Publication Productivity and Impact of Research in NITK, Surathkal: A Scientometric View

Abstract

This research paper highlights the current state of scientific research in National Institute of Technology Karnataka (NITKS) Surathkal, Mangalore for the period 2001-2017. The study gives an analysis of the volume, productivity and scientific impact of NITK Surathkal research as per the records entered in the SCOPUS publications and citation database during the period 2001-2017. There were 4038 articles published in 978 leading national and international primary resources during the study period. During 2001-2017 the NITK Surathkal has received a total of 20122 citations. The average number of publication published per year was 237.53 and the average number of citations per year was 1183.65 The average number of citations per publication was 4.98 Authorship pattern revealed that about 98.07 % of publications were multi-authored and only 1.93 % single authored. It is indicative of the trend towards multi-authored publications.

Full text

To cite: Shettar, I. M. & Angadi, M. (2018). Publication Productivity and Impact of Research in
NITK, Surathkal: A Scientometric View. In M. Angadi et al. (Eds.). Dr. B. S. Kademani Festschrift
Metamorphosis of Librarianship: Connecting People in Digital Environment (pp. 123-135). Ajmer:
Nav Vishnu Publications.
123
Publication Productivity and Impact of Research in
NITK, Surathkal: A Scientometric View
Iranna M. Shettar and Mallikarjun Angadi
imshettar@gmail.com
National Institute of Technology Karnataka Surathkal, Mangalore
Abstract
This research paper highlights the current state of scientific research in National Institute of
Technology Karnataka (NITKS) Surathkal, Mangalore for the period 2001-2017. The study gives
an analysis of the volume, productivity and scientific impact of NITK Surathkal research as per
the records entered in the SCOPUS publications and citation database during the period 2001-
2017. There were 4038 articles published in 978 leading national and international primary
resources during the study period. During 2001-2017 the NITK Surathkal has received a total of
20122 citations. The average number of publication published per year was 237.53 and the average
number of citations per year was 1183.65 The average number of citations per publication was
4.98 Authorship pattern revealed that about 98.07 % of publications were multi-authored and only
1.93 % single authored. It is indicative of the trend towards multi-authored publications. The
authors with most prolific publications were Isloor, A.M. who topped the list with 218 publications
and 2168 citations followed by Adhikari, A.V. with 97 publications and 1722 citations, Prabhu,
K.N. with 97 publications and 927 citations, George, S. with 85 publications and 122 citations,
and Bhat, B.R. with 78 publications and 652 citations. Core journals preferred for publishing with
high number of publications were: Acta Crystallographica Section E: Structure Reports Online
with 129 publications (5.01%) followed by International Journal of Earth Sciences and
Engineering with 126 (4.89%), RSC Advances with 30 publications (1.16%), ISH Journal of
Hydraulic Engineering with 29 publications (1.13%), European Journal of Medicinal Chemistry
with 28 publications (1.09%).
Keywords: Scientometric Study; Individual institution; Publication productivity; Scopus
Database; NITK; India.
1.
INTRODUCTION
There are large number of tools and techniques which are available to perform the analysis of
institutes to assess the patterns of their research output. But the way scientometrics does in the
field of science and technology is paramount and hence in the present study, the same technique
has been used to analyse the research output of the universities. Scientometric has become an
important field of study in recent decades. It includes quantitative and/or qualitative analysis of
the scientific products of many possible classes as objects, such as articles of an individual
author, department, university, city, and country (Abramo et al. 2009; Torres- Salinas et al.
2008). The aim of scientometrics is to provide quantitative characterizations of scientific
activity. Because of the particular importance of publication in scientific communities, it
largely overlaps with bibliometrics, which is quantitative analysis of media in any written form.
The bibliometric component of scientometrics is a mirror of science: it uses the published
works of scientists to answer the questions of policy makers, stakeholders, scientists
themselves, and social scientists taking research and science as a research object. Scientific
publication is central to the activity of scientific communities and is moreover made available
on a large scale by modern databases like Web of Science, Scopus, Google scholar, PubMed,
HubMed IEEExplore, etc. and the Internet (Michel Zitt & Elise Bassecoulard, 2008). Here in
the study, the Scopus database, which is a comprehensive multidisciplinary

