Metrics employed in the evaluation of research productivity: A systematic literature review

Abstract

The present paper makes a systematic review of 131 articles on research productivity basing upon a model developed by Denyer and Tranfield. The current review paper analyzed the quantitative and qualitative dimensions of the sample literature in the field of research productivity. The quantitative analysis incorporates the chronological distribution of articles, keyword wise distribution, form wise distribution, discipline wise distribution, publisher wise distribution, data sources used in the articles, most prolific journals of the publications and qualitative dimensions studied are top-cited articles and all the metrices used in these articles. The paper is based upon literature retrieved from Scopus bibliographic database and other online databases like Emerald, Taylor & Francis, Google Scholar, JSTOR, ProQuest, and EBSCO for full-text articles. It was revealed that there is significant growth in the number of articles during the fourth decade (2011–2020) whereas the highest numbers of citations (1530) have been received during the third decade from 2001 to 2010. Journal articles appeared to be the predominant source of information. A wide range of metrices found to be used in the sample literature to analyze the research productivity namely basic metrics, metrics dealing with growth, collaboration and metrics at institute level and author level metrics. It will serve as a reference tool to the scholars and practitioners in the field who will be acquainted with the publications on research productivity as well as various metrices, laws of bibliometrics, statistical tools, used in the articles.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 12 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.