A 'home bias' in citations boosts China's global science ranking

Dennis Normile

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.adt5690

IF: 56.9

2024-10-05

Science

Abstract:Studies find a majority of citations to top-ranked papers produced in China come from within the nation itself

multidisciplinary sciences

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

A Comparative Study of Domestic and Cross‐country Impact of Chinese and U.S. Publications in Chemistry

Xiaojing Cai,Xiaozan Lyu,Ping Zhou

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/pra2.5

2019-01-01

Abstract:ABSTRACTBased on publications in Chemistry in 2015, this paper investigated the citation impact on domestic and foreign scholarly communities of Chinese and US publications, and to what extent does such impact relate to international collaboration and government funding. First‐ or corresponding authorship in international collaboration is defined as dominance and is taken into consideration. Citations to publications are designated as domestic citations (Chinese or US citations), partner citations or other citations according to overlap of countries of citing and cited publications. Significant difference exists in the two countries. Most citations of Chinese publications are from domestic and partner countries, with domestic citations being the mainstay. In contrast, US papers receive more other citations than domestic or partner citations, and citations from partner countries contribute significantly. US papers have higher global impact than those of China. High domestic citation propensity is associated with non‐international collaboration, dominance of focal country in international collaboration, and national funding support. Such phenomenon is more pronounced in Chinese papers. In other words, citation impact of Chinese publications is more limited in domestic community, whereas that of the US is more global.
Characteristics of Research in China Assessed with Essential Science Indicators

Hui-Zhen Fu,Kun-Yang Chuang,Ming-Huang Wang,Yuh-Shan Ho

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-011-0416-8

IF: 3.801

2011-01-01

Scientometrics

Abstract:To provide an overview of the characteristics of research in China, a bibliometric evaluation of highly cited papers with high-level representation was conducted during the period from 1999 to 2009 based on the Essential Science Indicators (ESI) database. A comprehensive assessment covered overall performance, journals, subject categories, internationally collaborative countries, national inter-institutionally collaborative institutions, and most-cited papers in 22 scientific fields. China saw a strong growth in scientific publications in the last decade, to some extent due to increasing research and development expenditure. China has been more active in ESI fields of chemistry and physics, but more excellent in materials science, engineering and mathematics. Most publications were concerned with the common Science Citation Index subject categories of multidisciplinary chemistry, multidisciplinary materials and science, and physical chemistry. About one half China's ESC papers were internationally collaborative and the eight major industrialized countries (the USA, Germany, the UK, Japan, France, Canada, Russia, and Italy) played a prominent role in scientific collaboration with China, especially the USA. The Chinese Academy of Sciences took the leading position of institutions with many branches. The "985 Project" stimulated the most productive institutions for academic research with a huge funding injection and the universities in Hong Kong showed good scientific performance. The citation impact of internationally collaborative papers differed among fields and international collaborations made positive contributions to academic research in China.
Independent research of China in Science Citation Index Expanded during 1980–2011

Hui-Zhen Fu,Yuh-Shan Ho

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2012.11.005

IF: 3.7

2013-01-01

Journal of Informetrics

Abstract:The study explores the characteristics of China's independent research articles published from 1980 to 2011, based on the database of Science Citation Index Expanded. The publication outputs of seven major industrialized countries including Canada, France, Japan, Germany, Italy, the UK, and the USA were compared with China. Annual production, field performance, research emphases and trends, top articles, as well as main institutional and individual contributors by its top cited articles were analyzed. Some newly developed indicators related to words in title, author keywords, KeyWords Plus, first author, corresponding author, and Y-index were employed to provide in-depth information on topic and author contributions. Results showed that China has been closing the gap with the USA with the greatest growth, and has stood the second since 2006. Most top cited articles were published in 2000s, made up approximately seven tenths of total articles. Pronounced activities were found in chemistry and physics related categories. The core categories included multidisciplinary chemistry, physical chemistry, multidisciplinary materials science, and applied physics. Moreover, China's performance of nanotechnology and science, especially carbon nanotubes, nanoparticles, nanowires, and nanostructures showed dramatic growth. Six top articles with at least 1000 citations were examined, and were observed to concern medicine, nanotube, and adsorption. In addition, main contributing institutions and authors were also revealed and evaluated. Chinese Academy of Sciences played a dominant role, and Tsinghua University, Peking University and five universities in Hong Kong showed good scientific performance.
Is There A Clubbing Effect Underlying Chinese Research Citation Increases?

