Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 22

1

.. *

*
, ,
. :
, 101000, ,
. ., 20. E-mail: mkotsemir@hse.ru

-



16 .
, -


,
, -


- Scopus
. Web of Science

1
2012 . ..
, .

38 . 6. 1 2012

94.8% 19902011 . , - 5

25 , - 0.6%. Scopus
, 88.1%
19902011 .,
Scopus2 19962010 . 1.2%6. ,
- ,
, , -
, - ,
- . , Scopus 19962010 . 36.9%
3. -
- ,
4.6%7.
. ,
-
-
,

. 8. -
- -
, ( )
. .
, , ,
, , -
, .
. - , -
- , -
(article), (proceedings ,
paper) (review). - Scopus Web of Science -
, -
, ,
. . ,
Scopus Web of Science -
10%
SCImago Journal and Country [ , 2011,
Rank, Scopus. , . 42.]. ,
, , , , ,
236 , - ,
19962010 . . , -
.
Scopus
SCImago Journal and Country Rank 30 466 1996 . 36 053 2010 .
Web of Science4 -
Essential Science 2.9 1.8%. -
Indicators.
- 19962010 . 8 ,
8- 16-. ,
, , - , , , ,
Scopus Web of Science,
. , Web -
of Science 1.1%.

2
Scopus Elsevier 2004 . 2011 .
19 500 , , ,
( 46 ). 1966 .
3
- - ,
, [, , 2007; , 2011; , 2011].
4
Web of Science, . 1964 ., . Thomson
Reuters. 2011 . Web of Science 48 15 . .
148 . . 1900 .
5
1.2% 19962010 ., 1.1%, 0.22%,
0.1%.
6
Scopus , Web of Science. ,
3.4% , Scopus 19902011 ., 1.3%.
7
,
, [, 2003, . 231].
8
(article), (proceedings paper) (review).

2012 . 6. 1 39

. 1.
: 19962010 (%)
1.5
1.4 2.2

1.3 2.1 2.8


1.3 1.9 2.6 1.9
1.2 1.7 2.6 1.8
1.2 1.6 3.5
1.4 2.5 1.8
2.3 2.8
1.1 2.2 1.7
1.6 2.8
1.1 1.4
1.5 2.6
0.6 0.7 0.9 1.4 2.0 2.4
0.7 1.2 1.3 2.2
0.6 1.2 1.9 1.4
0.5 1.1 1.6 1.6
0.5 1.0 1.5 1.3 2.1
0.9 1.2 1.4 1.2 1.2 14.9 16.3
0.8 1.1 1.1
0.9 1.1 1.1 2.0 2.1 2.2 13.1
1.0 1.0 2.0 2.0 10.8 11.6
1.9 1.9 9.7
1.9
7.1
3.3 3.5 3.9 4.9 4.7 5.4
2.6 2.8

2.9 2.8 2.9 2.7 2.7 2.6 2.5 2.4 2.2 2.2 1.9 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.8
1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

: SCImago Journal and Country Rank.

- 19962010 .
,
(. 1). 19962010 . - Scopus, (. 1).
2.6 16.3%. -
0.9 1996 2.8%. .
, . 1. -
1996 .
, :
2010 . , , - 9 ,
. 8, 7, 5, 3 (. 2).

. 2.

1996 2010
1 311 937 1 457 642
2 81 611 2 315 768
3 75 665 3 123 756
4 68 439 4 119 216
5 51 109 5 108 586
6 39 679 6 87 430
7 35 685 7 72 092
8 30 466 8 67 501
9 27 439 9 67 459
10 22 105 10 59 642
11 21 081 11 53 838
12 21 060 12 53 734
13 20 138 13 43 169
14 15 690 14 39 499
15 14 301 15 36 055
16 11 260 16 35 446
17 10 504 17 28 734
18 10 150 18 28 260
19 9 830 19 * 26 619
20 9 699 20 26 057
21 8 419 21 25 257
22 7 482 22 21 978
23 7 278 23 15 476
24 6 873 24 15 042
25 * 5 561 25 * 14 502
26 5 360 26 14 191
27 * 5 355 27 * 14 103
28 * 4 822 28 * 13 790
29 * 4 681 29 * 13 326
30 * 4 421 30 13 308

* , .
: SCImago Journal and Country Rank.

40 . 6. 1 2012

. 1. : 19962010


* ** (%)*, *** (%)
1 0 23.4 2.8
2 7 8.6 19.1
3 0 6.6 3.6
4 -3 6.7 2.1
5 0 6.2 4.0
6 -1 4.5 3.9
7 -1 3.5 4.4
8 -2 3.4 4.7
9 0 2.6 7.3
10 5 2.4 9.0
11 0 2.3 6.9
12 -8 2.2 1.1
13 -2 1.9 4.6
14 8 2.0 13.0
15 8 1.5 12.4
16 -3 1.4 5.0
17 3 1.4 9.5
18 -7 1.4 3.5
19 -4 1.2 6.2
20 -5 1.1 5.4
21 9 1.0 12.7
22 -7 0.8 2.7
23 1 0.7 6.0
24 -2 0.7 5.1
25 -7 0.7 4.4
* , Scopus, 19962010 .
** 1996 . 2010 . ,
, .
*** 100%, .
: SCImago Journal and Country Rank.

