The quantitative and qualitative scientific production: A bibliometric study of the five main Asian economies in R&D

Main Article Content

Pablo José Arana-Barbier

Abstract

The five economies in Asia that invest the most in research and development, as a percentage of Gross Domestic Product (GDP), are Israel, South Korea, Japan, Singapore and China. Nevertheless, the results in the number of scientific output in terms of research publications, and the citations received by them, reveal a whole different reality among those countries. Furthermore, the intellectual production based on quantitative research methods used to be much more popular and defended than that on qualitative methods. However, three of these five countries mentioned trust more in the qualitative paradigm, represented by grounded theory, than in the quantitative one, represented by structural equation modeling. The current study investigates 25 years of scientific production available in the Web of Science and shows that, even though China is undoubtedly Asia’s leader in intellectual production, measured by publication productivity and scientific impact, the scientific community trusts the least on China’s papers regarding grounded theory, placing China in fifth place among the studied countries for qualitative studies, and third place for quantitative studies. The paper also deepens on the concept of trust as a replacement of impact, and projects the near future for the five studied countries regarding quantitative and qualitative intellectual production.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

How to Cite
ARANA-BARBIER, Pablo José. The quantitative and qualitative scientific production: A bibliometric study of the five main Asian economies in R&D. Malaysian Journal of Library & Information Science, [S.l.], v. 25, n. 2, p. 95-109, sep. 2020. ISSN 1394-6234. Available at: <https://mjlis.um.edu.my/article/view/26069>. Date accessed: 20 sep. 2020. doi: https://doi.org/10.22452/mjlis.vol25no2.6.
Section
Articles

References

Akcali, B.Y. and Sismanoglu, E. 2015. Innovation and the effect of research and development (R&D) expenditure on growth in some developing and developed countries. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 32: 768-775. Available at: http://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.06.474

Arana, P. 2020. Situación actual de la teoría fundamentada versus la modelación de ecuaciones estructurales: un estudio bibliométrico comparativo. Investigación Bibliotecológica: Archivonomía, Bibliotecología e Información, Vol. 34, no. 83: 37-53. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.22201/iibi.24488321xe.2020.83.58111.

Asubiaro, T. 2019. How collaboration type, publication place, funding and author’s role affect citations received by publications from Africa: A bibliometric study of LIS research from 1996 to 2015. Scientometrics, Vol. 120, no. 3: 1261-1287. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-019-03157-1

Baregheh, A., Rowley, J., and Sambrook, S. 2009. Towards a multidisciplinary definition of innovation. Management Decision, Vol. 47, no. 8: 1323-1339. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1108/00251740910984578.

Bilas, V., Bosnjak, M., and Cizmic, T. 2016. Relationship between research and development and economic growth in the EU economies. 13th International Scientific Conference on Economic and Social Development, April, p.223-230.

Cintra, P.R., Furnival, A.C. and Milanez, D.H. 2018. The impact of open access citation and social media on leading top Information Science journals. Investigación Bibliotecológica: archivonomía, bibliotecología e información, Vol. 32, no. 77: 117-132. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.22201/iibi.24488321xe.2018.77.57874.

Charmaz, K. 2006. Constructing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

Chión, S. and Charles, V. 2016. Analítica de datos para la modelación estructural. Lima: Pearson.

Cobo, M.J., Martínez, M.A., Gutiérrez-Salcedo, M., Fujita, H., and Herrera-Viedma, E. 2015. 25 years at Knowledge-Based Systems: A bibliometric analysis. Knowledge-Based Systems, Vol. 80, no.1: 3-13. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knosys.2014.12.035.

Creswell, J. 2007. Qualitative inquiry & research design: Choosing among five approaches (Second Edition). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

Erfanmanesh, M. 2019. Quantitative portrait of open access mega-journals. Malaysian Journal of Library & Information Science, Vol. 24, no. 2: 115-131. Available at: https://doi.org/10.22452/mjlis.vol24no2.7.

Frankort, H.T.W. 2016. When does knowledge acquisition in R&D alliances increase new product development? The moderating roles of technological relatedness and product-market competition. Research Policy, Vol. 45, no. 1: 291-302. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2015.10.007.

Giffin, K. 1967. The contribution of studies of source credibility to a theory of interpersonal trust in the communication process. Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 68, no. 2: 104-120. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0024833.

Gioia, D.A., Corley, K.G., and Hamilton, A.L. 2013. Seeking Qualitative Rigor in Inductive Research: Notes on the Gioia Methodology. Organizational Research Methods, Vol. 16, no. 1: 15-31. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428112452151.

