The DOI matches its Crossref record; 41 of the 41 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Academic research in innovation: a country analysis
Open accessAbstract
Many countries are investing a lot in innovation in order to modernize their economies. A key step in this process is the development of academic research in innovation. This article analyzes the leading countries in innovation research between 1989 and 2013 from an academic perspective. The aim of the study is to identify the most relevant countries in this field and the leading trends that are occurring during the last years. The work also introduces a general perspective analyzing the research developed in several supranational regions. The main advantage of this contribution is that it gives a global overview of the current academic state of the art in the area. The analysis focuses on the most productive and influential countries in innovation research classifying the results in periods of 5 years. The leading journals in the field are also studied individually identifying the most productive countries in each of the journals. The results show that the publications of each country are biased by the country origin of the journal. The USA and the UK are the leading countries in this field being the UK the most productive one in per capita terms among the big countries.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping
van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2010) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-009-0146-3 · Cited by 21,484
An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output
Hirsch, J. E. (2005) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0507655102 · Cited by 11,669
(1934) · SSRN Electronic Journal · Cited by 7,609
The journal coverage of Web of Science and Scopus: A comparative analysis
Mongeon, P., & Paul-Hus, A. (2016) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-015-1765-5 · Cited by 5,274
Moffitt, R. A. (2009) · American Economic Review · doi:10.1257/aer.99.2.660 · Cited by 4,694
R D spillovers and the geography of innovation and production
Feldmann, M., & Audretsch, D. B. (1994) · OpenGrey (Institut de l'Information Scientifique et Technique) · Cited by 2,673
Theory and practise of the g-index
Egghe, L. (2006) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-006-0144-7 · Cited by 2,354
Toward a definition of “bibliometrics”
Broadus, R. N. (1987) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/bf02016680 · Cited by 1,646
Alonso, S., Cabrerizo, F. J., Herrera-Viedma, E., & Herrera, F. (2009) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2009.04.001 · Cited by 848
Measuring Scholarly Impact: Methods and Practice
(2014) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-10377-8 · Cited by 675
Cited by
Future Trends and Current State of Smart City Concepts: A Survey
Kirimtat, A., Krejcar, O., Kertesz, A., & Tasgetiren, M. F. (2020) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2020.2992441 · Cited by 452
Mas-Tur, A., Roig-Tierno, N., Sarin, S., Haon, C., Sego, T., Belkhouja, M., Porter, A., & Merigó, J. M. (2021) · Technological Forecasting and Social Change · doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2020.120487 · Cited by 147
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Merigó, J. M., Cancino, C. A., Coronado, F., & Urbano, D.
- Venue
- Scientometrics
- Published
- 2016-05-27
- Volume
- 108
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 559-593
- ISSN
- 0138-9130 (ISSN-L)
- 1588-2861
- OpenAlex
- W2402806665
- Cited by
- 319
- References
- 41
- FWCI
- 22.61
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Academic research in innovation: a country analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/s11192-016-1984-4
- The paper
- Merigó, J. M., Cancino, C. A., Coronado, F., & Urbano, D. (2016). Academic research in innovation: a country analysis. Scientometrics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-1984-4
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