, , -
, - : 1996 . 29.2%
. , 2010.
5 ( 23.6%. ,
) , , , , ,
. 7.6%, 2010 . 16.3%,
, , -
.
19972010 . -
( 19.1%). 2004 .
- (. 3).
: 1996 . Scopus 27 439 - :
, 2010 . 315 768. 26.3% 19962010 .
, ;
- (16.7%), (13.6%). -
10%, - -
4.4%. (25.4%
- , 19962010 .),
, , - (12.3%), -
, (11.3%).
. -
- ,
19972010 . , -
7.3%. .
-
, 2010 . 1996 .

2012 . 6. 1 41

. 3.
:19962010 (%)*
26.3
7.9
16.8
7.9
13.6
6.2
12.3
12.4
, 9.7
11.3
8.9
4.0
7.1
4.1
4.6
7.4
4.4
3.8
3.2
25.4
2.5
1.4
2.4
3.6
2.0
4.7
1.8
3.1
, 0.8
2.5
0.7
0.8
0.6
3.9
0.4
1.8
, 0.3
1.7
0.2
0.5
0.2
1.5
0.1
1.4
, 0.1
1.0
0.0
0.6
0.0
0.8
0.0
0.9
0.0
0.4
0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0

* , Scopus, 19962010 .
100%, .
: SCImago Journal and Country Rank.

9. - 2003 . -
, -
0.3 1.4%, . - .
-
2.5 1.6%. -
-
( - .
) - -
(. 5),
[, 2003, . 229230; -
, 2011, . 42]. 7.5%
- 19962010 . -
i ,
j ,
. - 4.1% 5.3%
- - 19962010 .
, , ,
.
- 19962010 . .
(. 4).
, .
, , , - -
. , 2010 .
, 1996 . -
2.3 2.2 ,
19962010 . .
. .

.
9

- .

42 . 6. 1 2012

. 4.

3.1
3.5
2.0
2.4
2.5
2.3
2.6
2.2
1.6
2.1
2.5
1.8
1.3
1.3
, 0.8
0.9
1.1
0.9
0.6
0.8
0.6
0.7
0.7
0.6
0.6
0.4
, 0.3
0.4
0.3
0.3
0.1
0.3
0.2
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.0
0.2
0.0
, 0.2
0.1
, 0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0

0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0

1996 2010

: SCImago Journal and Country Rank.

. 5.
(%)

8.8
6.4
5.7
4.5
7.2
4.2
7.4
3.9
4.7
3.9
7.1
3.3
3.8
2.3
, 2.2
1.6
3.2
1.6
1.8
1.4
1.7
1.2
2.1
1.1
1.6
0.7
0.8
, 0.6
0.8
0.5
0.2
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.8
0.5
0.2
0.4
0.4
0.3
0.1
0.3
0.1
, 0.3
0.2
, 0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0

1996 2010

: SCImago Journal and Country Rank.

2012 . 6. 1 43

, - Science, . -
, Essential Science Indicators -
, - 10 .
10. , 5- 11.
5- -
- , Web
. of Science, ,
5- . -
: ,
, .
, Essential Science Indicators -
(impact)
. ,

. , -
, .
, Essential Science Indicators
, - ,
. ,
( . , 2011 . -
35 ), . , - ,
, , , 20002004, 19962000
, - 19982002 . SCImago Journal
, - and Country Rank -
. .
, - Essential Science Indicators -
, - -
, Scopus 5-
Web of Science, . , , .
SCImago Journal and Country Rank, - SCImago Journal and Country
Scopus, , Rank -
, ,
, , ,
(19962010 .
). , , -
Scopus 1996 ., . , -
15 , , 2010 ., Essential Science
11 . Indicators, -
, -
, Scopus, 1996 .
6.8, 2010 . 0.6. SCImago Journal and Country
5 Rank. ,
. , 1996 (cites)
2001 . - (documents),
12% ( 16.3 (article),
14.3), 20052010 . 9 , (proceeding paper) (review).
89% ( 9.4 1.0). , Essential Science Indicators ,
, SCImago Journal and ,
Country Rank, (research notes).
- , -
,
.
, -
.
- .
. [Carpenter,
Essential Narin, 1981; Moed, Vriens, 1989; MacRoberts, MacRoberts,
Science Indicators, Web of 1989; van Raan, 2000].

10
,
, Scopus.
11
Essential Science Indicators 20012005, 20022006,
20032007, 20042008, 20052009, 20062010 20072011 .

44 . 6. 1 2012

, - , -
10 000
, - , Scopus,
. - -
. -
, (. 2). 11
19962010 . - , -
, Scopus, 1 000, . Essential Science
Indicators : 12 -
,
, , - 16
,
, , 17.
. , -
,
, 12. -
Essential Science Indicators - .
13. - , -
, -
Web of Science , . ,
20012011 ., , : -
, 14. [Garfield,
-. - 1976; van Leuven et al., 2000].
Web of Science -
, 15,
1 000. ,

. 2. : 19962010*


21.77 292 254 17
20.42 154 612 24
20.18 4 972 679 1
20.05 409 982 14
19.09 292 150 18
17.64 149 390 25
17.55 748 787 7
17.42 1 392 982 4
17.10 224 898 20
16.66 177 814 22
16.63 116 973 31
16.01 155 111 23
16.00 485 249 11
15.79 1 321 606 5
15.56 74 033 39
15.09 964 320 6
14.80 95 295 34
14.45 720 911 8
13.76 12 350 66
13.12 547 858 9

* , , Scopus, 10 000
19962010 . , Scopus, 19962010 .
: SCImago Journal and Country Rank.

