Cómo citar
Resumen
Teniendo en cuenta que uno de los factores limitantes del desarrollo científico y tecnológico de un país son los factores económico – financieros (López, 2004), este trabajo tiene como propósito revisar el desempeño de éstos de países en América, Europa y Asia en términos de los resultados que se han obtenido a partir de las inversiones en Ciencia y Tecnología, tomando como referente el año 2010. Se revisan fuentes secundarias y se toman los datos para recursos financieros, recursos humanos y generación de nuevo conocimiento. Los resultados muestran que los países que se destacan en el análisis de coordenadas principales y de clúster son los que realizan mayores inversiones en I+D y por ende generan mayores resultados de nuevo conocimiento.
Referencias
Abolghassemi, M. A., & Jouyban, A. (2011). Scientometric analysis of the major Iranian medical universities. Scientometrics, 87(1), 205–220. Retrieved from http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?eid=2-s2.0-79952002177&partnerID=40&md5=657185388caf7526ed9a97ef7f363627
Abramo, G, & D’Angelo, C. A. (2011). National-scale research performance assessment at the individual level. Scientometrics, 86(2), 347–364. Retrieved from http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?eid=2-s2.0-78650993763&partnerID=40&md5=ac9090ef4cb8464b890d5695d501c63a
Abramo, G, D’Angelo, C. A., & Di Costa, F. (2010). Citations versus journal impact factor as proxy of quality: Could the latter ever be preferable? Scientometrics, 84(3), 821–833. Retrieved from http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?eid=2-s2.0-77954956331&partnerID=40&md5=4593b58a8027c03f08e34807245a4a89
Abramo, Giovanni, Cicero, T., & D’Angelo, C. A. (2011). The dangers of performance-based research funding in non-competitive higher education systems. Scientometrics, 87(3), 641–654. doi:10.1007/s11192-011-0355-4
Abramo, Giovanni, D’Angelo, C. A., & Costa, F. Di. (2009). Research Collaboration and Productivity: Is There Correlation? Higher Education, 57(2), 155–171. doi:10.2307/40269114
Abramo, Giovanni, D’Angelo, C. A., & Solazzi, M. (2010). National research assessment exercises: a measure of the distortion of performance rankings when labor input is treated as uniform. Scientometrics, 84(3), 605–619. doi:10.1007/s11192-010-0164-1
Abrizah, A., & Wee, M. (2011). Malaysia ’ s Computer Science research productivity based on publications in the Web of Science , 2000-2010, 16(1), 109–124.
Albert, A., Granadino, B., & Plaza, L. (2007). Scientific and technological performance evaluation of the Spanish Council for Scientific Research ( CSIC ) in the field of Biotechnology. Scientometrics, 70(1), 41–51.
Albornoz, M. (2001). Estudios Política Científica y Tecnológica Una visión desde América Latina. Revista Iberoamericana de Ciencia, Tecnología, Sociedad e Innovación, (4), 19. Retrieved from http://eco.mdp.edu.ar/cendocu/repositorio/00182.pdf
Aleixandre-Benavent, R., Valderrama-Zurián, J. C., & González-Alcaide, G. (2007). Scientific journals impact factor: Limitations and alternative indicators. Profesional de la Información, 16(1), 4–11. Retrieved from http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?eid=2-s2.0-34250160168&partnerID=40&md5=0907e67d338f89c367ed835277729ce3
Annibaldi, A., Truzzi, C., Illuminati, S., & Scarponi, G. (2010). Scientometric analysis of national university research performance in analytical chemistry on the basis of academic publications: Italy as case study. Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry, 398(1), 17–26. doi:10.1007/s00216-010-3804-7
Badar, K., Hite, J. M., & Badir, Y. F. (2012). Examining the relationship of co-authorship network centrality and gender on academic research performance: the case of chemistry researchers in Pakistan. Scientometrics, 94(2), 755–775. doi:10.1007/s11192-012-0764-z
Banco Mundial. (2013). Gasto en investigación y desarrollo (% del PIB). Gasto en investigación y desarrollo (% del PIB). Retrieved October 08, 2013, from http://datos.bancomundial.org/indicador/GB.XPD.RSDV.GD.ZS
Benneworth, P., & Jongbloed, B. W. (2010). Who matters to universities? A stakeholder perspective on humanities, arts and social sciences valorisation. Higher Education, 59(5), 567–588. doi:10.2307/40602420
Bordons, M., & Gómez-Fernández, I. (2002). Advantages and limitations in the use of impact factor measures for the assessment of research performance in a peripheral country. Scientometrics, 53(2), 195–206.
