↓ Skip to main content

Search strategies along the academic lifecycle

Overview of attention for article published in Scientometrics, June 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (54th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
30 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
106 Mendeley
Title
Search strategies along the academic lifecycle
Published in
Scientometrics, June 2012
DOI 10.1007/s11192-012-0789-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Edwin Horlings, Thomas Gurney

Abstract

Understanding how individual scientists build a personal portfolio of research is key to understanding outcomes on the level of scientific fields, institutions, and systems. We lack the scientometric and statistical instruments to examine the development over time of the involvement of researchers in different problem areas. In this paper we present a scientometric method to map, measure, and compare the entire corpus of individual scientists. We use this method to analyse the search strategies of 43 condensed matter physicists along their academic lifecycle. We formulate six propositions that summarise our theoretical expectations and are empirically testable: (1) a scientist's work consists of multiple finite research trails; (2) a scientist will work in several parallel research trails; (3) a scientist's role in research trail selection changes along the lifecycle; (4) a scientist's portfolio will converge before it diverges; (5) the rise and fall of research trails is associated with career changes; and (6) the rise and fall of research trails is associated with the potential for reputational gain. Four propositions are confirmed, the fifth is rejected, and the sixth could not be confirmed or rejected. In combination, the results of the four confirmed propositions reveal specific search strategies along the academic lifecycle. In the PhD phase scientists work in one problem area that is often unconnected to the later portfolio. The postdoctoral phase is where scientists diversify their portfolio and their social network, entering various problem areas and abandoning low-yielding ones. A professor has a much more stable portfolio, leading the work of PhDs and postdoctoral researchers. We present an agenda for future research and discuss theoretical and policy implications.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 106 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 3 3%
United States 2 2%
Malaysia 2 2%
Portugal 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Austria 1 <1%
Colombia 1 <1%
Iran, Islamic Republic of 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Other 2 2%
Unknown 91 86%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 26 25%
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 20%
Student > Master 15 14%
Librarian 9 8%
Other 9 8%
Other 21 20%
Unknown 5 5%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 33 31%
Computer Science 20 19%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 8%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 5 5%
Psychology 5 5%
Other 30 28%
Unknown 5 5%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 September 2012.
All research outputs
#6,196,869
of 22,668,244 outputs
Outputs from Scientometrics
#1,122
of 2,667 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#39,272
of 147,842 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scientometrics
#11
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,668,244 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,667 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 147,842 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its contemporaries.