12
72- 19962010 . , Scopus, 86-
.
13
Essential Science Indicators 144 .
14
7- .
15
, Web of Science, 20012011 . 2 098.
16
, 20012011 . , Web of Science,
10 000.
17
17- .

2012 . 6. 1 45

, - , -
Science 1968 . [Merton, 1968, 16- 26-.
1988]18. - , -
, SCImago Journal and Country
. Rank, 120- 131.
- , 19962010 .,
, 5.27 .
: - Essential Science Indicators: -
, Web
, of Science 20012011 .,
. - 126- 147,
4.87 .
, - ,
19962010 .,
[Bointz et al., 1997; Bointz, 2002, 2005]. , - , -
(. 1).
, , 1996 . -
( - , . 6.
), 2010. , ,
19. -
, ,
- 1.12% 0.95%.
,

, [Schubert, ,
Glnzel, 2004, 2005, 2006]. . -
,
: 0.9% 1996 .
9.7% 2010 .
- ,
- 0.7% 2.7%.
20. -
, -
19962010 ., ,
19- . - (.3). , ,
10 ,

. 6. ,

: 19962010 (%)
0.9
1.0
1.6
1.0 1.6
1.0 1.6 2.7
2.5
0.9 1.5 2.4 1.6
0.8 1.4 1.6
2.2
1.2 1.6 2.4
0.8 2.0 2.3
1.5
0.7 1.1 1.9 2.1
1.1 1.4
1.7 2.0
0.6 1.3
0.4 0.5 1.0 1.7 1.9
0.4 0.9 1.1 1.6
0.3 0.9 1.4 1.1
0.3 0.8 1.3 1.5 9.6
0.3 0.8 1.2 9.0
0.7 1.0 1.0 1.5 8.0
0.6 0.8 0.9 0.9 6.9
0.6 0.8 0.8 1.3 5.9
0.7 0.7 0.7 1.2 5.0
1.1 1.1 3.2
1.0 1.0 1.0 3.2
1.4 1.7 2.0 2.4
0.9 1.1 1.2
1.1 1.2 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.1 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

: SCImago Journal and Country Rank.

18
: , ,
(. 25, 29). , , [, 2001; Gokhberg, Pislyakov,
2008; , , 2009].
19
[Luwell, 1999].
20
.

46 . 6. 1 2012

. 3. : 19962010
,
* ** * (%)
1 0 43.1
2 0 10.5
3 0 8.8
4 -3 6.1
5 0 5.2
6 0 3.2
7 -1 7.1
8 -2 4.2
9 -2 3.3
10 15 3.0
11 3 2.6
12 -2 2.8
13 -4 2.3
14 -3 1.6
15 9 1.3
16 3 1.4
17 -2 1.2
18 -7 1.0
19 -10 1.4
20 -4 1.1
21 6 1.1
22 2 1.0
23 0 1.0
24 0 0.8
27 6 0.6

* , , Scopus, 1996
2010 .
** 1996 2010 .
, , .
: SCImago Journal and Country Rank.

19962010 . 43.1%. - -
, , - , 19962010 .,
, 48.7 39.1%, , 10.0 . -
, , -
. ,
, 1996 . , -
, - 4-, 5- 6- , -
10.3 11.2% 2010 . 21 (. 4).
,
, 30-22.
10- (3%
). 19962010 . (11.7),
15 , - 46- .
19- 4-. - ,
, -
: 9 , , , ,
, 6. - , ,
, .
7 ,
. 9.8 19962010 . (64-
, , ).
-
. . , ,

21
, , , , .
22
, , 31-, 86- 92- , .

2012 . 6. 1 47

. 4. : 19962010*


**
21.77 2.17 4
20.42 2.04 5
20.18 2.02 6
20.05 2.00 7
19.09 1.91 8
17.64 1.76 9
17.55 1.75 10
17.42 1.74 11
17.10 1.71 12
16.66 1.66 13
16.01 1.60 15
16.00 1.60 16
15.79 1.58 17
15.09 1.51 21
14.45 1.44 27
13.12 1.31 31
11.72 1.17 46
9.82 0.98 64
9.57 0.96 68
9.57 0.96 69
7.87 0.79 86
7.54 0.75 92
7.27 0.73 96
5.66 0.57 115
5.21 0.52 120

* , , Scopus, 19962010 .
** 130 , , Scopus, 19962010 .
1 000.
: SCImago Journal and Country Rank.

. 7. , 19962010 . ,
(%)

49.2
46.6
37.3
35.5
32.8
32.7
32.1
30.9
30.7
26.4
25.5
25.0
24.3
24.2
24.2
22.3
21.9
21.9
21.9
21.8
19.8
19.8
19.0
18.9
17.2
16.9
15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0 40.0 45.0 50.0

: SCImago Journal and Country Rank.