Bornmann, L., Wallon, G., & Ledin, A. (2008). Is the h index related to (standard) bibliometric measures and to the assessments by peers? An investigation of the h index by using molecular life sciences data. Research Evaluation, 17(2), 149–156. doi:10.3152/095820208X319166
Braam, R., & van den Besselaar, P. (2010). Life cycles of research groups: The case of CWTS. Research Evaluation, 19(3), 173–184.
Bressan, R. a, Gerolin, J., & Mari, J. J. (2005). The modest but growing Brazilian presence in psychiatric, psychobiological and mental health research: assessment of the 1998-2002 period. Brazilian journal of medical and biological research, 38(5), 649–59. doi:/S0100-879X2005000500001
Broadhead, L., & Howard, S. (1998). “ The Art of Punishing ”: The Research Assessment Exercise and the Ritualisation of Power in Higher Education, 6(8), 1–14.
Butler, L. (2003). Explaining Australia’s increased share of ISI publications—the effects of a funding formula based on publication counts. Research Policy, 32(1), 143–155. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(02)00007-0
Calviño, A. M. (2006). Assessment of research performance in food science and technology : Publication behavior of five Iberian-American countries ( 1992 – 2003 ). Scientometrics, 69(1), 103–116.
Canet, E., & Grassy, G. (2006). Optimizing French scientific and economic performance: The Cifre system of public-private partnership in doctoral research and Servier’s contribution . Formation à la recherche et partenariats de recherche public-privé: Contribuer essemble à l’excellence scvientifique et à la croissance économique, 22(6-7), 664–668. Retrieved from http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?eid=2-s2.0-33745925303&partnerID=40&md5=6a965b2fa1e1f066340d3ca44b28d508
Caviglia, G., Perrella, R., Sapuppo, W., & Del Villano, N. (2010). Psychotherapy research: The contribution of the Working Group with the course of Dynamic Psychology (basic) at the Second University of Naples . La ricerca in psicoterapia: Il contributo del Gruppo di Lavoro della cattedra di Psicologia Dinamica (base) della Seconda Università di Napoli, 13(2), 32–52. Retrieved from http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?eid=2-s2.0-80054822448&partnerID=40&md5=d00d2d3a280c519098f08b637f80b541
Chu, K. L. (2003). A scientometric study of the research performance of the Institute of Molecular and Cell Biology in Singapore. Scientometrics, 56(1), 95–110.
Clark, D., Clark, J., & Greenwood, A. (2010). The place of supportive, palliative and end-of-life care research in the United Kingdom Research Assessment Exercise, 2001 and 2008. Palliative Medicine, 24(5), 533–543. Retrieved from http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?eid=2-s2.0-77953999787&partnerID=40&md5=3b9ac9f5a34d57797b1efd98ffd6443c
Coccia, M. (2005). A scientometric model for the assessment of scientific research performance within public institutes. Scientometrics, 65(3), 307–321.
Coccia, M. (2008). Research performance and bureaucracy within public research labs. Scientometrics, 79(1), 93–107. doi:10.1007/s11192-009-0406-2
Colciencias. (2012). Antecedentes del Sistema Nacional de Ciencia, Tecnologia e Innovación.
Colin Glass, J., McCallion, G., McKillop, D. G., Rasaratnam, S., & Stringer, K. S. (2006). Implications of variant efficiency measures for policy evaluations in UK higher education. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 40(2), 119–142. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.seps.2004.10.004
Couto, F. M., Pesquita, C., Grego, T., & Veríssimo, P. (2009). Handling self-citations using Google Scholar. Cybermetrics, 13(1). Retrieved from http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?eid=2-s2.0-67650320533&partnerID=40&md5=138e210893ea1fdef592a45b9e829847
De Moya-Anegón, F., & Herreero-Solana, V. (2002). Visibilidad internacional de la producción científica iberoameticana en biblioteconomía y documentación (1991-2000). Ci. Inf., Brasilia, 31(3), 54–65.
De Witte, K., & Rogge, N. (2010). To publish or not to publish? On the aggregation and drivers of research performance. Scientometrics, 85(3), 657–680. doi:10.1007/s11192-010-0286-5
Docampo, D. (2010). Erratum to: On using the Shanghai ranking to assess the research performance of university systems. Scientometrics, 86(1), 237–237. doi:10.1007/s11192-010-0315-4
Duke, J., & Moss, C. (2009). Re-visiting scholarly community engagement in the contemporary research assessment environments of Australasian universities. Contemporaty Nurse, 32(1), 30–41.
Erfanmanesh, A., Didegah, F., & Omidvar, S. (2010). Research productivity and impact of Library and Information Science in the Web of Science, 15(3), 85–95.
Fishman, B., Marx, R. W., Blumenfeld, P., Krajcik, J., & Soloway, E. (2004). Creating a Framework for Research on Systemic Technology Innovations. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(1), 43–76. doi:10.2307/1466932
Ford, J. B., & Merchant, A. (2008). A Ten-Year Retrospective of Advertising Research Productivity, 1997-2006. Journal of Advertising, 37(3), 69–94. doi:10.2753/JOA0091-3367370306
Fox, M. F., & Mohapatra, S. (2007). Social-Organizational Characteristics of Work and Publication Productivity among Academic Scientists in Doctoral-Granting Departments. The Journal of Higher Education, 78(5), 542–571. doi:10.2307/4501228
Frey, B. S. (2007). Evaluations, evaluations evaluitis . Evaluierungen, evaluierungen ... evaluitis, 8(3), 207–220. Retrieved from http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?eid=2-s2.0-34547260160&partnerID=40&md5=4cab967cce04cf4b4e5dc2ebba0fbbd5
García-Aracil, A., & Palomares-Montero, D. (2010). Examining benchmark indicator systems for the evaluation of higher education institutions. Higher Education, 60(2), 217–234. doi:10.2307/40784178
Goldstein, H. (2012). Estimating research performance by using research grant award gradings. Retrieved from http://www.sinab.unal.edu.co:2065/stable/23013394?&Search=yes&searchText=“Research+Assessment”&searchText=team&searchText=Research&searchText=“Research+Productivity”&searchText=group&searchText=“Research+Performance”&searchText=University&list=hide&searchUri=/action/doAdvancedSearch?q0=%22Research+Assessment%22&f0=ti&c1=OR&q1=%22Research+Performance%22&f1=ti&c2=OR&q2=%22Research+Productivity%22&f2=ti&c3=AND&q3=University%2
Gómez, I., Bordons, M., Fernández, M. T., & Morillo, F. (2008). Structure and research performance of Spanish universities. Scientometrics, 79(1), 131–146. doi:10.1007/s11192-009-0408-0
Grossman, J. H., Reid, P. P., & Morgan, R. P. (2001). Contributions of Academic Research to Industrial Performance in Five Industry Sectors. Journal of Technology Transfer, 26, 143–152.
Gu, J., Lin, Y., Vogel, D., & Tian, W. (2010). What are the major impact factors on research performance of young doctorate holders in science in China: a USTC survey. Higher Education, 62(4), 483–502. doi:10.1007/s10734-010-9400-0
Guan, J., & Gao, X. (2008). Comparison and evaluation of Chinese research performance in the field of bioinformatics. Scientometrics, 75(2), 357–379. doi:10.1007/s11192-007-1871-0
Guan, J., & Ma, N. (2004). A comparative study of research performance. Scientometrics, 61(3), 339–359.
Hayashi, T., & Tomizawa, H. (2006). Restructuring the Japanese national research system. Scientometrics, 68(2), 241–264.