124
bibliographic database in the field of science and technology, has been used to collect the relevant
data of publications of the universities selected for the study.
Kademani and Vijai Kumar [1 & 2] have given a bird’s eye view of the bibliometric and
scientometric techniques used to study various quantitative and qualitative aspects of scientific
endeavours. Chidambaram [3] noted that research publications are clearly one of the
quantitative measures for the basic research activity in a country. It must be added, however,
that what excites the common man, as well as the scientific community, are the peaks of
scientific and technological achievements, not just the statistics on publications. There are also
other kinds of research and technology development-mission oriented, industry-oriented,
country-specific, etc., which cannot obviously be measured by counting only the number of
publications.
Koganuramath, Angadi and Kademani [4 & 5] have studied the publication productivity of the
Tata Institute of Social Sciences for the year 1990-2000. The study analysed 663 papers and
showed that more than 90 % of the papers were single authored.
Kalyane and Kalyane [6] studied the publication productivity of sugarcane breeding institutes,
Coimbatore.
Kademani et al. [7] have carried out scientometric analysis of the chemistry division at Bhabha
Atomic Research Centre. The study analysed 1733 papers published during 1970-1999 in
various domains. The study also highlighted the most prolific authors and the core journals
preferred by the scientists. The collaboration trend was towards multi-authorship papers. More
than 90 % of the publications were multi authored.
Yankevich [8] studied the publication productivity in some Soviet academic institutions and
revealed some peculiarities and tendencies in publication productivity. He also suggested that
these tendencies and invention productivity may be used for the prognosis and evaluation of
the activity of academic institutions.
van Ran [9] presents examples of application of bibliometric methods in evaluation. He focused
on the assessment of strengths and weaknesses in the research performance of a scientific
institution or organisation in an international context. The paper also discussed the
identification of patterns of scientific development, particularly the mapping of research
activities of the evaluated or organisation on the worldwide map of science.
Over the years scientometric and bibliometric techniques have become tools to evaluate the
productivity of research institutes, individual researcher and to map the growth of subject.
Publication and citation counts are being extensively used for evaluation purpose of an
institution [10 to 52].
2.
NITK SURATHKAL
National Institute of Technology Karnataka (NITK), formerly known as Karnataka Regional
Engineering College (KREC), also known as NIT Surathkal, is a public engineering university
at Surathkal, Mangalore. It was founded in 1960 as KREC while today, it is one of the 31
National Institutes of Technology in India and is recognised as an Institute of National
Importance by the Government of India. It has a suburban campus, in close proximity to the
Arabian Sea. National Highway 66 runs through the campus and serves as the major mode of
access.

125
NITK Surathkal offers undergraduate and graduate programs in Engineering, Science and
Management. The institute has 14 departments and 11 support centres with about 200 faculty
members, 300 support staff, 5,500 students and 15,500 alumni worldwide.
3.
OBJECTIVES
The main objective of the present study is to quantitatively document the publication
productivity behaviour of NITK Surathkal and make the assessment of status of research by
way of analyzing the following features research output;
 To find out year-wise growth of publications and citations received,
 To find out authorship and collaboration pattern in the publications,
 To identify the prolific authors having large number of publications,
 To identify the types of communication channels preferred,
 To find out the highly preferred journals for publication
 To find out highly cited publications
4.
MATERIALS AND METHOD
Data was collected using Scopus database for the duration between 2001-2017. The Scopus is
a very comprehensive multidisciplinary citation database indexing large number of science and
technology journals worldwide. It provides researchers, administrators, faculty, and students a
quick and powerful access to the world’s leading citation database. Using suitable search
strategy, records pertaining to NITK Surathkal in the address field were downloaded for 2001-
2017. A total of 4038 publications were downloaded. Further, all the bibliographic details were
transferred to spread sheet application. The data was analysed as per the objectives of the study.
5.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
5.1
Year-wise Growth of Publications and Citations:
A total of 4038 publications were published during 2001-2017, which received 20122 citations
during the period. The highest numbers of publications (635) were in 2027 and these
publications have received the 381 citations. The highest number of citations (2180) were
received in 2011. The average number of publication published per year was 237.53 and the
average number of citations per year was 1183.65. The average number of citations per
publication was 4.98 Figure 1 gives the year-wise growth of publications and citations. The
highest growth rate (89.47%) of publications was observed in 2003. The highest growth rate
(295.79 %) of citations was also observed in 2003. Table 1 provides growth rate of publications
and citations of NITK Surathkal. The highest average citations per publication was 13.27 in
2007 and 13.27 in 2008 (Figure 2).
5.2
Authorship Pattern and Collaboration Trends of Publications of NITK Surathkal
Table 2 and Figure 3 give year-wise publication productivity, authorship pattern (single author
and multi-author), collaboration trend among authors of the publications of NITK Surathkal
and cumulative growth of publications.
About 98.07 % of publications were multi-authored and only 1.93 % single authored. It is
indicative of the trend towards multi-authored publications. The highest number of multi-

126
authored publications (629) was found in 2017. Highest collaboration coefficient (number of
collaborative papers divided by total number of papers) was found in the year 2005.
Figure 1: Year-wise Distribution of Publications and Citations of NITK Surathkal
Figure 2: Year-wise Distribution of Average Citations Per Publication of NITK Surathkal
2500
700
600
2000
500
1500
400
1000
300
200
500
100
0
0
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
No of Publications
No of Citation
14.00
12.00
10.00
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.00
Average Citations/Publication
Number of Citations
2001
10.46
2002
5.00
2003
10.44
2004
11.13
2005
11.88
2006
9.07
2007
13.27
2008
12.32
2009
11.46
2010
8.62
2011
5.75
2012
4.31
2013
5.54
2014
4.12
2015
3.43
2016
1.84
2017
0.60
Number of Publications

127
Table 1: Year-wise Growth Rate (in %) of Publications and Citations of NITK Surathkal
Year
Total
Publicatio
ns
% of total
publications
Growth
rate of
publicatio
ns
Total
citation
s
% of
total
citation
s
Growth
rate of
citation
s
Average
citations/
publicatio
n
2001
13
0.32
-
136
0.68
-
10.46
2002
19
0.47
46.15
95
0.47
-30.15
5.00
2003
36
0.89
89.47
376
1.87
295.79
10.44
2004
45
1.11
25.00
501
2.49
33.24
11.13
2005
48
1.19
6.67
570
2.83
13.77
11.88
2006
84
2.08
75.00
762
3.79
33.68
9.07
2007
100
2.48
19.05
1327
6.59
74.15
13.27
2008
147
3.64
47.00
1811
9.00
36.47
12.32
2009
189
4.68
28.57
2166
10.76
19.60
11.46
2010
249
6.17
31.75
2146
10.66
-0.92
8.62
2011
379
9.39
52.21
2180
10.83
1.58
5.75
2012
337
8.35
-11.08
1453
7.22
-33.35
4.31
2013
369
9.14
9.50
2044
10.16
40.67
5.54
2014
374
9.26
1.36
1542
7.66
-24.56
4.12
2015
482
11.94
28.88
1653
8.21
7.20
3.43
2016
532
13.18
10.37
979
4.87
-40.77
1.84
2017
635
15.73
19.36
381
1.89
-61.08
0.60
4038
100
20122
100
Table 2: Year-wise Productivity and authorship Pattern of Publications
Year
Single
Authored
Papers
Multi-authored
Papers
Total
Collaboration
Co-efficient
2001
4
9
13
0.69
2002
1
18
19
0.95
2003
3
33
36
0.92
2004
1
44
45
0.98
2005
0
48
48
1
2006
4
80
84
0.95
2007
1
99
100
0.99
2008
3
144
147
0.98
2009
7
182
189
0.96
2010
8
241
249
0.97
2011
5
374
379
0.99
2012
7
330
337
0.98
2013
11
358
369
0.97
2014
9
365
374
0.98
2015
4
476
482
0.99
2016
4
528
532
0.99
2017
6
629
635
0.99

128
Figure 3: Growth Pattern of Single-authored and Multi-authored Papers and Collaboration
Coefficient of Publications of NITK Surathkal
5.3
Most Prolific Authors of NITK Surathkal
The authors with most prolific publications were Isloor, A.M. who topped the list with 218
publications and 2168 citations followed by Adhikari, A.V. with 97 publications and 1722
citations, Prabhu, K.N. with 97 publications and 927 citations, George, S. with 85 publications
and 122 citations, and Bhat, B.R. with 78 publications and 652 citations. Table 3 provides list
of top 32 who have contributed at least 30 publications each.
Table 3: Most prolific authors of NITK, Surathkal
Author Name
No. of Authorships
No. of Times
Cited
Isloor, A.M.
218
2168
Prabhu, K.N.
97
927
Chandrasekaran, K.
96
94
Adhikari, A.V.
97
1722
George, S.
85
122
Umesh, G.
69
880
Bhat, B.R.
78
652
Bhat, D.K.
61
674
Reddy, G.R.M.
50
156
Gaonkar, D.N.
49
163
Garudachari, B.
46
215
Ananthanarayana, V.S.
45
210
Single Authored
Multi-authored
Total
Collaboration Co-efficient
4500
1.2
4000
1
3500
3000
0.8
2500
0.6
2000
1500
0.4
1000
0.2
500
0
0
CUMULATIVE NUMBER OF PUBLICATIONS
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
COLLABORATION CO-EFFICIENT

129
Shivakumar, G.K.
45
241
Hegde, A.C.
43
370
Shetty, A.N.
44
252
Anandhan, S.
42
218
Bangera, K.V.
41
223
Pais, A.R.
43
68
Rao, S.
40
151
Satyanarayan, M.N.
39
171
Koolagudi, S.G.
38
21
Nagaraja, H.S.
36
270
Jena, D.
35
255
Annappa, B.
39
33
Gangadharan, K.V.
35
109
Vardhan, H.
33
145
Hegde, A.V.
32
137
Shashikala, H.D.
32
349
Mohanan, P.
31
58
Venkat Reddy, D.
31
19
Narendranath, S.
30
126
Nityananda Shetty, A.
30
183
5.4
Preference of Channels of Communication
Distribution of publications in types of documents is depicted in Table 4. The NITK Surathkal
publications were spread over variety of publication media like Journal Articles with 2431
publications (60.20%) which received 16668 citations followed by Conference Papers 1429
(35.39%) with 2416 citations, Article in Press with 50 publications (1.24%) and 11 citations,
Review with 51 publications ((1.26%) and 979 citations, Editorial with 31 publications
(0.77%) and 0 citations, Book Chapter with 25 publications (0.62%) and 10 citations, Note
with 7 publications (0.17%) and 11 citations, Erratum with 6 publications (1.15%) and 5
citations, Letter 5 publications (0.12%) and 10 citations, Short Survey with 2 publications
(0.05%) and 12 citations, Book with 1 publications without citations.
Table 4: Preference of Channels of Communication by the Authors of NITK Surathkal
Document
Type
No. of
Publications
Percentage
No. of
Times Cited
Article
2431
60.20%
16668
Conference
Paper
1429
35.39%
2416
Article in Press
50
1.24%
11
Review
51
1.26%
979
Editorial
31
0.77%
0
Book Chapter
25
0.62%
10
Note
7
0.17%
11
Erratum
6
0.15%
5
Letter
5
0.12%
10

130
Short Survey
2
0.05%
12
Book
1
0.02%
0
4038
100
20122
Core journals preferred for publishing with high number of publications were:
Acta Crystallographica Section E: Structure Reports Online with 129 publications
(5.01%) followed by International Journal of Earth Sciences and Engineering with
126 (4.89%), RSC Advances with 30 publications (1.16%), ISH Journal of
Hydraulic Engineering with 29 publications (1.13%), European Journal of
Medicinal Chemistry with 28 publications (1.09%). Journal-wise scattering of
publications is provided in Table 5. The publications were published in 978
different journals.
Table 5: Journals Preferred for Publishing Articles by the Authors of NITK Surathkal
Source title
No of
Article
Published
Percentage
Acta Crystallographica Section E: Structure Reports
Online
129
5.01%
International Journal of Earth Sciences and
Engineering
126
4.89%
RSC Advances
30
1.16%
ISH Journal of Hydraulic Engineering
29
1.13%
European Journal of Medicinal Chemistry
28
1.09%
Desalination
24
0.93%
Journal of Materials Engineering and Performance
22
0.85%
Transactions of the Indian Institute of Metals
22
0.85%
Indian Journal of Chemical Technology
19
0.74%
Journal of Alloys and Compounds
16
0.62%
Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Electronics
15
0.58%
3 Journal with 14 publications
42
1.63%
4 Journal with 13 publications
52
2.02%
5 Journal with 12 publications
60
2.33%
8 Journal with 11 publications
88
3.41%
6 Journal with 10 publications
60
2.33%
9 Journal with 9 publications
81
3.14%
8 Journal with 8 publications
64
2.48%
11 Journal with 7 publications
77
2.99%
14 Journal with 6 publications
84
3.26%
34 Journal with 5 publications
170
6.60%
44 Journal with 4 publications
176
6.83%
86 Journal with 3 publications
258
10.01%
170 Journal with 2 publications
340
13.19%
565 Journal with 1 publications
565
21.92%
2577
100