Li Tang,Philip Shapira,Jan Youtie

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23302

2015-01-01

Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology

Abstract:There is increasing evidence that citations to Chinese research publications are rising sharply. A series of reasons have been highlighted in previous studies. This research explores another possibilitywhether there is a clubbing effect in China's surge in research citations, in which a higher rate of internal citing takes place among influential Chinese researchers. Focusing on the most highly cited research articles in nanotechnology, we find that a larger proportion of Chinese nanotechnology research citations are localized within individual, institutional, and national networks within China. Both descriptive and statistical tests suggest that highly cited Chinese papers are more likely than similar U.S. papers to receive internal and localized citations. Tentative explanations and policy implications are discussed.
China's research clout leads to growth in homegrown science publishing

Brian Owens

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-024-01596-2

IF: 64.8

2024-06-06

Nature

Abstract:Self-reliance and a wish to set the agenda might explain concerted push to produce domestic journals. Self-reliance and a wish to set the agenda might explain concerted push to produce domestic journals.

multidisciplinary sciences
A discussion of measuring the top-1 percent most-highly cited publications: Quality and impact of Chinese papers

Caroline S. Wagner,Lin Zhang,Loet Leydesdorff

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2202.00781

2022-02-02

Abstract:The top 1 percent most highly cited articles are watched closely as the vanguards of the sciences. Using Web of Science data, one can find that China had overtaken the USA in the relative participation in the top 1 percent in 2019, after outcompeting the EU on this indicator in 2015. However, this finding contrasts with repeated reports of Western agencies that the quality of Chinese output in science is lagging other advanced nations, even as it has caught up in numbers of articles. The difference between the results presented here and the previous results depends mainly upon field normalizations, which classify source journals by discipline. Average citation rates of these subsets are commonly used as a baseline so that one can compare among disciplines. However, the expected value of the top 1 percent of a sample of N papers is N 100, ceteris paribus. Using the average citation rates as expected values, errors are introduced by using the mean of highly skewed distributions and a specious precision in the delineations of the subsets. Classifications can be used for the decomposition, but not for the normalization. When the data is thus decomposed, the USA ranks ahead of China in biomedical fields such as virology. Although the number of papers is smaller, China outperforms the US in the field of Business and Finance in the Social Sciences Citation Index when p is less than .05. Using percentile ranks, subsets other than indexing based classifications can be tested for the statistical significance of differences among them.

Digital Libraries,Applications
A Discussion of Measuring the Top-1% Most-Highly Cited Publications: Quality and Impact of Chinese Papers.

Wagner Caroline S.,Zhang Lin,Leydesdorff Loet

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-022-04291-z

IF: 3.801

2022-01-01

Scientometrics

Abstract:The top-1% most-highly-cited articles are watched closely as the vanguards of the sciences. Using Web of Science data, one can find that China had overtaken the USA in the relative participation in the top-1% (PP-top1%) in 2019, after outcompeting the EU on this indicator in 2015. However, this finding contrasts with repeated reports of Western agencies that the quality of China’s output in science is lagging other advanced nations, even as it has caught up in numbers of articles. The difference between the results presented here and the previous results depends mainly upon field normalizations, which classify source journals by discipline. Average citation rates of these subsets are commonly used as a baseline so that one can compare among disciplines. However, the expected value of the top-1% of a sample of N papers is N / 100, ceteris paribus. Using the average citation rates as expected values, errors are introduced by (1) using the mean of highly skewed distributions and (2) a specious precision in the delineations of the subsets. Classifications can be used for the decomposition, but not for the normalization. When the data is thus decomposed, the USA ranks ahead of China in biomedical fields such as virology. Although the number of papers is smaller, China outperforms the US in the field of Business and Finance (in the Social Sciences Citation Index; p < .05). Using percentile ranks, subsets other than indexing-based classifications can be tested for the statistical significance of differences among them.
A Discussion of Measuring the Top-1% Most-Highly-Cited Publications: the Case of China