Hicks, D. (2009). Evolving Regimes of Multi-University Research Evaluation. Higher Education, 57(4), 393–404. doi:10.2307/40269131
Hickson, M., Bodon, J., & Turner, J. (2004). Research productivity in communication: An analysis, 1915–2001. Communication Quarterly, 52(4), 323–333. doi:10.1080/01463370409370203
Hodder, a. P. W., & Hodder, C. (2010). Research culture and New Zealand’s performance-based research fund: some insights from bibliographic compilations of research outputs. Scientometrics, 84(3), 887–901. doi:10.1007/s11192-010-0201-0
Horri, A. (2004). Bibliometric Overview of Library and Information Science Research Productivity in Iran. Journal of Education for Library and Information Science, 45(1), 15. doi:10.2307/40323918
Hu, X., & Rousseau, R. (2009). A comparative study of the difference in research performance in biomedical fields among selected Western and Asian countries. Scientometrics, 81(2), 475–491. doi:10.1007/s11192-008-2202-9
Jansen, D., Wald, A., Franke, K., Schmoch, U., & Schubert, T. (2007). Third party research funding and performance in research. On the effects or institutional conditions on research performance of teams . Drittmittel als Performanzindikator der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung zum Einfluss von Rahmenbedingungen auf Forschungsleistung, 59(1), 125–149+183.
Jayasinghe, U. W., Marsh, H. W., & Bond, N. (2001). Peer Review in the Funding of Research in Higher Education: The Australian Experience. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 23(4), 343–364. doi:10.2307/3594134
Jayasinghe, U. W., Marsh, H. W., & Bond, N. (2003). A Multilevel Cross-Classified Modelling Approach to Peer Review of Grant Proposals: The Effects of Assessor and Researcher Attributes on Assessor Ratings. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series A (Statistics in Society), 166(3), 279–300. doi:10.2307/3559744
Jeang, K.-T. (2009). The importance of individualized article-specific metrics for evaluating research productivity. Retrovirology, 6, 82. doi:10.1186/1742-4690-6-82
Johnes, J., & Yu, L. (2008). Measuring the research performance of Chinese higher education institutions using data envelopment analysis. China Economic Review, 19(4), 679–696. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chieco.2008.08.004
Kao, C., & Pao, H.-L. (2008). An evaluation of research performance in management of 168 Taiwan universities. Scientometrics, 78(2), 261–277. doi:10.1007/s11192-007-1906-6
Kelley, C., Conley, S., & Kimball, S. (2000). Payment for Results: Effects of the Kentucky and Maryland Group-Based Performance Award Programs. Peabody Journal of Education, 75(4), 159–199 CR – Copyright © 2000 Taylor & Franc. doi:10.2307/1493057
Kleinman, D. L., & Vallas, S. P. (2001). Science, Capitalism, and the Rise of the “Knowledge Worker”: The Changing Structure of Knowledge Production in the United States. Theory and Society, 30(4), 451–492 CR – Copyright © 2001 Springer. doi:10.2307/658124
Kumar, H. A., & Dora, M. (2012). Research Productivity in a Management Institute : An Analysis of Research Performance of Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad during 1999-2010, 32(4), 365–372.
La Manna, M. M. a. (2008). Assessing the Assessment or, the Rae and the Optimal Organization of University Research. Scottish Journal of Political Economy, 55(5), 637–653. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9485.2008.00469.x
Lau, M. Y., Cisco, H. C., & Delgado-romero, E. A. (2008). Institutional and Individual Research Productivity in Five Nominated Multicultural Psychology Journals. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development, 36(October), 194–206.
Laudel, G. (2006). The “Quality Myth”: Promoting and Hindering Conditions for Acquiring Research Funds. Higher Education, 52(3), 375–403. doi:10.2307/29735019
Lee, S., & Bozeman, B. (2005). The Impact of Research Collaboration on Scientific Productivity. Social Studies of Science, 35(5), 673–702. doi:10.2307/25046667
Lewison, G., Thornicroft, G., Szmukler, G., & Tansella, M. (2007). Fair assessment of the merits of psychiatric research. British Journal of Psychiatry, 190(APR.), 314–318. Retrieved from http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?eid=2-s2.0-34147202646&partnerID=40&md5=5e6dbc6f9c7af5662f2fd76ffb1cc00c
Liang, C.-C., & Yuan, M.-S. (2010). Bibliometrics analysis of patent indicators’ application in Taiwan. Journal of Educational Media and Library Science, 47(1), 19–53. Retrieved from http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?eid=2-s2.0-77952934635&partnerID=40&md5=c87a49769da9ef246b6e6d41920beb3a
Lin, C.-T., & Chiang, C.-T. (2007). Evaluating the performance of sponsored Chinese herbal medicine research. Scientometrics, 70(1), 67–84.
