Original paper
Artificial selection versus natural selection: Which causes the Matthew effect of science funding allocation in China?
Abstract
To investigate either artificial or natural selection leads to the Matthew effect in the science funding allocation and its consequences, this study retrieves 274,732 publications by Chinese scientists from the Web of Science and examines how the disparity of science funding determines scientists’ research performance. We employ the Negative Binomial Model and other models to regress the publication’s citation times, which measures the research...
Paper Details
Title
Artificial selection versus natural selection: Which causes the Matthew effect of science funding allocation in China?
Published Date
May 3, 2020
Journal
Volume
47
Issue
3
Pages
434 - 445
Citation AnalysisPro
You’ll need to upgrade your plan to Pro
Looking to understand the true influence of a researcher’s work across journals & affiliations?
- Scinapse’s Top 10 Citation Journals & Affiliations graph reveals the quality and authenticity of citations received by a paper.
- Discover whether citations have been inflated due to self-citations, or if citations include institutional bias.
Notes
History