Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Research Elite of Pakistan: Profile and Determinants of Productivity and Impact

  • Published:
Publishing Research Quarterly Aims and scope

Abstract

This study aimed to explore the determinants of quality, quantity, impact, and excellence of the research produced by the most productive and the highly cited researchers of Pakistan. The study also presented the profile of these impactful and the most prolific researchers of Pakistan. 134 highly cited and the most productive researchers constitute a group of PERs (Pakistani elite researchers). This group of elite researchers produced one-fourth of the country’s scholarly research and received 40% citations’ share over the period of study, from 2009 to 2018. Based on its findings the study provided multiple policy recommendations for researchers, research institutes, policy-makers, the government of Pakistan, and the administrators of universities. The study recommended the researchers to collaborate internationally and publish their research in good quality and open access journals for greater visibility and impact. The study further recommended enhancing the academic-corporate collaboration for user insight-based research. The study found that Islamabad based academic institutions have employed almost half of the elite researchers while the rest half of these researchers are affiliated with the institutions of the rest of the whole country. The majority of the journals publishing scholarly output of Pakistani elite researchers are based in the USA and European countries. Only 12 (0.32%) journals belonged to Pakistan. Besides international collaboration, industry collaboration was in place for this group of elite researchers. The key determinants of research quantity/quality, impact, and excellence were publications published in 1st and 2nd journals quartiles, journals having impact factor/citescore, open access publications, and international collaborations.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Makri A. Pakistan and Egypt had highest rises in research output in 2018. Nature 2018.

  2. Herciu I. Pakistan: Another BRIC in the Wall. 2016.

  3. Shils E. The Academic Profession in India. In: Leach E, Mukherjee SN, editors. Elites in South Asia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1970. p. 172–200.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Rahman T. Language, education, and culture. Karachi: Oxford University Press; 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Khattak SG. Research in difficult settings: reflections on Pakistan and Afghanistan, 2009.

  6. Khalid SM, Fayyaz Khan M. Pakistan: the State of Education, 2006.

  7. Warriach NF, Tahira M. Impact of Information and Communication Technologies on Research Development: a Case of University of the Punjab-Pakistan. Pak J Inf Manag Libr. 2014;15:47–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Mahmood K, Shafique F. Changing research scenario in Pakistan and demand for research qualified LIS professionals. Libr Rev. 2010;59(4):291–303.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Lodhi AS. A pilot study of researching the research culture in Pakistani public universities: the academics’ perspective. Procedia Soc Behav Sci. 2012;31(2011):473–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Chan TH, Tse CH. Profiling Lead Researchers in Advertising Research. In: Advances in Advertising Research, vol. VII. Wiesbaden: Springer; 2017, p. 297–315.

  11. Basu A. Using ISI’s ‘highly cited researchers’ to obtain a country level indicator of citation excellence. Scientometrics. 2006;68(3):361–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Abramo G, Cicero T, D’Angelo CA. Are the authors of highly cited articles also the most productive ones ? J Informetr. 2014;8(1):89–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Parker JN, Allesina S, Lortie CJ. Characterizing a scientific elite (B): Publication and citation patterns of the most highly cited scientists in environmental science and ecology. Scientometrics. 2013;94(2):469–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Stern RS, Arndt KA. Top-cited dermatology authors publishing in 5 ‘high-impact’ general medical journals. Arch Dermatol. 2000;136(3):357–61.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Peng MW, Zhou JQ. Most cited articles and authors in global strategy research. J Int Manag. 2006;12(4):490–508.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Docampo D, Cram L. Highly cited researchers: a moving target. Scientometrics. 2019;118(3):1011–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Podlubny I, Kassayova K. Towards a better list of citation superstars: compiling a multidisciplinary list of highly cited researchers. Res Eval. 2006;15(3):154–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Goodall AH. Highly cited leaders and the performance of research universities. Res Policy. 2009;38(7):1079–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Larivière V, Costas R. How many is too many? On the relationship between research productivity and impact. PLoS ONE. 2016;11(9):e0162709.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Hayati Z, Ebrahimy S. Correlation between quality and quantity in scientific production : A case study of Iranian organizations from 1997 to 2006 Correlation between quality and quantity in scientific production : a case study of Iranian organizations from 1997 to 2006; 2009.

