Funding information in Web of Science: an updated overview

Despite the limitations of funding acknowledgment (FA) data in Web of Science (WoS), studies using FA information have increased rapidly over the last several years. Considering this WoS’ recent practice of updating funding data, this paper further investigates the characteristics and distribution of FA data in four WoS journal citation indexes. The research reveals that FA information coverage variances persist cross all four citation indexes by time coverage, language and document type. Our evidence suggests an improvement in FA information collection in humanity and social science research. Departing from previous studies, we argue that FA text (FT) alone no longer seems an appropriate field to retrieve and analyze funding information, since a substantial number of documents only report funding agency or grant number information in respective fields. Articles written in Chinese have a higher FA presence rate than other non-English WoS publications. This updated study concludes with a discussion of new findings and practical guidance for the future retrieval and analysis of funded research.

[1]  Li Tang,et al.  Does "birds of a feather flock together" matter - Evidence from a longitudinal study on US-China scientific collaboration , 2013, J. Informetrics.

[2]  Yuya Kajikawa,et al.  Using acknowledgement data to characterize funding organizations by the types of research sponsored: the case of robotics research , 2018, Scientometrics.

[3]  Li Tang,et al.  Funding acknowledgment analysis: Queries and caveats , 2016, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[4]  Xianwen Wang,et al.  Science funding and research output: a study on 10 countries , 2011, Scientometrics.

[5]  K. Powell.  Searching by grant number: comparison of funding acknowledgments in NIH RePORTER, PubMed, and Web of Science , 2019, Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA.

[6]  Alan L. Porter,et al.  Early insights on the Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI): an overlay map-based bibliometric study , 2017, Scientometrics.

[7]  John P. Walsh,et al.  Pathogenic organization in science: Division of labor and retractions , 2018, Research Policy.

[8]  María Bordons,et al.  What characterises funded biomedical research? Evidence from a basic and a clinical domain , 2019, Scientometrics.

[9]  Grant Lewison,et al.  Evaluating UK research in speech and language therapy. , 2003, International journal of language & communication disorders.

[10]  Adrián A. Díaz-Faes,et al.  Beyond funding: Acknowledgement patterns in biomedical, natural and social sciences , 2017, PloS one.

[11]  Sônia Elisa Caregnato,et al.  Agradecimentos por financiamento na produção científica brasileira representada na Web of Science , 2018, Em Questão.

[12]  Philip Shapira,et al.  The impact of research funding on scientific outputs: Evidence from six smaller European countries , 2016, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[13]  Arnold H. Rots,et al.  Usefulness and dangers of relying on grant acknowledgments in an observatory bibliography , 2016, Astronomical Telescopes + Instrumentation.

[14]  John Flowerdew,et al.  English or Chinese? The trade-off between local and international publication among Chinese academics in the humanities and social sciences , 2009 .

[15]  Min Song,et al.  The funding factor: a cross-disciplinary examination of the association between research funding and citation impact , 2018, Scientometrics.

[16]  Wen Lou,et al.  Do funded papers attract more usage? , 2018, Scientometrics.

[17]  Adèle Paul-Hus,et al.  Characterization, description, and considerations for the use of funding acknowledgement data in Web of Science , 2016, Scientometrics.

[18]  Fiorenzo Franceschini,et al.  Empirical analysis and classification of database errors in Scopus and Web of Science , 2016, J. Informetrics.

[19]  MongeonPhilippe,et al.  The journal coverage of Web of Science and Scopus , 2016 .

[20]  Weishu Liu,et al.  The secrets behind Web of Science’s DOI search , 2019, Scientometrics.

[21]  Jonas Lundberg,et al.  Collaboration uncovered: Exploring the adequacy of measuring university-industry collaboration through co-authorship and funding , 2006, Scientometrics.

[22]  Weishu Liu,et al.  The data source of this study is Web of Science Core Collection? Not enough , 2019, Scientometrics.

[23]  Li Tang,et al.  The penalty of containing more non-English articles , 2017, Scientometrics.

[24]  Xin Xu,et al.  Global pattern of science funding in economics , 2016, Scientometrics.

[25]  Li Tang,et al.  Missing author address information in Web of Science-An explorative study , 2018, J. Informetrics.

[26]  Zheng Liang,et al.  Does the concentration of scientific research funding in institutions promote knowledge output? , 2018, J. Informetrics.

[27]  Adèle Paul-Hus,et al.  The journal coverage of Web of Science and Scopus: a comparative analysis , 2015, Scientometrics.

[28]  Weishu Liu,et al.  DOI errors and possible solutions for Web of Science , 2019, Scientometrics.

[29]  Wu Xiaoming.  On the Contemporary Construction of the Chinese System of Academic Discourse , 2012 .

[30]  S. Rijcke,et al.  Bibliometrics: The Leiden Manifesto for research metrics , 2015, Nature.

[31]  Jian-Bo Yang,et al.  Solving multiple-criteria R&D project selection problems with a data-driven evidential reasoning rule , 2018, International Journal of Project Management.

[32]  Thed N. van Leeuwen,et al.  Approaching the "reward triangle": General analysis of the presence of funding acknowledgments and "peer interactive communication" in scientific publications , 2012, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[33]  Stefan Hornbostel,et al.  Assessing the effects of the German Excellence Initiative with bibliometric methods , 2016, Scientometrics.

[34]  Zhen Zhong,et al.  Non-English journals and papers in physics and chemistry: bias in citations? , 2012, Scientometrics.

[35]  J. Rigby.  Systematic grant and funding body acknowledgement data for publications: new dimensions and new controversies for research policy and evaluation , 2011 .

[36]  Li Tang,et al.  China's Global Growth in Social Science Research: Uncovering Evidence from Bibliometric Analyses of SSCI Publications (1978–2013) , 2015, J. Informetrics.

[37]  Robin I. M. Dunbar,et al.  Do Birds of a Feather Flock Together? , 2013, Human Nature.

[38]  T C Wang.  Follow the money. , 2000, Gastroenterology.

[39]  Fernanda Morillo,et al.  How to automatically identify major research sponsors selecting keywords from the WoS Funding Agency field , 2018, Scientometrics.

[40]  Michael M. Hopkins,et al.  Funding Data from Publication Acknowledgments: Coverage, Uses, and Limitations , 2017, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[41]  Fernanda Morillo.  Public–private interactions reflected through the funding acknowledgements , 2016, Scientometrics.

[42]  María Bordons,et al.  Funding acknowledgments in the Web of Science: completeness and accuracy of collected data , 2017, Scientometrics.

[43]  Philip Shapira,et al.  Funding acknowledgement analysis: an enhanced tool to investigate research sponsorship impacts: the case of nanotechnology , 2011, Scientometrics.

[44]  Stacy Konkiel,et al.  The sum of it all: revealing collaboration patterns by combining authorship and acknowledgements , 2017 .

[45]  Brian A. Jacob,et al.  The Impact of Research Grant Funding on Scientific Productivity , 2007, Journal of public economics.

[46]  Mu-Hsuan Huang,et al.  An analysis of global research funding from subject field and funding agencies perspectives in the G9 countries , 2018, Scientometrics.

[47]  Philip Shapira,et al.  Is There a Relationship between Research Sponsorship and Publication Impact? An Analysis of Funding Acknowledgments in Nanotechnology Papers , 2015, PloS one.

[48]  Weishu Liu,et al.  The changing role of non‐English papers in scholarly communication: Evidence from Web of Science's three journal citation indexes , 2017, Learn. Publ..

[49]  Alessandro Maffioli,et al.  The impact of funding on research collaboration: Evidence from a developing country , 2011 .