S. Arunachalam and K. Manorama
Scientometrics Volume 14, Numbers 1-2 / July, 1988
Based on the premise that citations in scientific journals can tell us a lot about the journals, we have compared Indian journals in the fields of astronomy, physics, chemistry, biochemistry, geology and ecology with leading world journals. The two criteria compared are the age of references and the journals often cited in each of the journals considered. Our results show that although overall Indian science is mediocre, parts of India’s scientific enterprise are cognitively better related to world science. The peripherality is not uniform across the board, but some areas like astronomy and to some extent physics are closer to the central or mainstream science than others. Although citation analysis is not normally used for cross-field comparisons, this paper demonstrates that, if used judiciously, citation analysis can yield valuable insights into issues involving many fields.
1 response so far ↓
bill // June 8, 2009 at 10:57 pm |
I wonder to what extent the “better performance” of astronomy and physics relates to the arXiv preprint server, which is widely (as I understand it, almost universally) used in those fields but has no real equivalent in any other field.