131
5.5
Highly Cited Publications of NITK Surthkal
Table 6 lists the highly cited publications of the NITK Surthkal during 2001-2017. The paper
entitled “Review of non-reactive and reactive wetting of liquids on surfaces” which appeared
in Advances in Colloid and Interface Science in 2007 received the highest number of (192)
citations followed by “Enhanced hydrophilicity and salt rejection study of graphene oxide-
polysulfone mixed matrix membrane” published in Desalination in 2013 with 160 citations
and “Modified SVPWM algorithm for three level VSI with synchronized and symmetrical
waveforms” in IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics in 2007 with 159 citations.
Table 6: Highly Cited Publications of the NITK Surthkal
Sl.
No.
Title
Source title
Year
Cited
by
1
Review of non-reactive and reactive
wetting of liquids on surfaces
Advances in Colloid
and Interface Science
2007
192
2
Enhanced hydrophilicity and salt rejection
study of graphene oxide-polysulfone mixed
matrix membrane
Desalination
2013
160
3
Modified SVPWM algorithm for three
level VSI with synchronized and
symmetrical waveforms
IEEE Transactions
on Industrial
Electronics
2007
159
4
Buckling and free vibration analysis of
functionally graded cylindrical shells
subjected to a temperature-specified
boundary condition
Journal of Sound and
Vibration
2006
154
5
Regioselective reaction: Synthesis,
characterization and pharmacological
studies of some new Mannich bases
derived from 1,2,4-triazoles
European Journal of
Medicinal Chemistry
2009
153
6
Modification of eutectic silicon in Al-Si
alloys
Journal of Materials
Science
2008
152
7
Synthesis and antimicrobial activities of
novel quinoline derivatives carrying 1,2,4-
triazole moiety
European Journal of
Medicinal Chemistry
2009
146
8
Static analysis of functionally graded
beams using higher order shear
deformation theory
Applied
Mathematical
Modelling
2008
139
9
Studies on the removal of Pb(II) from
wastewater by activated carbon developed
from Tamarind wood activated with
sulphuric acid
Journal of Hazardous
Materials
2008
136
10
Classification of heart rate data using
artificial neural network and fuzzy
equivalence relation
Pattern Recognition
2003
128
6.
CONCLUSION
Evaluation of the productivity of institutional research and developmental activities highlights
the contribution of the institution and the individuals engaged in research. The analysis shows
that the authors of NITK Surthkal are publishing their research outputs in various forms like

132
journal articles, conference papers, meeting abstracts, letters, reviews, corrections, editorial
materials and other publications. Journal articles are the most preferred form of publication of
authors of NITK Surthkal and it amounts to more than 60.20% of the total publications.
Measuring research productivity of an institution reflects its scientific and technological
developments and progress. Evaluating the productivity of institutional research and
developmental activities highlights the contribution of the institution and the individual
scientists engaged in research. It also provides some insights into the complex dynamics of
research activity and directs the research activities in a proper direction. It is suggested that
other qualitative indicators based on citations and impact factors of the institution may be taken
up to know the institution's standing globally.
REFERENCES
1.
Kademani, B S and Vijai Kumar. 2004. Bibliometrics: An innovative tool to measure the
growth of knowledge and impact studies for policy makers, UGC Sponsored refresher
Course on “Information Technology for Librarians”, 06-26 September 2004, TISS,
Mumbai, 1-21.
2.
Kademani, B S and Vijai Kumar. 2002. Citation Index: An indispensable information
retrieval tool for research and evaluation, ICSSR Sponsored Training Workshop on
Exploring Social Science Information in Digital Environment, 27 –30 May 2002 ,
TISS,Mumbai,62-75.
3.
Chidambaram, R. 2005. Measures of progress in science and technology. Current Science.
Vol. 88, No.6: 856-860.
4.
Koganuramath, M M, Angadi, Mallikarjun and Kademani, B S. 2002.Bibliometric
dimension of innovation communication productivity of Tata Institute of Social Sciences.
Malaysian Journal of Library and Information Science. 7, 1; 69-76.
5.
Angadi, Mallikarjun, Koganuramath, M. M., Kademani, B. S. and Kumbar, B.D. 2006.
Publication Productivity of Tata Institute of Social Sciences: A Scientometric study. SRELS
journal of Information Management, Vol. 43, No.4:363-374.
6.
Kalyane,V L, Kalyane, S V. 1991. Scientometric dimensions of innovation communication
productivity system. Annals of library Science and Documentation. Vol. 38, No.1: 8-29.
7.
Kademani, B S, Vijay Kumar, Surwase, G,Anil Sagar, Lalit Mohan, Gaderao, C R, Anil
Kumar, Kalyane, V L, Prakasan, H R. 2005. Scientometric dimensions of innovations
communication productivity of the chemistry division at Bhabha atomic Research Centre.
Malaysian Journal of Library and Information Science. Vol.10, No.1: 65-89.
8.
Yainkevich, W F. 1982. Analysis of publication invention productivity in some Soviet
academic institutions. Scientometrics. Vol. 4: 431-437.
9.
van Ran, A. Advanced bibliometric methods for the evaluation of universities.
Scientometrics. Vol. 45: 4I7-423.
10.
Small, H. and Greenlee, E. 1979. A Citation and Publication Analysis of U. S. Industrial
Organisations, Philadelphia: ISI.
11.
Salisbury,G W.1980. Research productivity of the State Agricultural Experiment Station
System – measured by scientific publication output. Illinois Agricultural Experiment
Station Bulletin. Vol. 62: 1-63.
12.
Cohen, J E. 1981.Publication rate as a function of laboratory size in three biomedical
research institutions. Scientometrics, Vol. 3, No.6: 467-487.
13.
Schubert, A and Braun, T. 1981. Some scientometric measures of publishing performance
for 85 Hungarian Research Institutes. Scientometrics. Vol. 3, No.5: 379-388.

133
14.
Carpenter, M P, Gibb, F, Harris, M, Irvin, J, Martin, B R and Narin, F. 1988. Bibliographic
profiles for British academic institutions: An experiment to develop research output
indicators. Scientometrics. Vol. 14, No.3-4: 213-233.
15.
Garg, K C and Rao, M K D. 1988. Bibliometric analysis of scientific productivity: A case
study of an Indian physics laboratory. Scientometrics. Vol. 13, No.5-6: 261-269.
16.
Vinkler, P. 1990. Bibliometric analysis of publication activity of a scientific research
Institute, In: L. Egge, and R. Rousseau, eds. Informetrics. Amsterdam: Elsevier Science
Publishers. 309-334.
17.
Zachos, G. 1991. Research output evaluation of two university departments in Greece with
the use of bibliometric indicators. Scientometrics. Vol. 21, No.2: 195-221.
18.
Minor, L and Dostatni, P. 1991. A bibliometric study of the publications of the French
National Institute for Health and Medical Research (INSERM). Scientometrics. Vol. 22,
No. 1: 41-63.
19.
Dizon, L B and Sadorra, M S M. 1995. Patterns of publication by the staff of an
International Fisheries Research Center. Scientometrics. Vol. 32, No.1: 67-75.
20.
Ugolini, D, Parodi, S and Santi, L. 1997. Analysis of publication quality in Cancer Research
Institute. Scientometrics. Vol. 38, No.2: 265-274.
21.
King, J. 1998. The use of bibliometric techniques for institutional research evaluation: A
study of Avian Virology Research. Scientometrics. Vol. 41, No.3-4: 295-313.
22.
Gupta, B M, Suresh Kumar, and Khanna, H K. 1999. Science in India: performance of
Council of Scientific and Industrial Research laboratories based on the productivity profile
of scientists. Research Evaluation. Vol. 8, No.3: 177-187.
23.
Gupta, B. M., Suresh Kumar and Khanna, H. K. 1999. Science in India: Performance of
Council of Scientific and Industrial Research laboratories based on the productivity
profile of scientists. Research Evaluation, Vol. 8, No. 3:177-187.
24.
Frohlich, C and Resler, L. 2001. Analysis of publications and citations from a Geophysics
Research Institute. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and
Technology. Vol. 52, No. 9: 701-713.
25.
Gu, Yinian and Zainab, A N. 2001. Publication productivity of Malaysian researchers in
the field of computer science and information technology. Malaysian Journal of Library
and Information Science. Vol. 6, No.1: 1-23.
26.
Lee, C K. 2003. A scientometric study of the research performance of the Institute of
Molecular and Cell Biology in Singapore. Scientometrics. Vol. 56, No.1: 95-110.
27.
Schloegl, C, Gorraiz, J, Bart, C and Bargmann, M. 2003. Evaluating two Australian
university departments: Lessons learned. Scientometrics. Vol. 56, No.3: 287-299.
28.
Huang, H H and Hsu, J S C. 2005. An Evaluation of Publication Productivity in Information
Systems: 1999 to 2003. Communications of the Association for Information Systems: Vol.
15: 555-564.
29.
Kademani, B.S., Vijai Kumar, Anil Kumar, Anil Sagar, Lalit Mohan, Surwase, G and
Gaderao, C. R. 2005a. Publication productivity of the Bio-organic Division at Bhabha
Atomic Research Centre: A scientometric study. Annals of Library and Information
Studies, Vol. 52, No. 4:135-146.
30.
Kademani, B. S., Vijai Kumar, Surwase, G, Anil Sagar, Lalit Mohan, Gaderao, C. R., Anil
Kumar, Kalyane, V. L. and Prakasan, E. R. 2005b. Scientometric dimensions of innovation
communication productivity of the Chemistry Division at Bhabha Atomic Research Centre.
Malaysian Journal of Library and Information Science, Vol. 10, No.1 :65-89.
31.
Kademani, B. S., Vijai Kumar, Lalit Mohan, Anil Sagar, Anil Kumar, Gaderao, C. R. and
Surwase, G. 2006. Scientometric dimensions and publication productivity of the
Analytical Chemistry Division at Bhabha Atomic Research Centre. SRELS Journal of
Information Management, Vol. 43, No. 1:5-20.