López, G. A. (2004). Aproximación a las Generalidades y Debilidades del Sistema de Innovación Colombiano. Scientia et Technica, 10, 195–200.
Maccoll, J. (2010). Library Roles in University Research Assessment. Library Quarterly, 20(2), 152–168.
Macharzina, K., Wolf, J., & Rohn, A. (2004). Quantitative Evaluation of German Research Output in Business Administration : 1992- 2001. Management International Review, 44(September 2003), 335–359.
Mählck, P. (2001). Mapping Gender Differences in Scientific Careers in Social and Bibliometric Space. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 26(2), 167–190. doi:10.2307/690191
Malekafzali, H., Peykari, N., Gholami, F. S., Owlia, P., Habibi, E., Mesgarpour, B., & Vasei, M. (2009). Research Assessment of Iranian Medical Universities , an Experience from a Developing Country. Iranian J Publ Health, 38, 47–49.
Marsh, H. W., & Hattie, J. (2002). The Relation Between Research Productivity and Teaching Effectiveness. The Journal of Higher Education, 73(5), 603–641.
Martín-Sempere, M. J., Rey-Rocha, J., & Garzón-García, B. (2002). The effect of team consolidation on research collaboration and performance of scientists. Case study of Spanish university researchers in geology. Scientometrics, 55(3), 377–394. Retrieved from http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?eid=2-s2.0-19044366792&partnerID=40&md5=0f7962fca3ecc455c9069eb512316fdb
McCauley, L. A., Beltran, M., Phillips, J., Lasarev, M., & Sticker, D. (2001). The Oregon Migrant Farmworker Community: An Evolving Model for Participatory Research. Environmental Health Perspectives, 109, 449–455. doi:10.2307/3434794
Miguel, E. C., Ferrão, Y. A., Do Rosário, M. C., De Mathis, M. A., Torres, A. R., Fontenelle, L. F., … Gonzalez, C. H. (2008). The Brazilian Research Consortium on Obsessive-Compulsive Spectrum Disorders: Recruitment, assessment instruments, methods for the development of multicenter collaborative studies and preliminary results. Revista Brasileira de Psiquiatria, 30(3), 185–196. Retrieved from http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?eid=2-s2.0-54249104051&partnerID=40&md5=3eaa2a5cd9f706e4108bea785dd1c2a1
Mingers, J. (2009). Measuring the Research Contribution of Management Academics Using the Hirsch-Index. The Journal of the Operational Research Society, 60(9), 1143–1153. doi:10.2307/40295607
Mokhnacheva, Y. V., & Kharybina, T. N. (2011). Research performance of RAS institutions and Russian universities: A comparative bibliometric analysis. Herald of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 81(6), 569–574. doi:10.1134/S1019331611060104
Mollis, M., & Marginson, S. (2002). The Assessment of Universities in Argentina and Australia: Between Autonomy and Heteronomy. Higher Education, 43(3), 311–330. doi:10.2307/3447520
Morgan, K. J. (2001). The Research Assessment Exercise in English Universities , 2001. Higher Education, 48(4), 461–482.
Moss, G., Kubacki, K., Hersh, M., & Gunn, R. (2007). Knowledge Management in Higher Education: A Comparison of Individualistic and Collectivist Cultures. European Journal of Education, 42(3), 377–394 CR – Copyright © 2007 Wiley. doi:10.2307/4543103
Nah, I. W., Kang, D., & Lee, D. (2009). A Bibliometric Evaluation of Research Performance in Different Subject Categories. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60(2002), 1138–1143. doi:10.1002/asi
Nederhof, A. (2006). Bibliometric monitoring of research performance in the Social Sciences and the Humanities : Scientometrics, 66(1), 81–100.
Nederhof, A. (2008). Policy impact of bibliometric rankings of research performance of departments and individuals in economics. Scientometrics, 74(1), 163–174. doi:10.1007/s11192-008-0109-0
Niu, F., Wang, D., & Wu, W. (2010). Analysis of current situation and trend research for universities and colleges’ performance evaluation. Wuhan Daxue Xuebao (Xinxi Kexue Ban)/Geomatics and Information Science of Wuhan University, 35(Special Issue 2), 194–197. Retrieved from http://www.sinab.unal.edu.co:2066/record/display.url?eid=2-s2.0-78649685998&origin=resultslist&sort=plf-f&src=s&sid=95E894FE72E1AF193C2D7C89DF0B4EB2:10&sot=a&sdt=a&sl=176&s=(TITLE(research+AND+(assessment+OR+performance+OR+productivity))+AND+TITLE(university)+AND+TITLE-ABS-KEY(research+AND+(group+OR+team)))+AND+DOCTYPE(ar+OR+re)+AND+PUBYEAR+>+1999&relpos=6&relpos=6&searchTerm=(TITLE(research+AND+(assessment+OR+performance+OR+productivity))+AND+TITLE(un
Opthof, T., & Leydesdorff, L. (2010). Caveats for the journal and field normalizations in the CWTS (“ Leiden” ) evaluations of research performance. Journal of Informetrics, 4(3), 423–430.
Panaretos, J., & Malesios, C. (2009). Assessing scientific research performance and impact with single indices. Scientometrics, 81(3), 635–670. doi:10.1007/s11192-008-2174-9
Pouris, A. (2007). The International Performance of the South African Academic Institutions: A Citation Assessment. Higher Education, 54(4), 501–509. doi:10.2307/29735127
Redes de alta velocidad en el desarrollo científico y tecnológico . (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.enterate.unam.mx/artic/2008/mayo/index.html
Revilla, E., Sarkis, J., & Modrego, A. (2003). Evaluating Performance of Public-Private Research Collaborations: A DEA Analysis. The Journal of the Operational Research Society, 54(2), 165–174. doi:10.2307/4101607
Rey-Rocha, J., Garzón-García, B., & José Martín-Sempere, M. (2007). Exploring social integration as a determinant of research activity, performance and prestige of scientists. Empirical evidence in the Biology and Biomedicine field. Scientometrics, 72(1), 59–80. doi:10.1007/s11192-007-1703-2
Rey-Rocha, J., Garzón-García, B., & Martín-Sempere, M. J. (2006). Scientists ’ performance and consolidation of research teams in Biology and Biomedicine at the Spanish Council for Scientific Research. Scientometrics, 69(2), 183–212.
Rogers, J. D., & Bozeman, B. (2001). “Knowledge Value Alliances”: An Alternative to the R&D Project Focus in Evaluation. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 26(1), 23–55. doi:10.2307/690119
Rons, N., De Bruyn, A., & Cornelis, J. (2008). Research evaluation per discipline: A peer-review method and its outcomes. Research Evaluation, 17(1), 45–57.
Saxena, A., Gupta, B. M., & Jauhari, M. (2011). Research Performance of Top Engineering and Technological Institutes of India : A Comparison of Indices, 31(5), 377–381.
Sevukan, R., & Sharma, J. (2008). Bibliometric Analysis of Research Output of Biotechnology Faculties in Some Indian Central Universities. Journal of Library & Information Technology, 28(6), 11–20.
Smart, W. (2008). The impact of the performance-based research fund on the research productivity of New Zealand universities. Social Policy Journal of New Zealand, 34, 136–152.
Sombatsompop, N., Markpin, T., Yochai, W., & Saechiew, M. (2005). An evaluation of research performance for different subject categories using Impact Factor Point Average ( IFPA ) index : Thailand case study. Scientometrics, 65(3), 293–305.