  21. Bosquet C, Combes PP. Are academics who publish more also more cited? Individual determinants of publication and citation records. Scientometrics. 2013;97(3):831–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Sandströ U, Van Den Besselaar P. Quantity and/or quality? The importance of Publishing Many Papers, 2016.

  23. Tahamtan I, Safipour Afshar A, Ahamdzadeh K. Factors affecting number of citations: a comprehensive review of the literature. Scientometrics. 2016;107(3):1195–225.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Rutledge R, Karim K. Determinants of coauthorship for the most productive authors of accounting literature. J Educ Bus. 2009;84(3):130–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Confraria H, Blanckenberg J, Swart C. The characteristics of highly cited researchers in Africa. Res Eval. 2018;27(3):222–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Parker JN, Lortie C, Allesina S. Characterizing a scientific elite: The social characteristics of the most highly cited scientists in environmental science and ecology. Scientometrics. 2010;85(1):129–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Bornmann L, Bauer J, Schlagberger EM. Characteristics of highly cited researchers 2015 in Germany. Scientometrics. 2017;111(1):543–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Mayrath MC. Attributions of productive authors in educational psychology journals. Educ Psychol Rev. 2008;20(1):41–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Crase D. Highly productive scholars: what drives them toward success? J Phys Educ Recreat Danc. 1993;64(6):80–3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Javed Y, Ahmad S, Khahro SH. Evaluating the Research Performance of Islamabad-Based Higher Education Institutes. SAGE Open. 2020;10(1):2158244020902085.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Mahbuba D, Rousseau R. Scientific research in the Indian subcontinent: selected trends and indicators 1973–2007 comparing Bangladesh, Pakistan and Sri Lanka with India, the local giant. Scientometrics. 2010;84(2):403–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Uddin A, Singh VK. Measuring research output and collaboration in South Asian countries. Curr Sci. 2014;107:31–8.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Javed SA, Liu S. Predicting the research output/growth of selected countries: application of Even GM (1, 1) and NDGM models. Scientometrics. 2018;115(1):395–413.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Badar K, Hite JM, Badir YF. Examining the relationship of co-authorship network centrality and gender on academic research performance: the case of chemistry researchers in Pakistan. Scientometrics. 2013;94(2):755–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Bajwa RS, Yaldram K. Bibliometric analysis of biotechnology research in Pakistan. Scientometrics. 2013;95(2):529–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Jan SU. Collaborative research in economics in Pakistan: the case of Pakistan Development Review from 1973 to 2009. Libr Philos Pract. 2013;1016:171–81.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Naseer MM, Mahmood K. Use of bibliometrics in LIS research. Libres. 2009;19(2):1–11.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Qayyum M, Naseer MM. Bio-bibliometric Study of Dr. Khalid Mahmood’s Contributions to LIS Field in Pakistan. Libr Philos Pract, 2013; 16.

  39. Kousar M, Mahmood K. Dr. Syed Jalaludin Haider: A bio-bibliometric study. Pak J Libr Inf Sci 2010.

  40. Kwiek M. The European research elite: a cross-national study of highly productive academics in 11 countries. High Educ. 2016;71(3):379–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. de Freitas S, Mayer I, Arnab S, Marshal I. Industrial and academic collaboration: hybrid models for research and innovation diffusion. J High Educ Policy Manag. 2014;36(1):2–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Abramo G, D’Angelo CA, Solazzi M. The relationship between scientists’ research performance and the degree of internationalization of their research. Scientometrics. 2011;86(3):629–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Wang L, Thijs B, Glänzel W. Characteristics of international collaboration in sport sciences publications and its influence on citation impact. Scientometrics. 2015;105(2):843–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Prince Sultan University, Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia

    Shakil Ahmad

  2. Imam Abdulrehman Bin Faisal University, P.O. Box 1982, Dammam, Saudi Arabia

    Inaam Ullah Qureshi

  3. Fair Information, Lahore, Pakistan

    Muhammad Ramzan

  4. Institute of Information Management, University of the Punjab, Lahore, Pakistan

    Shafiq Ur Rehman

Authors
  1. Shakil Ahmad
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Inaam Ullah Qureshi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Muhammad Ramzan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Shafiq Ur Rehman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Shakil Ahmad.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ahmad, S., Qureshi, I.U., Ramzan, M. et al. Research Elite of Pakistan: Profile and Determinants of Productivity and Impact. Pub Res Q 38, 263–280 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12109-022-09874-5

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12109-022-09874-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation