(Georgia Institute of Technology, 2011-09-17)
Shapira, Philip; Wang, Jue
This study attempts to investigate the impact of research funding on the quality of scientific publications using the funding acknowledgement analysis approach. A two-stage regression model is used to test the effect of funding on research quality. The results show that publications from funded research do exhibit higher quality in terms of both journal ranking and citation counts. In the meantime, different funding sources and patterns are of different implications to research quality.
(Georgia Institute of Technology, 2011-09-16)
Carley, Stephen; Corley, Elizabeth A.; Scheufele, Dietram; Shapira, Philip; Youtie, Jan
This study links survey data on scientists societal perceptions of nanotechnology with publication data to understand the extent of association between societal perspectives held by nanoscientists and publication actions. We find that perceptions about moral limits mediate citation actions whereas attitudes toward government regulation have no significant effect.
(Georgia Institute of Technology, 2011-09-15)
Arora, Sanjay; Gao, Lidan; Ma, TingTing; Shapira, Philip; Youtie, Jan L.
This research employs a web-scraping methodology to 1) investigate country level differences among twenty graphene SMEs and 2) devise several measures that gauge the extent to which firm specialization in graphene coincides with other market factors. We identify three groups of SMEs to develop some early evidence of graphene commercialization.
(Georgia Institute of Technology, 2009-10)
Rogers, Juan D.; Shapira, Philip; Youtie, Jan L.
This research examines approaches for constructing a comparison group relative to highly creative researchers in nanotechnology and human genetics in the US and Europe. Such a comparison group would be useful in identifying factors that contribute to scientific creativity in these emerging fields. Two comparison group development approaches are investigated. The first approach is based on propensity score analysis and the second is based on knowledge from the literature on scientific creativity and early career patterns. In the first approach, the log of citations over the years of activity in the domains under analysis produces a significant result, but the distribution of matches is not adequate at the middle and high ends of the scale. The second approach matches highly creative researchers in nanotechnology and human genetics with a comparison group of researchers that have the same or similar early career characteristics were considered: (1) same first year of publication (2) same subject category of the first publication, (3) similar publication volume for the first six years in the specified emerging domain. High levels of diversity among the highly creative researchers, especially those in human genetics, underscore the difficulties of constructing a comparison group to understand factors that have brought about their level of performance.