48 . 6. 1 2012

Scopus, , (. 8). (37.4%)
, 19962010 . -
.
5.7 .
115- - , -
131, - 2%. ,
.
-
: 3.9% 1996. 10.0%
2010 . -
(46.5%), -
(. 7). (28.6%), ,
, 49.2% (22.3%).
, Scopus 19962010 ., -
. -
, (. 9). -
, . -
, ( -
19962010 ., - ) (5.3% -
16.9%, - 19962010 .). (23%)
5- .
, , ,
, - . -
, , -
19962010 . , - , ( 5.5 ), (5.0),
19.8%. , , (2.8)
1-, (2.6). , ,
2- 3- , -
14.4, 9.9 22.9%. .
- . 5 -
, ,

. 8.
: 19962010 * (%)

37.4
7.5
13.6
9.1
, 13.4
22.2
9.8
4.4
9.4
3.9
6.5
2.3
5.0
5.7
5.0
28.6
5.0
7.7
3.5
2.6
3.3
4.1
3.0
4.2
2.7
5.9
1.1
4.2
1.1
3.0
1.0
0.6
, 0.9
2.9
0.2
1.8
0.2
0.4
0.2
1.6
0.1
0.7
, 0.1
0.9
0.1
, 1.1
0.1
0.3
0.0
0.7
0.0
0.4
0.0
0.4

0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0 40.0

* 19962010 .
: SCImago Journal and Country Rank.

2012 . 6. 1 49

. 5.
: 19962010*

,


11.88 1.77 29.0 73.9
14.48 1.27 10.6 69.1
6.64 1.25 25.5 65.5
1.66 0.95 65.0 20.0
7.28 0.82 6.9 86.2
4.67 0.77 44.6 36.5
7.69 0.74 49.8 32.4
7.28 0.72 35.2 43.3
6.04 0.70 23.5 54.8
14.43 0.63 15.8 57.4
4.08 0.61 50.1 20.1
, 5.34 0.60 29.5 53.5
22.42 0.55 36.2 26.3
6.51 0.55 41.9 37.3
5.45 0.53 41.3 33.5
6.11 0.52 46.9 40.0

5.55 0.51 41.7 35.0
, 5.36 0.50 52.9 30.6
3.70 0.49 45.8 26.8
2.10 0.48 62.0 19.1
2.10 0.44 66.1 22.5
2.09 0.44 62.9 18.7
2.73 0.41 58.0 27.8
7.62 0.39 34.6 30.5
,
7.04 0.35 41.4 28.4
4.15 0.30 42.8 21.4
, 1.26 0.22 85.4 13.1
5.11 0.51 46.6 29.9

* , Scopus, ,
, 19962010 .
: SCImago Journal and Country Rank.

. , , .
- ( 20%) -
.
, , -, 60% .
, , -
, -, ,
. - 19962010 . (9.6%), -
- . 86.2% -
23,
- . -
. .
- ( 20%) ,
, , -
. - . ,
, ,
19962010 . 85.4%, - -
.
13%. ( 60%) , -
, , , (

23
, .

50 . 6. 1 2012

. 9.
(%)

5.6
3.9
3.3
2.6
2.4
2.2
0.7
1.2
3.0
1.2
1.8
1.2
1.1
0.8
4.2
0.8
0.8
0.8
2.0
0.7
, 0.7
0.7
0.6
0.6
0.7
0.5
0.5
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.2
0.3
, 0.4
0.3
0.2
0.3
0.1
0.2
, 0.1
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.1
, 0.0
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0

0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0

1996 2010

: SCImago Journal and Country Rank.

, , , - ,
, ) , -
( . ,
,
) 25.
, 19962010 . -
. ,
, -

,

. 10.

. ,
Web of Science

0.50%
-
- 0.35%
0.38%
0.35%
0.33% 0.34% 0.33%
24. j 0.31% 0.29%
0.27%
i , 149
1% - 104 102 105
95 99 95
j i. 86 89
76
,
,
. 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

-

[Aksnes, Siversten, 2004;
Tijssen et al., 2002]. (
:
, 1-2 ) Essential Science Indicators.

24
: (article), (proceedings paper),
(review), (research note).
25
[Aksnes, Siversten, 2004] ,
. Web of Science 19811998 . , 10%
50% , 40% 1 2 .

2012 . 6. 1 51

. 6.
: 20012011*

(%)
5501 46 0.84
1252 2 0.16
21783 104 0.48
2544 3 0.12
2377 27 1.14
4572 27 0.59
180 4 2.22
1646 6 0.36
2806 18 0.64
2872 55 1.92
1240 27 2.18
5789 14 0.24
3012 4 0.13
4562 5 0.11
/ 2762 16 0.58
/ 2477 3 0.12
2041 3 0.15
7890 91 1.15
1848 4 0.22
8600 508 5.91
11699 77 0.66
1722 1 0.06
99175 1045 1.05

* , Web of Science, 2001


2011 . 2011 . .
: Essential Science Indicators.