Glaser, B. and Strauss, A. 1967. The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. New Jersey: Aldine Transaction.

Greenstone, M. 2011. The importante of research and development (R&D) for US competitiveness and a clean energy future. MIT Center for Energy and Environmental Policy Research, Vol. 2011, June: 1-11. Available at: https://dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/ handle/1721.1/66283/2011-010.pdf?sequence=1.

Guedes, M.J., da Conceição Gonçalves, V., Soares, N. and Valente, M. 2016. UK evidence for the determinants of R&D intensity from a panel fsQCA. Journal of Business Research, Vol. 69, no. 2016: 5431-5436. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ j.jbusres.2016.04.150.

Hair, J., Black, W., Babib, B. and Anderson, R. 2010. Multivariate data analysis (Seventh Edition). Ciudad de México: Pearson Education.

Jones, J. 2009. Selection of grounded theory as an appropriate research methodology for a dissertation: One student’s perspective. The Grounded Theory Review, Vol. 8, no. 2: 23-34.

Liu, H. and Wang, T-Y. 2018. China and the “Singapore Model”: Perspectives from mid-level cadres and implications for transnational knowledge transfer. China Quarterly, Vol. 236, May: 988-1011. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0305741018000462.

Mateos-Aparicio, G. 2011. Los modelos de ecuaciones estructurales: una revisión histórica sobre sus orígenes y desarrollo, Historia de la Probabilidad y la Estadística (V), Riobóo, J.M. and Riobóo, I. (eds.), 289-302. Santiago de Compostela: Nino-Centro de Impresión Digital.

Merigó, J.M., Mas-Tur, A., Roig-Tierno, N. and Ribeiro-Soriano, D. 2015. A bibliometric overview of the Journal of Business Research between 1973 and 2014. Journal of Business Research, Vol. 68, no. 2015: 2645-2653. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.04.006.

Mulet-Forteza, C., Genovart-Balaguer, J., Mauleon-Mendez, E., and Merigó, J.M. 2019. A bibliometric research in the tourism, leisure, and hospitality fields. Journal of Business Research, Vol. 101: 819-827. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.jbusres.2018.12.002

Nicolson, D. 2013. Taking epistemology seriously: “truth, reason and justice” revisited. The International Journal of Evidence & Proof, Vol. 17, no. 1: 1-46. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1350/ijep.2013.17.1.417.

OECD. 2019. Research and development expenditure. Available at: https://stats.oecd.org/ glossary/detail.asp?ID=2315.

Rodríguez, A. and Nieto, M.J. 2016. Does R&D offshoring lead to SME growth? Different governance modes and the mediating role of innovation. Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 37: 1734-1753. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2413.

Sadatmoosavi, A., Nooshinfard, F., Hariri, N., and Esmaeil, S.M. 2018. Does the superior position of countries in co-authorship networks lead to their high citation performance in the field of nuclear science and technology? Malaysian Journal of Library & Information Science, Vol. 23, no. 1: 51-65. Available at: https://doi.org/10.22452/mjlis.vol23no1.4.

Simkin, M.V. and Roychowdhury, V.P. 2003. Read before you cite! Complex Systems, Vol. 14: 269-274. Available at: https://arxiv.org/pdf/cond-mat/0212043.pdf.

Solow, R.M. 1956. A contribution to the theory of economic growth. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 70, no. 1: 65-94. Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/ 1884513.

Strauss, A. and Corbin, J. 1990. Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques (Second Edition). Newbury Park: Sage Publications.

Thornley, C., Watkinson, A., Nicholas, D., Volentine, R., Jamali, H.R., Herman, E., Allard, S., Levine, K.J., and Tenopir, C. 2015. The role of trust and authority in the citation bevahiour of researchers. Information Research, Vol.20, no.3, paper 677. Available at: http://www.informationr.net/ir/20-3/paper677.html#.X1TqTnkzZPY.

Tomljanović, M. and Grubišić, Z. 2016. Investment in research and development – A factor of adjustment of Montenegro to the EU economy. Journal of Central Banking Theory and Practice, Vol. 5, no. 3: 139-164. Available at: http://doi.org.10.1515/jcbtp-2016-0024.

UNESCO. 2019. How much does your country invest in R&D? Available at: http://uis.unesco.org/apps/visualisations/research-and-development-spending/.

Véliz, C. 2011. Estadística para la administración y los negocios. Ciudad de México: Pearson.