Limits...
How to Receive More Funding for Your Research? Get Connected to the Right People!

Ebadi A, Schiffauerova A - PLoS ONE (2015)

Bottom Line: However, not everyone is successful in obtaining the necessary funds.According to the results, although past productivity of researchers positively affects the funding level, our findings highlight the significant role of networking and collaboration.In fact, our results show that in the quest for the research money it is more important how researchers build their collaboration network than what publications they produce and whether they are cited.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Concordia Institute for Information Systems Engineering (CIISE), Concordia University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.

ABSTRACT
Funding has been viewed in the literature as one of the main determinants of scientific activities. Also, at an individual level, securing funding is one of the most important factors for a researcher, enabling him/her to carry out research projects. However, not everyone is successful in obtaining the necessary funds. The main objective of this work is to measure the effect of several important factors such as past productivity, scientific collaboration or career age of researchers, on the amount of funding that is allocated to them. For this purpose, the paper estimates a temporal non-linear multiple regression model. According to the results, although past productivity of researchers positively affects the funding level, our findings highlight the significant role of networking and collaboration. It was observed that being a member of large scientific teams and getting connected to productive researchers who have also a good control over the collaboration network and the flow of information can increase the chances for securing more money. In fact, our results show that in the quest for the research money it is more important how researchers build their collaboration network than what publications they produce and whether they are cited.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Example of the procedure for counting the citations received by the articles.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4519253&req=5

pone.0133061.g003: Example of the procedure for counting the citations received by the articles.

Mentions: Apart from the rate of publications we have also analyzed the trend in their quality. As mentioned earlier, number of citations received by an article and the impact factor of the journal in which the article is published are the two most common measures for the quality of the paper. However, it is argued that journal impact factor cannot be considered as a good paper quality measure since it is highly discipline dependent and editorial policies can also affect the impact factor [39–40]. Number of citations has also some drawbacks (e.g. negative citations and self-citation) but citation based indicators are considered as the common practice in measuring the overall impact of an article [41]. We defined a three year time window for both funding and articles to calculate the average amount of citations. For example as it can be seen in Fig 3, for the funding year of 1996 we collected all the articles of the funded researchers for the period of 1996 to 1998. Then, we defined a three-year citation window for each of the publication years. In other words, we counted the citations for the period of 1996 to 1998 for the articles that were published in 1996, and from 1997 to 1999 for the articles published in 1997, and from 1998 to 2000 for the articles published in 1998. We followed the same procedure for the other funding years and in order to make a fair indicator we stopped at the funding year of 2008 since we had the publications for the period of 1996 to 2010 and the citations for the period of 1996 to 2012.


How to Receive More Funding for Your Research? Get Connected to the Right People!

Ebadi A, Schiffauerova A - PLoS ONE (2015)

Example of the procedure for counting the citations received by the articles.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4519253&req=5

pone.0133061.g003: Example of the procedure for counting the citations received by the articles.
Mentions: Apart from the rate of publications we have also analyzed the trend in their quality. As mentioned earlier, number of citations received by an article and the impact factor of the journal in which the article is published are the two most common measures for the quality of the paper. However, it is argued that journal impact factor cannot be considered as a good paper quality measure since it is highly discipline dependent and editorial policies can also affect the impact factor [39–40]. Number of citations has also some drawbacks (e.g. negative citations and self-citation) but citation based indicators are considered as the common practice in measuring the overall impact of an article [41]. We defined a three year time window for both funding and articles to calculate the average amount of citations. For example as it can be seen in Fig 3, for the funding year of 1996 we collected all the articles of the funded researchers for the period of 1996 to 1998. Then, we defined a three-year citation window for each of the publication years. In other words, we counted the citations for the period of 1996 to 1998 for the articles that were published in 1996, and from 1997 to 1999 for the articles published in 1997, and from 1998 to 2000 for the articles published in 1998. We followed the same procedure for the other funding years and in order to make a fair indicator we stopped at the funding year of 2008 since we had the publications for the period of 1996 to 2010 and the citations for the period of 1996 to 2012.

Bottom Line: However, not everyone is successful in obtaining the necessary funds.According to the results, although past productivity of researchers positively affects the funding level, our findings highlight the significant role of networking and collaboration.In fact, our results show that in the quest for the research money it is more important how researchers build their collaboration network than what publications they produce and whether they are cited.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Concordia Institute for Information Systems Engineering (CIISE), Concordia University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.

ABSTRACT
Funding has been viewed in the literature as one of the main determinants of scientific activities. Also, at an individual level, securing funding is one of the most important factors for a researcher, enabling him/her to carry out research projects. However, not everyone is successful in obtaining the necessary funds. The main objective of this work is to measure the effect of several important factors such as past productivity, scientific collaboration or career age of researchers, on the amount of funding that is allocated to them. For this purpose, the paper estimates a temporal non-linear multiple regression model. According to the results, although past productivity of researchers positively affects the funding level, our findings highlight the significant role of networking and collaboration. It was observed that being a member of large scientific teams and getting connected to productive researchers who have also a good control over the collaboration network and the flow of information can increase the chances for securing more money. In fact, our results show that in the quest for the research money it is more important how researchers build their collaboration network than what publications they produce and whether they are cited.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus