Analyses of a sample of cancer research papers previously judged to be of high quality and of a random sample from the world literature, indicate that nineteen countries are the key producers of cancer research literature. Quality papers were much less dispersed among countries than ordinary papers and there was a high and statistically significant correlation be tween the quantity and the quality of productivity of countries.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
A.J. Lotka , The frequency distribution of scientific productivity , J. Washington Acad. Sci.16(12) (1926) 317-323.
2.
W. Shockley , On the statistics of individual variations of productivity in research laboratories, Proc. Institute of Radio Engineers45 (1957) 279-290.
3.
W.J. Broad , The publishing game: getting more for less, Science211 (1981) 1137-1139.
4.
H.A. Zuckerman , Nobel laureates in science: patterns of productivity, collaboration and authorship, Amer. Sociol. Rev.32 (1967) 391-403.
5.
W. Dennis , Bibliographies of eminent scientists, Scientific Monthly79 (1954) 180-183.
6.
S. Cole andJ.R. Cole, Scientific output and recognition: a study in the operation of the reward system in science, Amer. Sociol. Rev.32 (1967) 377-390.
7.
A.E. Bayer and J. Folger, Some correlates of a citation measure of productivity in science, Sociology of Education39(4) (1966) 381-390.
8.
E. Garfield , Citation indexing for studying science, Nature227 ( 1970) 669-671.
9.
S.M. Lawani , Citation analysis and the quality of scientific productivity, Bioscience27 (1) (1977) 26-31.
10.
S.M. Lawani and A.E. Bayer, Validity of citation criteria for assessing the influence of scientific publications: new evidence with peer assessment , J. Amer. Soc. Inform. Sci.33 (1982). in press.
11.
R.K. Merton .The Matthew Effect in science, Science159 ( 1968) 56-63.
12.
P.D. Allison and J.A. Stewart, Productivity differences among scientists: evidence for accumulative advantage, Amer. Sociol. Rev.39 (1974) 596-606.
13.
R. Crandall , The relationship between quantity and quality of publications, Personality and Social Psychology Bull.4 (1978) 379-380.