134
32.
Kademani, B. S., Gaderrao, C. R., Surwase, G., Sanhotra, A. B., Anil Kumar and Vijai
Kumar. 2007a. Scientometric Profile and Publication Productivity of the Radiochemistry
Division at Bhabha Atomic Research Centre. SRELS Journal of Information Management,
Vol. 44, No.2:99-124.
33.
Kademani, B. S., Vijai Kumar, Surwase, G., Anil Sagar and Lalit Mohan 2007b. Research
and Citation Impact of Publications by the Chemistry Division at Bhabha Atomic Research
Centre. Scientometrics, Vol. 71, No.1:25-57.
34.
Yazit, Norhazwani and Zainab, A N. 2007. Publication productivity of Malaysian authors
and institutions in LIS. Malaysian Journal of Library and Information Science. Vol. 12,
No.2: 35-55.
35.
Akakandelwa, Akakandelwa. 2009. Author collaboration and productivity at the University
of Zambia, 2002-2007. African Journal of Library, Archives and Information Science. Vol.
19, No.1. Retrieved April 19, 2012 from:
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_7002/is_1_19/ai_n32146504/?tag=content;col1
36.
Varghese, Rekha Rani and Rajan, Junju S. 2009. Productivity of scientists of Rajiv Gandhi
Centre for Biotechnology (RGCB): an analysis. Annals of library Science and
Documentation. Vol. 56: 156-162.
37.
Girap, Priya, Surwase, Ganesh, Anil Sagar, Kademani, B.S. and Vijai Kumar. 2009.
Publication Productivity of the Technical Physics and Prototype Engineering Division at
Bhabha Atomic Research Centre. DESIDOC Journal of Library & Information
Technology, Vol. 29, No. 2: 39-54.
38.
Upadhye, R. P., Kademani, B.S., Surwase, G. and Vijai Kumar. 2010. Scientometric
Dimensions of the Nuclear Physics Division at Bhabha Atomic Research Centre. SRELS
Journal of Information Management, Vol. 47, No. 4:437-448.
39.
Sudhier, K G and Abhila, I S. 2011. Publication productivity of social scientists in the
Centre for Development Studies, Thiruvananthapuram: A bibliometric analysis. 8th
International CALIBER-2011, 2-4 March, 2011, Goa University, Goa.
40.
Upadhye, Rekha P., Kademani, B. S., Lalit Mohan and Bhanumurthy, K. 2012. Research
and Citation Impact of Publications of the Nuclear Physics Division at Bhabha Atomic
Research Centre. Malaysian Journal of Library and Information Science (Paper Accepted,
2012)
41.
Subramanyam, K. 1983. Bibliometric studies of research collaboration: a review. Journal
of information science. Vol.6: 33-38.
42.
Abolghassemi Fakhree, M., & Jouyban, A. 2011. Scientometric analysis of the major
Iranian medical universities. Scientometrics, 87(1), 205-220. doi: 10.1007/s11192-010-
0336-z
43.
Alireza Noruzi and Mohammadhiwa, A. 2014. Scientometric analysis of Iraqi-Kurdistan
universities’ scientific productivity. The Electronic Library, 32(6), 770-785. doi:
10.1108/EL-01-2013-0004
44.
Ding, J. D., & Qiu, J. P. 2011. An approach to improve the indicator weights of scientific
and technological competitiveness evaluation of Chinese universities. Scientometrics,
86(2), 285-297. doi: 10.1007/s11192-010-0268-7
45.
Gupta, B. M., Saxena, A., & Visakhi, P. 2013. Contribution and Impact of Indian
Agricultural Universities: A Performance: Analysis Using Scientometric Techniques,
2007-11. SRELS Journal of Information Management; Volume 50, Issue 5, October 2013.
46.
Kim, M. J. 2014. A bibliometric analysis of publications by the School of Biological
Sciences, Seoul National University, South Korea. Scientometrics, 98(2), 999-1019.
47.
Gopikuttan A., Aswathy S. 2014. Publication Productivity of University of Kerala: A
Scientometric View. DESIDOC Journal of Library & Information Technology, 34(2), 131-
139. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.14429/djlit.34.4280

