201-229.
[59] FERNANDEZ A, FERRANDIZ E, LEON M D.Are organizational and economic proximity driving factors of scientific collaboration? Evidence from Spanish universities, 2001-2010[J]. Scientometrics, 2021, 126(1): 579-602.
[60] FAN L, WANG Y, DING S, et al.Productivity trends and citation impact of different institutional collaboration patterns at the research units' level[J]. Scientometrics, 2020, 125(2):1179-1196.
[61] 韩佳伟, 玄兆辉. 中国国家竞争力评价及中美比较[J]. 全球科技经济瞭望, 2019, 34(11): 21-26.
HAN J W, XUAN Z H.The evaluation of China's national competi-tiveness and comparison between China and the US[J]. Global sci-ence, technology and economy outlook, 2019, 34(11): 21-26.
[62] World economic forum. Global competitiveness report2018-2019[EB/OL].[2020-10-29]. https://www.weforum.org/reports/how-to-end-a-decade-of-lost-productivity-growth.
[63] 叶伊倩, 林世爵. 全球竞争力排行榜中的中国——《2019年全球竞争力报告》的解读及对中国的启示[J]. 科技创新发展战略研究, 2020, 4(2): 52-57.
YE Y Q, LIN S J.China in the global competitiveness rankings: The interpretation of the global competitiveness report 2019 and its enlightenment to China[J]. Strategy for innovation and development of science and technology, 2020, 4(2): 52-57.
[64] International institute for management development. World competitiveness yearbook2020[EB/OL].[2020-10-29]. https://www.imd.org/research-knowledge/books/world-competitiveness-yearbook-2020/.
[65] 张小军. 基于IMD视角的我国国际竞争力提升策略探析[J]. 内蒙古科技与经济, 2019, 439(21): 16-17.
ZHANG X J.Exploration and analysis on promotion strategy of China's international competitiveness based on perspective of IMD[J]. Inner Mongolia science technology & economy, 2019, 439(21): 16-17.
[66] 黄师平, 王晔. 国内外区域创新评价指标体系研究进展[J]. 科技与经济, 2018, 31(4): 11-15.
HUANG S P, WANG Y.Review of research on the index systems of regional innovation evaluation at home and abroad[J]. Science & technology and economy, 2018, 31(4): 11-15.
[67] BORNER K, PENUMARTHY S, MEISS M, et al.Mapping the diffusion of scholarly knowledge among major US research institutions[J]. Scientometrics, 2006, 68(3): 415-426.
[68] BORNER K, KLAVANS R, PATEK M, et al.Design and update of a classification system: The UCSD map of science[J]. PloS one, 2012, 7(7): E39464.
[69] LEYDESDORFF L, PERSSON O.Mapping the geography of science: Distribution patterns and networks of relations among cities and institutes[J]. Journal of the American society for information science and technology, 2010, 61(8): 1622-1634.
[70] BORNMANN L, LEYDESDORFF L, WALCH-SOLIMENA C, et al.Mapping excellence in the geography of science: An approach based on Scopus data[J]. Journal of informetrics, 2011, 5(4): 537-546.
[71] BORNMANN L, WALTMAN L.The detection of "hot regions" in the geography of science - A visualization approach by using density maps[J]. Journal of informetrics, 2011, 5(4): 547-553.
[72] BORNMANN L, STEFANER M, DE MOYA ANEGON F, et al. Ranking and mapping of universities and research - Focused institutions worldwide based on highly-cited papers[J]. Online information review, 2014, 38(1): 43-58.
[73] BORNMANN L, DE MOYA-ANEGON F. Spatial bibliometrics on the city level[J]. Journal of information science, 2019, 45(3): 416-425.

Metrics

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed

Comments

Recommended 0

No Suggested Reading articles found!

Research and Application of Spatial Scientometrics

PDF (PC)

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

References

Related Articles 15

Metrics

Comments

Recommended 0

[1]	XING Yunfei, LI Yuhai. Visualization of Topic Graph of Weibo Public Opinion Based on Text Mining [J]. Journal of Library and Information Science in Agriculture, 2021, 33(7): 12-23.
[2]	WANG Feifei, HAN Wenfei, SU Ziyao, YI Xinyue. Exploring the Academic Exchange among Countries along the "The Belt and Road": Bibliometrics Perspective of Highly Cited Papers [J]. Journal of Library and Information Science in Agriculture, 2021, 33(6): 94-106.
[3]	XU Yongle, CHEN Yuanyuan, YANG Tingting, WAN Xiangli. Comparative Analysis of the Research on the Influence of Chinese and International Think Tanks [J]. Journal of Library and Information Science in Agriculture, 2021, 33(11): 50-62.
[4]	WANG Yihan, YE Yuming. Review on the Research of Open Science at Home and Abroad in Recent Ten Years [J]. Journal of Library and Information Science in Agriculture, 2021, 33(10): 20-35.
[5]	PENG Xia, LIU Min, YANG Li, FAN Shan. The Geographical Distribution and Causes of the Female Writers during Ming and Qing Dynasties in Spatial Horizon: A Case Study of Songjiang Prefecture [J]. Journal of Library and Information Science in Agriculture, 2020, 32(9): 31-38.
[6]	LIN Hai, GU Tinghua, WU Yubing. Development Context and Characteristics of Social Commerce: Review and Prospect Based on Visualization Technology [J]. Journal of Library and Information Science in Agriculture, 2020, 32(5): 31-44.
[7]	CAO Qi. Visual Modeling of Keyword Dimension Reduction in Double First-Class University Funds Based on t-SNE Algorithm [J]. Journal of Library and Information Science in Agriculture, 2020, 32(2): 47-57.
[8]	WANG Li, SHEN Xiang. Research of Topics Discovery and Tech Evolution Based on Text Preprocessed LDA Model [J]. Agricultural Library and Information, 2019, 31(4): 19-28.
[9]	LIU Feng, LI Xianglan, NAN Hong, TANG Yan. Bibliometric and Visual Analysis on Soybean Breeding for Pest Resistance in China [J]. , 2018, 30(5): 70-74.
[10]	LIU Zhongkai. Visualized Analysis on Domestic Library Wechat Research [J]. , 2018, 30(3): 71-75.
[11]	ZHAO Laijuan, CHEN Wei, ZHANG Ning. Visualized Analysis on Characteristic Database Research in China's University [J]. , 2018, 30(2): 110-113.
[12]	ZHANG Yang, YU Yanhui, HUANG Danqing. Comparison between High Attention Papers and ESI Hot Papers: A Case Study of Clinical Medicine [J]. , 2018, 30(10): 13-22.
[13]	ZHANG Yang, WANG Yuanyuan. A Quantitative Analysis of Scientific Research Evaluation at Home and Abroad [J]. , 2018, 30(10): 38-48.
[14]	AZIGULI Wusiman, ZULIHUMAER Aizize. Discussion on the Application of Knowledge Mapping in Library’s Reference and Subject Service [J]. , 2017, 29(8): 181-185.
[15]	QI Xuelong, TAO Jihan, TANG Yan, LI Bo, WANG Lei. Bibliometric and Visual Analysis on the Research of Precision Agriculture in China [J]. , 2017, 29(8): 62-65.