Caroline Wagner,Lin Zhang,Koen Jonkers,Loet Leydesdorff

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3846583

2021-01-01

Abstract:The top-1% most-highly-cited articles are watched closely as the vanguards of the sciences. Using Web-of-Science data, one can find that China had overtaken the USA in the relative participation in the top-1% (PP-top1%) in 2019, after outcompeting the EU on this indicator in 2015. However, this finding contrasts with repeated reports of Western agencies that the quality of China’s output in science is lagging other advanced nations, even as it has caught up in numbers of articles. The difference between the results presented here and the previous results depends mainly upon field normalizations, which classify source journals by discipline. Average citation rates of these subsets are commonly used as a baseline so that one can compare among disciplines. However, the expected value of the top-1% of a sample of N papers is N / 100, ceteris paribus. Using the average citation rates as expected values, however, errors are introduced by (1) using the mean of highly skewed distributions and (2) a specious precision in the delineations of the subsets. Classifications can be used for the decomposition, but not for the normalization. When the data is thus decomposed, the USA ranks ahead of China in biomedical fields such as virology. Although the number of papers is smaller, China outperforms the US in the field of Business and Finance (in the Social Sciences Citation Index; (p<.05). Using percentile ranks, subsets other than indexing-based classifications can also be tested for the statistical significance of differences among them.
The Emergence of China as a Leading Nation in Science

Ping Zhou,Loet Leydesdorff

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.0911.3421

2009-11-17

Physics and Society

Abstract:China has become the fifth leading nation in terms of its share of the world's scientific publications. The citation rate of papers with a Chinese address for the corresponding author also exhibits exponential growth. More specifically, China has become a major player in critical technologies like nanotechnology. Although it is difficult to delineate nanoscience and nanotechnology, we show that China has recently achieved a position second only to that of the USA. Funding for R&D has been growing exponentially, but since 1997 even more in terms of business expenditure than in terms of government expenditure. It seems that the Chinese government has effectively used the public-sector research potential to boost the knowledge-based economy of the country. Thus, China may be achieving the ("Lisbon") objectives of the transition to a knowledge-based economy more broadly and rapidly than its western counterparts. Because of the sustained increase in Chinese government funding and the virtually unlimited reservoir of highly-skilled human resources, one may expect a continuation of this growth pattern in the near future.
Regional Analysis on Chinese Scientific Output

Ping Zhou,Bart Thijs,Wolfgang Glänzel

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-008-2255-9

IF: 3.801

2009-01-01

Scientometrics

Abstract:Based on data from the Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE) and using scientometric methods, we conducted a systematic analysis of Chinese regional contributions and international collaboration in terms of scientific publications, publication activity, and citation impact. We found that regional contributions are highly skewed. The top positions measured by number of publications or citations, share of publications or citations are taken by almost the same set of regions. But this is not the case when indicators for relative citation impact are used. Comparison between regional scientific output and R&D expenditure shows that Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient between the two indicators is rather low among the leading publication regions.
Telling Our Own Story: A Bibliometrics Analysis of Mainland China’s Influence on Chinese Politics Research, 2001–2020

Hui-Zhen Fu,Li Shao

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/s1049096522001147

2023-01-01

Abstract:ABSTRACTThis study conducted a bibliometric analysis of Chinese politics research from 2001 to 2020 (N = 11,285) using Social Sciences Citation Index data. The number of publications in the field by scholars from Mainland China surged in the past 20 years; however, their influence on academia remained limited. Chinese institutions serve as the major hubs of collaborative networks. Using structural topic models, we identified 25 research topics that can be categorized in three clusters. In the past 20 years, scholars from Mainland China steered the focus of Chinese politics by causing a reduction in the proportion of international relation topics and an increase in the proportion of political economy topics. Domestic politics topics had the most citations. Scholars from Mainland China have made contributions to better research methods in the field. This article is a comprehensive view of Chinese politics research using a tool that is rarely used by political scientists. It depicts how studies of Chinese politics influence academia from a bibliometrics perspective.
Comparing like with like: China ranks first in SCI-indexed research articles since 2018

Junwen Zhu,Weishu Liu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03525-2

IF: 3.801

2020-05-25

Scientometrics

Abstract:China's rising in scientific research output is impressive. The academic community is curious about the time when the cross-over in the number of annual scientific publication production between China and the USA can happen. By using Web of Science Core Collection's Science Citation Index Expanded database, this study finds that China still ranks the second in the production of SCI-indexed publications in 2019 but may leapfrog the USA to be the first in 2020 or 2021, if all document types are considered. Comparatively, China has already overtaken the USA and been the largest SCI-indexed original research article producer since 2018. However, China still lags behind the USA regarding the number of review paper production. In general, quantitative advantage does not equal quality or impact advantage. We think that the USA will continue to be the global scientific leader for a long time.

information science & library science,computer science, interdisciplinary applications
An Analysis of the International Academic Influence of Academic Journals in China over the Three Decades Since Reform and Opening Up

聂珍钊,石挺,杜娟

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1673-5420.2010.01.001

2010-01-01

Abstract:Academic journals,by which academic influence of a country is indicated,provide important sources for research.The number of papers collected by the three US science citation databases(SCI,SSCI,AHCI) is an important index of a discipline's international academic influence.An analysis of academic papers indexed by the three science citation databases over the last three decades in our country reveals that great gaps exist in the number of papers indexed by each database,which embodies great imbalance in the development and international academic influence of the three subjects,of which natural science developed at a high speed,social science developed rapidly,and art and humanities developed slowly.In order to enhance the international academic influence of our country,policies should be stipulated to balance the development of different subjects.The way to classify subjects should be reformed: the philosophical social science should be divided into two subjects——social science and art humanities.Correct methods should be used in evaluating different subjects and measures should be taken to assist academic journals in entering international citation databases and thereby promote the internationalization.
Profiling the most highly cited scholars from China: Who they are. To what extent they are interdisciplinary

Yu Peng Zhu,Han Woo Park

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2022.jul.08

2022-07-28

El Profesional de la información

Abstract:Since the beginning of the 21st century, an increasing number of Chinese researchers have joined the ranks of the world’s top scientists. Some international organizations have observed this phenomenon and ranked the world’s top Chinese researchers. However, investigation of highly cited interdisciplinary research (IDR) scholars is insufficient, although IDR tends to have a greater social impact. Looking at the top 2% of the world’s Chinese scholars, this study analyzes the structural attributes of IDR by those top scholars in detail using network analysis, cluster analysis, block modeling, and quadratic assignment procedure analysis. The results show that the proportion of highly cited scholars in technical categories is higher than in social categories. The fields of artificial intelligence and image processing, oncology and carcinogenesis, plus neurology and neurosurgery serve as bridges across disciplines, with materials, energy, and artificial intelligence and image processing having higher eigenvector centrality. The field of social sciences has the widest range of IDR activities, but cooperation within this field is low. Forty-two of the world’s first-class universities are in China, and of the world’s top 2% scholars who come from China, 46.3% work for these institutions. The research themes of highly cited academics from World First-Class universities in China are most similar to the themes of scholars from universities in China with first-class academic disciplines. There are differences between non-university and university scholars in terms of research topics. It is suggested that the government can promote a triple-helix effect (public institute, industrial enterprise, and research school) so that organizations of different natures can produce synergistic effects.

information science & library science,communication
The dominance of big teams in China’s scientific output

Linlin Liu,Jianfei Yu,Junming Huang,Feng Xia,Tao Jia

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00099

2021-01-01

Quantitative Science Studies

Abstract:Abstract Modern science is dominated by scientific productions from teams. A recent finding shows that teams of both large and small sizes are essential in research, prompting us to analyze the extent to which a country’s scientific work is carried out by big or small teams. Here, using over 26 million publications from Web of Science, we find that China’s research output is more dominated by big teams than the rest of the world, which is particularly the case in fields of natural science. Despite the global trend that more papers are written by big teams, China’s drop in small team output is much steeper. As teams in China shift from small to large size, the team diversity that is essential for innovative work does not increase as much as that in other countries. Using the national average as the baseline, we find that the National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) supports fewer small teams than the National Science Foundation (NSF) of the United States does, implying that big teams are preferred by grant agencies in China. Our finding provides new insights into the concern of originality and innovation in China, which indicates a need to balance small and big teams.
The dominance of big teams in China's scientific output

Linlin Liu,Jianfei Yu,Junming Huang,Feng Xia,Tao Jia

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2003.01108

2020-02-29

Digital Libraries

Abstract:Modern science is dominated by scientific productions from teams. A recent finding shows that teams with both large and small sizes are essential in research, prompting us to analyze the extent to which a country's scientific work is carried out by big/small teams. Here, using over 26 million publications from Web of Science, we find that China's research output is more dominated by big teams than the rest of the world, which is particularly the case in fields of natural science. Despite the global trend that more papers are done by big teams, China's drop in small team output is much steeper. As teams in China shift from small to large size, the team diversity that is essential for innovative works does not increase as much as that in other countries. Using the national average as the baseline, we find that the National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) supports fewer small team works than the National Science Foundation of U.S. (NSF) does, implying that big teams are more preferred by grant agencies in China. Our finding provides new insights into the concern of originality and innovation in China, which urges a need to balance small and big teams.
The poor altmetric performance of publications authored by researchers in mainland China

Xianwen Wang,Zhichao Fang,Qingchun Li,Xinhui Guo

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1610.07424

2016-10-24

Digital Libraries

Abstract:China's scientific output has risen precipitously over the past decade; it is now the world's second-largest producer of scientific papers, behind only the United States. The quality of China's research is also on the rise (Van Noorden, 2016). The online visibility and impact of China's research are also important issues worth exploring. In this study, we investigate the altmetric performance of publications in the field of Biotechnology and Applied Microbiology and published by authors from Chinese affiliations. We find that papers published by those authors from Chinese affiliations have much lower visibility on the social web than articles from other countries, when there is no significant difference for the citations. Fewer of China's publications get tweeted, and those tweeted publications attract less social attention. A geographical analysis of tweeters shows that scholarly articles get most of their social attention from the authors' home countries, a finding that is also confirmed by correlation and regression analysis. This situation, which is unfavorable for researchers from Chinese affiliations, is caused, in part, by the inaccessibility of mainstream social networking platforms in mainland China.
Openness and Knowledge Sharing of Economics,Sociology,Law and Politics:A Comparative Study on Citations of Chinese Social Science Journals

Shi Jinchuan,Zhang Yuhao

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3785/j.issn.1008-942X.2011.08.171

2012-01-01

Abstract:As an important part of academic papers which comply with the norms of social science research,citations themselves are of great research value.On the basis of the collection of citation data from top Chinese journals in economics,sociology,law and politics and on the basis of internal and international comparison research,we find that economics and sociology are more open to research abroad while law and politics are less open.And in these subjects,the level of citations to other social sciences is comparatively low.We also find that the percentage of self-citation in economics decreased significantly while that in sociology,law and politics increased moderately between 1998 and 2008 according to the results of the comparison of interdisciplinary citations.On the other hand,the percentage of interdisciplinary citation of sociology and law to economics are quite high,while the percentage of interdisciplinary citation of politics to economics is low.We think that the lack of interdisciplinary journals and the lack of researchers are two key reasons for the underdevelopment of interdisciplinary research in China.
The structure and comparative advantages of China’s scientific research: quantitative and qualitative perspectives

