Relationship between bibliometric indicators and university ranking positions

Area of Science:

• Bibliometrics
• Higher Education Rankings
• Scientometrics

Background:

• International university rankings are increasingly used to demonstrate institutional prestige.
• Scientific productivity is a key parameter in many global university ranking systems.
• Diverse ranking methodologies exist, leading to varied outcomes for institutions.

Purpose of the Study:

• To analyze differences between major international university rankings.
• To examine the correlation between bibliometric indicators and university performance across disciplines.
• To inform decision-making for institutions aiming to improve their global standing.

Main Methods:

• Investigated the top 300 universities from four rankings: Times Higher Education (THE), QS World University Rankings (QS), ShanghaiRanking (ARWU), and U.S. News Best Global Universities (USNews).
• Assessed ranking positions, size-related indicators, and bibliometric data.
• Analyzed the weight of scientometric parameters (20%-75%) and key indicators like citations and publications.

Main Results:

• The weight of scientometric parameters varies significantly across rankings (20% in QS to 75% in USNews).
• Key parameters include citations, international reputation, and researcher numbers, with varying correlation strengths.
• Universities excelling in size-independent rankings (QS, THE) tend to have fewer students.
• High-impact research improves positions in ARWU and USNews.
• THE rankings favor social sciences, while USNews and QS favor science, technology, and medicine.

Conclusions:

• Different university ranking systems prioritize distinct bibliometric and qualitative indicators.
• Understanding these differences is crucial for institutions seeking to enhance their global visibility.
• The study highlights the complex interplay between research output, disciplinary focus, and international university standing.