Essential Science Indicators Thomson 48.6%


Reuters. - , -
2001 . 2011 . (10.0%),
(7.4%). -
, . -
, (22.0%
, - ), -
, - (11.8%),
(8.7%).
, -
, -
. . 7.
- , 34.1% -
- .
(. 10). 2010 .
, 20012011 . (8.9%). ,
2009 . . 6- , -
-
, 7- ,
(. 6), . -
: 21- . 20012011 .,
- -
. -
.
- , ,
, , , - .
.
-
. 0.64%.
52 . 6. 1 2012

. 7. : 20012011*





(%) (%)
55953 1 34.1 1.83
14505 2 8.85 1.76
12649 3 7.72 1.61
7155 4 4.36 1.28
6717 5 4.10 1.49
5856 6 3.57 0.70
5659 7 3.45 0.73
5097 8 3.11 1.19
4808 9 2.93 1.91
4210 10 2.57 1.38
4171 11 2.54 2.30
3584 12 2.19 1.06
2747 13 1.68 1.53
2310 14 1.41 1.68
1940 15 1.18 1.98
1773 16 1.08 0.63
1450 17 0.88 1.31
1438 18 0.88 1.50
1238 19 0.76 0.42
1172 20 0.71 1.32
1045 21 0.64 0.39
1013 23 0.62 0.57
1001 24 0.61 0.47
942 25 0.57 0.61
733 27 0.45 0.47
* , Web of Science,
20012011 . 2011 . .
: Essential Science Indicators.

,
,
- . -
, -
26. , ,
, - ,
, . -
Web of Science. - -
, , .

-
- . ,
27. , -
- ,
- Web of Science, 29
( )28. 32%, 2001 . (. 11). -
- 9 . .
, - 2008 . .
29. ,

26
, , [Luukonen et al., 1993; Glnzel et al., 1999; Bookstein et al., 2006, 2006b].
27

[Melin, Person, 1996; Glnzel et al., 1999; Arunchalam, Doss, 2000; , 2003; Wang et al., 2005; , , 2007; ,
2011; , 2011].
28
[Glnzel, Lange, 1997, 2002;
Nederhof, Moed, 1993].
29
[, 2010].

2012 . 6. 1 53

. 11.

2.28

2.05
2.02
1.96
1.88 1.91
1.80
1.65 1.68 1.67
1.59 1.62
1.52 1.54 1.57

9386
9328
9186

9107
9008

9021

8591
8869
8791

8637
8559
8195
7791
7212
6353

30.7% 31.0% 31.0% 32.3% 33.2% 32.9% 31.5% 29.4% 29.0% 29.6%
25.0% 26.9% 27.4%
23.3%
20.6%

84 96 93 89 93 89 95 99 107 113 124 109 121 117 114

1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

: Web of Science.

. 8.
,

, .
,
1996 2010 2.65%. . 11 -
23.6 27.0 (
24.0 26.3
12.5 16.2 ). 19962010 .
10.2 14.6 50%.
7.8 9.8
5.0 7.4
4.9 6.4 (. 8).
4.5 5.2
4.3 5.9 , , 25.2% 24.2% -
4.9 5.3 .
3.4 7.0
3.6 5.0 . -
4.8 5.4 :
3.2 5.1

7.6 30,
1.1 6.2
4.8 ,
1.3 4.1
4.6 . -
2.0 3.9
, , -
1.6 3.3

2.3 2.8
.
1.6 2.7
25
2.5 3.6 .
1.3 2.8 ,
2.5 1.7 , ,
1.0 3.6
1.5 2.4
* 100%,
30

,
,










,
,



.

(
(100
100)
).
.



.
.




: Web of Science. 1996 . 100, , , 2010
1996 . 100, , , 2010 . .


.
.

54 . 6. 1 2012

. 9. , ,
(%)
1996 2010 19962010*
41.2 36.3 38.0
12.4 10.1 12.1
12.1 11.6 12.0
9.2 9.7 9.9
, 11.4 8.2 9.3
7.7 9.8 8.6
6.4 7.0 7.6
4.7 6.8 5.4
3.7 5.2 3.6
2.4 3.1 3.0
3.4 2.7 3.0
1.3 2.5 1.9
2.3 1.8 1.8
1.6 1.4 1.6
, 0.6 0.9 0.8
0.8 0.7 0.8
0.8 0.7 0.7
0.4 0.7 0.4
0.2 0.3 0.3
, 0.1 0.3 0.2
0.2 0.3 0.2
, 0.0 0.2 0.1
0.1 0.2 0.1
0.0 0.1 0.1
0.0 0.1 0.0
0.0 0.0 0.0

* 19962010 .
: Web of Science.

, - (16.9%).
10% (11.7 12.9%, -
(. 9)31. (38.0% ). ,
19962010 .) , ,
. - , , -
.
-
, - 1996
2010 . .
- . -
- ,
- 33.
32,
SCImago Journal , -
and Country Rank Scopus, Web of : , ,
Science - , , -
, .
, . -

.

31
SCImago Journal and Country Rank ,
, .
32

. , ,
, ( ) (
).
33

. [Schubert, Glnzel, 2006] ,
.

2012 . 6. 1 55

. 10.
(%)
, ,

1996 2010
33.3 43.8 9.5
41.9 56.4 8.6
41.6 57.2 8.2
38.8 24.4 8.9
30.1 44.4 6.9
36.2 44.7 6.1
43.0 55.7 7.4
37.8 45.3 4.3
17.3 17.5 9.4
29.8 39.8 10.0
29.8 41.0 7.5
34.5 44.6 6.7
19.3 14.7 16.9
35.5 51.1 7.8
33.9 29.6 5.4
24.0 29.4 2.7
22.3 28.5 5.1
20.1 19.9 9.6
19.0 16.4 11.7
33.1 50.7 7.9
32.6 46.5 6.9
49.5 63.2 7.1
38.0 55.0 6.5
27.0 25.9 12.9
17.5 23.7 4.5

: SCImago Journal and Country Rank.