Lili Wang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1650-2

IF: 3.801

2015-08-13

Scientometrics

Abstract:In recent decades China has witnessed an impressive improvement in science and its scientific output has become the second largest in the world. From both quantitative and qualitative perspectives, this paper aims to explore China’s comparative advantages in different academic disciplines. This paper employs two datasets: publications in all journals and publications in the top 5 % journals by discipline. With the former database we investigate the comparative advantages of each academic discipline in terms of absolute output volume, and with the latter database we evaluate the scientific output published in prestigious resources. Different from the criticism stated in previous literature, this paper finds that the quality of China’s research (represented by papers published in high-impact journals) is promising. Since 2006 the growth of scientific publications in China has been driven by papers published in English-language journals. The increasing visibility of Chinese science seems to be paving the way for its wider recognition and higher citation rates.

information science & library science,computer science, interdisciplinary applications
China's global growth in social science research: Uncovering evidence from bibliometric analyses of SSCI publications (1978–2013)

Weishu Liu,Guangyuan Hu,Li Tang,Yuandi Wang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2015.05.007

IF: 3.7

2015-07-01

Journal of Informetrics

Abstract:The phenomenon of China's rise as an emerging scientific power has been well documented, yet the development of its social science is less explored. Utilizing up-to-date Social Science Citation Index (SSCI) publication data (1978–2013), this paper probes the patterns and dynamics of China's social science research via bibliometric analyses. Our research indicates that despite the national orientation of social science research and the linguistic obstacle of publishing for an international audience, China's publications in the SSCI dataset have been rising in terms of volume, world share, and global ranking. But China is still not yet a major player in the arena of social sciences, as is evidenced by the number of Chinese journals indexed in SSCI and the lack of Olympic players. Team research features China's international publishing in social science, but the research outputs are highly unbalanced at regional and institutional levels.

information science & library science,computer science, interdisciplinary applications

A 'home bias' in citations boosts China's global science ranking

A Comparative Study of Domestic and Cross‐country Impact of Chinese and U.S. Publications in Chemistry

Characteristics of Research in China Assessed with Essential Science Indicators

Independent research of China in Science Citation Index Expanded during 1980–2011

Is There A Clubbing Effect Underlying Chinese Research Citation Increases?

China's research clout leads to growth in homegrown science publishing

A discussion of measuring the top-1 percent most-highly cited publications: Quality and impact of Chinese papers

A Discussion of Measuring the Top-1% Most-Highly Cited Publications: Quality and Impact of Chinese Papers.

A Discussion of Measuring the Top-1% Most-Highly-Cited Publications: the Case of China

The Emergence of China as a Leading Nation in Science

Regional Analysis on Chinese Scientific Output

Telling Our Own Story: A Bibliometrics Analysis of Mainland China’s Influence on Chinese Politics Research, 2001–2020

Comparing like with like: China ranks first in SCI-indexed research articles since 2018

An Analysis of the International Academic Influence of Academic Journals in China over the Three Decades Since Reform and Opening Up

Profiling the most highly cited scholars from China: Who they are. To what extent they are interdisciplinary

The dominance of big teams in China’s scientific output

The dominance of big teams in China's scientific output

The poor altmetric performance of publications authored by researchers in mainland China

Openness and Knowledge Sharing of Economics,Sociology,Law and Politics:A Comparative Study on Citations of Chinese Social Science Journals

The structure and comparative advantages of China’s scientific research: quantitative and qualitative perspectives

China's global growth in social science research: Uncovering evidence from bibliometric analyses of SSCI publications (1978–2013)