135
View publication stats
48.
Sudhier, K. G. 2010. Bradford’s law of Scattering Revisited: A study based on the
References in Doctoral theses in the area of Physics. Collnet Journal of Scientometrics and
Information Management, 4(2), 35-47. doi: 10.1080/09737766.2010.10700891
49.
Sweileh, W. M., Zyoud, S. e. H., Al-Khalil, S., Al-Jabi, S. W., & Sawalha, A. F. 2014.
Assessing the Scientific Research Productivity of the Palestinian Higher Education
Institutions. SAGE Open, 4(3).
50.
Thirumagal, A. 2012. Scientific publications of Manonmaniam Sundaranar University,
Tirunelveli, Tamilnadu: scientometric analysis. Library Philosophy and Practice (e-
journal). doi: http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/libphilprac/791
51.
Zhu, X., Wu, Q., Zheng, Y., & Ma, X. 2004. Highly cited research papers and the evaluation
of a research university: A case study: Peking University 1974–2003. Scientometrics,
60(2), 237-347.
52.
Suresh Jange, Mallikarjun Angadi and Shekappa Bandi. 2016. Publication Productivity and
Impact of Research in University Environment: A Scientometric View. International
Research: Journal of Library and Information Science, 6(1),2016.
http://irjlis.com/publication-productivity-and-impact-of-research-in-university-
environment-a-scientometric-view/
53.
Abramo, G., D’Angelo, C. A., & Solazzi, M. 2009. Assessing public–private research
collaboration: Is it possible to compare university performance? Scientometrics.
DOI: 10.1007/s11192-009-0104-0
54.
Torres-Salinas, D., Lopez-Co´zar, E.D., & Jime´nez-Contreras, E. 2008. Ranking of
departments and researchers within a university using two different databases:
Web of Science versus Scopus. Scientometrics. DOI: 10.1007/s11192-008-
2113-9
55.
Michel Zitt & Elise Bassecoulard. 2008. Challenges for scientometric indicators: data
demining, knowledge-flow measurements and diversity issues. Ethics in science and
environmental politics, Vol. 8, 49–60. DOI: 10.3354/esep00092
56.
Naikoo, Muzamil Mushtaq, Ahmad, Hilal, Imran, Sheikh. 2012. SCIENTOMETRIC
ASSESSMENT OF STATE UNIVERSITIES OF UTTAR PRADESH: A STUDY
BASED ON SCOPUS DATABASE. International Journal of Information Science and
Management, 10(2).