Taylor, J. (2011). The Assessment of Research Quality in UK Universities: Peer Review or Metrics? British Journal of Management, 22, 202–217. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8551.2010.00722.x
UNIA. (2013). Bases de datos. Universidad Internacional de Andalucía - UNIA. Retrieved from http://www.unia.es/index2.php?option=com_content&do_pdf=1&id=89
Valadkhani, A., & Ville, S. (2010). Ranking and clustering of the faculties of commerce research performance in Australia. Applied Economics, 42(22), 2881–2895. doi:10.1080/00036840801964674
Valadkhani, A., & Worthington, A. (2006). Ranking and Clustering Australian University Research Performance, 1998–2002. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 28(2), 189–210. doi:10.1080/13600800600751101
Van Leeuwen, T. (2007). Modelling of bibliometric approaches and importance of output verification in research performance assessment, 16(2), 93–106.
Van Leeuwen, T., Costas, R., Calero-Medina, C., & Visser, M. (2012). The role of editorial material in bibliometric research performance assessments. Scientometrics. doi:10.1007/s11192-012-0904-5
Van Leeuwen, T., Moed, H. F., Tijssen, R. J. W., Visser, M. S., & van Raan, A. F. J. (2001). Language biases in the coverage of the Science Citation Index and its consequences for international comparisons of national research performance. Scientometrics, 51(1), 335–346.
Van Looy, B., Debackere, K., Callaert, J., Tijssen, R., & van Leeuwen, T. (2006). Scientific capabilities and technological performance of national innovation systems: An exploration of emerging industrial relevant research domains. Scientometrics, 66(2), 295–310. doi:10.1007/s11192-006-0030-3
Van Raan, A. (2006a). Performance-Related Differences of Bibliometric Statistical Properties of Research Groups : Cumulative Advantages and Hierarchically Layered Networks. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 57(14), 1919–1935. doi:10.1002/asi
Van Raan, A. (2006b). Comparison of the hirsch-index with standard bibliometric indicators and with peer judgment for 147 chemistry research groups. Scientometrics, 67(3), 491–502. Retrieved from http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?eid=2-s2.0-33748655746&partnerID=40&md5=b8eb21d6b18d9e32bbf015d59b6e1e6f
Wang, M.-H., Yu, T.-C., & Ho, Y.-S. (2009). A bibliometric analysis of the performance of Water Research. Scientometrics, 84(3), 813–820. doi:10.1007/s11192-009-0112-0
Watts, G. (2009). Beyond the Impact Factor. BMJ: British Medical Journal, 338(7692), 440–441. doi:10.2307/20512136
Wootton, R. (2013). A simple, generalizable method for measuring individual research productivity and its use in the long-term analysis of departmental performance, including between-country comparisons. Health research policy and systems / BioMed Central, 11, 2. doi:10.1186/1478-4505-11-2
Ylijoki, O.-H. (2003). Entangled in Academic Capitalism? A Case-Study on Changing Ideals and Practices of University Research. Higher Education, 45(3), 307–335. doi:10.2307/3447483
Zaharia, R. M. (2009). Performance of academic research in Romania: The view of academics from Bucharest University of Economics. Transformations in Business and Economics. Retrieved February 24, 2013, from http://www.sinab.unal.edu.co:2066/record/display.url?eid=2-s2.0-72749122746&origin=resultslist&sort=plf-f&src=s&sid=95E894FE72E1AF193C2D7C89DF0B4EB2:10&sot=a&sdt=a&sl=176&s=(TITLE(research+AND+(assessment+OR+performance+OR+productivity))+AND+TITLE(university)+AND+TITLE-ABS-KEY(research+AND+(group+OR+team)))+AND+DOCTYPE(ar+OR+re)+AND+PUBYEAR+>+1999&relpos=9&relpos=9&searchTerm=(TITLE(research+AND+(assessment+OR+performance+OR+productivity))+AND+TITLE(un
Punto de vista by Institución Universitaria Politécnico Grancolombiano is licensed under a Creative Commons Reconocimiento-NoComercial-SinObraDerivada 3.0 Unported License.
Creado a partir de la obra en http://www.poligran.edu.co/puntodevista.