-
, -
. -
- .
-
19962010 . , -
- .
. , , , ,
, , - , -
.
.
, ,
-
-
. . ( -
- ),
, ( , )
Scopus, ( ,
. , ) -
, - .
,
- ,
. , .

. ,
, -
. F

56 . 6. 1 2012

.. (2001) : // .
. . . 18. . 173185.
.. (2003) . .:
.., .. (2007) a: // . . 1. 1. . 4453.
.. (2011) : // . . 5. 3.
. 3442.
.. (2010) : //
WP6/2010/01. .: .
.., .. (2009) , //
. . 2. . 3. . 1924.
(2011) . .. . .: .
Aksnes D.W., Sivertsen G. (2004) The effect of highly cited papers on national citation indicators // Scientometrics. Vol. 59. 2. P. 213224.
Arunachalam S., Doss M.J. (2000) Mapping international collaboration in science in Asia through coauthorship analysis // Current Science.
Vol. 79. 5.
Bointz M. (2002) Rank of Nations and Heightened Competition in Matthew Core Journals: Two Faces of the Matthew Effect for Countries //
Library Trends. Vol. 50. 3. P. 440460.
Bointz M. (2005) Ten Years Matthew Effect for Countries // Scientometrics. Vol. 64. 3. P. 375379.
Bointz M., Bruckner E., Sharnhorst A. (1997) Characteristics and Impact of the Matthew Effect for Countries // Scientometrics. Vol. 40. 3.
P. 407422.
Bookstein A., Moed H., Yitzhaki M. (2006a) Measures of international collaboration in scientific literature: Part I // Information Processing
and Management. Vol. 42. P. 14081421.
Bookstein A., Moed H., Yitzhaki M. (2006b) Measures of international collaboration in scientific literature: Part II // Information Processing
and Management. Vol. 42. P. 14221442.
Bookstein A., Yitzhaki M. (1999) Own-Language Preference: A New Measure of Relative Language Self-Citation // Scientometrics. Vol. 46.
2. P. 337348.
Carpenter M.P., Narin F. (1981) The adequacy of the Science Citation Index (SCI) as an indicator of international scientific activity // Journal
of the American Society for Information Science. Vol. 32. 6. P. 430439.
Egghe L., Rousseau R., Yitzhaki M. (1999) The Own-Language Preference: Measures of Relative Language Self-Citation // Scientometrics.
Vol. 45. 2. P. 217232.
Garfield E. (1976) English An international language for science, The Information Scientist // Essays of an Information Scientist. Vol. 1.
P. 1920. ISI Press.
Glnzel W., Lange C. (1997) Modelling and Measuring Multilateral Co-Authorship in International Scientific Collaboration. Part II.
A Comparative Study on the Extent and Change of International Scientific Collaboration Links // Scientometrics. Vol. 40. 3. P. 605626.
Glnzel W., Lange C. (2002) A distributional approach to multinationality measures of international scientific collaboration // Scientometrics.
Vol. 54. 1. P. 7589.
Glnzel W., Schubert A., Czerwon H. J. (1999) A bibliometric analysis of international scientific cooperation of the European Union
(19851995) // Scientometrics. Vol. 45. P. 185202.
Gokhberg L., Pislyakov V. (2008) Assessing the Relative Standing of Russian Science through a Set of Citation and Publication Indicators.
Excellence and Emergence // Book of Abstracts. 10th International Conference on Science and Technology Indicators. Vienna. P. 400403.
Glnzel W., Lange C. (1997) Modelling and Measuring Multilateral Co-authorship in International Scientific Collaboration. Part I.
Development of a New Model Using a Series Expansion Approach // Scientometrics. Vol. 49. 3. P. 593604.
Luukkonen T., Tijssen R.J.W., Persson O., Silvertsen G. (1993) The measurement of international scientific collaboration // Scientometrics.
Vol. 28. P. 1536.
Luwel M. (1999) Is the Science Citation Index US-biased? // Scientometrics. Vol. 46. 3. P. 549562.
MacRoberts M.H., MacRoberts B.R. (1989) Problems of citation analysis: a critical review // Journal of the American Society for Information
Science. Vol. 32. 6. P. 430439.
Melin G., Persson O. (1996) Studying research collaboration using co-authorships // Scientometrics. Vol. 36. P. 363377.
Merton R.K. (1968) The Matthew Effect in Science // Science. Vol. 159. 3810. P. 5663.
Merton R.K. (1988) The Matthew Effect in Science II: Cumulative Adxantage and the Symbolism of Intellectual Property // ISIS. Vol. 79. 4.
P. 606623.
Moed H.F., Vriens M. (1989) Possible inaccuracies occurring in citation analysis // Journal of Information Science. Vol. 15. 2. P. 95107.
Nederhof A. J., Moed H. F. (1993) Modelling multinational publication: development of an on-line fractionation approach to measure national
scientific output // Scientometrics. Vol. 27. P. 3952.
Schubert A., Glnzel W. (2006) Cross-national preference in co-authorship, references and citations // Scientometrics. Vol. 69. 2. P. 409428.
Tijssen R.J.W., Visser M.S., van Leeuwen T.N. (2002) Benchmarking international scientific excellence: Are highly cited research papers an
appropriate frame of reference? // Scientometrics. Vol. 54. P. 381397.
van Leeuwen T.N., Moed H.F., Tijssen R.J.W., Visser M.S., van Raan A.F.J. (2000) First evidence of serious language-bias in the use of citation
analysis for the evaluation of national science systems // Research Evaluation. Vol. 9. P. 155156.
van Raan A.F.J. (2000) The Pandoras box of citation analysis: measuring scientific excellence the last evil? // Corin B., Atkins H.B. (eds.) The
Web of Knowledge: A Festschrift in Honor of Eugene Garfield. Medford: ASIS.
Wang Y., Wu Y., Pan Y., Ma Z., Rousseau R. (2005) Scientific collaboration in China as reflected in co-authorship // Scientometrics. Vol. 62.
2. P. 183198.
Yitzhaki M. (1998) The language preference in sociology: Measures of language self-citation, relative own-language preference indicator, and
mutual use of languages // Scientometrics. Vol. 41. P. 243254.

2012 . 6. 1 57
Science

Dynamics of Russian and World Science through the


Prism of International Publications
Maxim Kotsemir
Junior Research Fellow, Research Laboratory for Science and Technology Studies, Institute for Statistical Studies and Economics of
Knowledge, National Research University Higher School of Economics. Address: National Research University Higher School of
Economics, 20 Myasnitskaya str., Moscow, 101000, Russian Federation. E-mail: mkotsemir@hse.ru

Abstract

T
his paper analyses publication activities of scientists of science, identified as specializations. In particular, the
in Russia and selected other countries for a cross- level of citation of the most highly Russian publications is
country comparison of their integration into the noted. Also, the paper focuses on the integration of Russian
global scientific community. It adds to the literature researchers in the international scientific community, as
assessing global, regional and national trends in knowledge measured by the number of publications co-authored with
production to help policy makers develop a more flexible foreign researchers. Finally, it reviews the methodological
and effective science policy. approaches of the evaluation of citations, focusing on
It provides an overview of the dynamics of main resulting problems which require further investigations.
indicators of scientific publications and their citation in The analysis shows that Russia has lost more
Russia and leading countries over the period 19952010. international status in scientific publishing activity than
Based on this analysis, the author estimates Russias position other countries of the studied sample. At the same time the
within the global scientific community. The data are other BRIC nations as well as some other developing Asian
drawn from Scopus and the Web of Science databases. For countries have significantly improved their international
Russia, the focus is on publication activity in specific areas positioning in this regard.

Keywords
publication activity, bibliometric indicators, publication activity in Russia, Russian Federation, scientific publications, cross-country
analysis, place of Russia in the global scientific community, structure of publications, index of scientific specialization, levels of citation,
highly cited publications, international co-authorship, Scopus, Web of Science.

References

Aksnes D.W., Sivertsen G. (2004) The effect of highly cited papers on national citation indicators. Scientometrics, vol. 59, no 2,
pp. 213224.
Arunachalam S., Doss M.J. (2000) Mapping international collaboration in science in Asia through co-authorship analysis. Current
Science, vol. 79, no 5, pp. 621628.
Batygin G. (2001) Effekt Matfeya: nakoplennoe preimushchestvo i raspredelenie statusov v nauke [Matthew Effect: Cumulative
Advantage and the Distribution of Statuses in Science]. Vedomosti, Tyumen Oil and Gas University, Institute for Applied Ethics, no 18,
pp. 173185.
Bointz M. (2002) Rank of Nations and Heightened Competition in Matthew Core Journals: Two Faces of the Matthew Effect for
Countries. Library Trends, vol. 50, no 3, pp. 440460.
Bointz M. (2005) Ten Years Matthew Effect for Countries. Scientometrics, vol. 64, no 3, pp. 375379.
Bointz M., Bruckner E., Sharnhorst A. (1997) Characteristics and Impact of the Matthew Effect for Countries. Scientometrics, vol. 40,
no 3, pp. 407422.
Bookstein A., Moed H., Yitzhaki M. (2006) Measures of International Collaboration in Scientific Literature: Part I. Information Processing
and Management, vol. 42, pp. 14081421.
Bookstein A., Moed H., Yitzhaki M. (2006) Measures of international collaboration in scientific literature: Part II. Information Processing
and Management, vol. 42, pp. 14221442.
Bookstein A., Yitzhaki M. (1999) Own-Language Preference: A New Measure of Relative Language Self-Citation. Scientometrics, vol. 46,
no 2, pp. 337348.
Carpenter M.P., Narin F. (1981) The adequacy of the Science Citation Index (SCI) as an indicator of international scientific activity.
Journal of the American Society for Information Science, vol. 32, no 6, pp. 430439.

58 FORESIGHT-RUSSIA Vol. 6. No 1 2012


Science

Egghe L., Rousseau R., Yitzhaki M. (1999) The Own-Language Preference: Measures of Relative Language Self-Citation. Scientometrics,
vol. 45, no 2, pp. 217232.
Garfield E. (1976) English An International Language for Science. Essays of an Information Scientist, vol. 1, ISI Press, pp. 1920.
Glnzel W., Lange C. (1997) Modelling and Measuring Multilateral Co-Authorship in International Scientific Collaboration. Part II.
A Comparative Study on the Extent and Change of International Scientific Collaboration Links. Scientometrics, vol. 40, no 3,
pp. 605626.
Glnzel W., Lange C. (1997) Modelling and Measuring Multilateral Co-authorship in International Scientific Collaboration. Part I.
Development of a New Model Using a Series Expansion Approach. Scientometrics, vol. 49, no 3, pp. 593604.
Glnzel W., Lange C. (2002) A distributional approach to multinationality measures of international scientific collaboration.
Scientometrics, vol. 54, no 1, pp. 7589.
Glnzel W., Schubert A., Czerwon H.J. (1999) A bibliometric analysis of international scientific cooperation of the European Union
(19851995). Scientometrics, vol. 45, pp. 185202.
Gokhberg L. (ed.) (2011) Rossiiskii innovatsionnyi indeks [Russian Innovation Index], Moscow: HSE.
Gokhberg L., Pislyakov V. (2008) Assessing the Relative Standing of Russian Science through a Set of Citation and Publication Indicators.
Excellence and Emergence. Book of Abstracts.10th International Conference on Science and Technology Indicators, Vienna, pp. 400403.
Gokhberg L., Sagieva G. (2007) Rossiiskaya nauka: bibliometricheskie indikatory [Russian Science: Bibliometric Indicators]. Foresight-
Russia, vol. 1, no 1, pp. 4453.
Kirchik O. (2011) Nezametnaya nauka: patterny internatsionalizatsii rossiiskikh nauchnykh publikatsii [Invisible Science: Patterns of
Internationalization of Russian Scientific Publications]. Foresight-Russia, vol. 5, no 3, pp. 3442.
Luukkonen T., Tijssen R.J.W., Persson O., Silvertsen G. (1993) The measurement of international scientific collaboration. Scientometrics,
vol. 28, pp. 1536.
Luwel M. (1999) Is the Science Citation Index US-biased? Scientometrics, vol. 46, no 3, pp. 549562.
MacRoberts M.H., MacRoberts B.R. (1989) Problems of Citation Analysis: A Critical Review. Journal of the American Society for
Information Science, vol. 32, no 6, pp. 430439.
Melin G., Persson O. (1996) Studying research collaboration using co-authorships. Scientometrics, vol. 36, pp. 363377.
Merton R.K. (1968) The Matthew Effect in Science. Science, vol. 159, no 3810, pp. 5663.
Merton R.K. (1988) The Matthew Effect in Science II: Cumulative Advantage and the Symbolism of Intellectual Property. ISIS, vol. 79,
no 4, pp. 606623.
Moed H.F., Vriens M. (1989) Possible inaccuracies occurring in citation analysis. Journal of Information Science, vol. 15, no 2, pp. 95107.
Nederhof A.J., Moed H. F. (1993) Modelling Multinational Publication: Development of an On-line Fractionation Approach to Measure
National Scientific Output. Scientometrics, vol. 27, pp. 3952.
Pislyakov V. (2010) Soavtorstvo rossiiskikh uchenykh s zarubezhnymi kollegami: publikatsii i ikh tsitiruemost [Co-authorship of Russian
Scientists with Foreign Colleagues: Publications and Their Citation]. Preprint WP6/2010/01, Moscow: HSE.
Pislyakov V., Dyachenko E. (2009) Effekt Matveya v tsitirovanii statei rossiiskikh uchenykh, opublikovannykh za rubezhom [Matthew
Effect in Citation of Russian International Publications]. NTI, Information processes and systems, vol. 2, no 3, pp. 1924.
Schubert A., Glnzel W. (2006) Cross-national preference in co-authorship, references and citations. Scientometrics, vol. 69, no 2,
pp. 409428.
Tijssen R.J.W., Visser M.S., Van Leeuwen T.N. (2002) Benchmarking International Scientific Excellence: Are Highly Cited Research
Papers an Appropriate Frame of Reference. Scientometrics, vol. 54, pp. 381397.
van Leeuwen T.N., Moed H.F., Tijssen R.J.W., Visser M.S., van Raan A.F.J. (2000) First Evidence of Serious Language-bias in the Use of
Citation Analysis for the Evaluation of National Science Systems. Research Evaluation, vol. 9, pp. 155156.
the Last Evil? The Web of Knowledge:
Van Raan A.F.J. (2000) The Pandoras Box of Citation Analysis: Measuring Scientific Excellence
A Festschrift in Honour of Eugene Garfield (eds. Corin B., Atkins H.B.), Medford: ASIS.
Wang Y., Wu Y., Pan Y., Ma Z., Rousseau R. (2005) Scientific collaboration in China as reflected in co-authorship. Scientometrics, vol. 62,
no 2, pp. 183198.
Yitzhaki M. (1998) The Language Preference in Sociology: Measures of Language Self-Citation, Relative Own-language Preference
Indicator, and Mutual Use of Languages. Scientometrics, vol. 41, pp. 243254.

2012 Vol. 6. No 1 FORESIGHT-RUSSIA 59