This paper presents a systematic review of the literature on hyperprolific authorship to examine how it is defined, investigated, and perceived across disciplines.

Peer review is crucial for academic communities to ensure high-quality research. Drawing on 39 semi-structured interviews, the study investigates how reviewers for three publishing outlets in psychology experience the tension between community responsibility and various priorities of a more individual kind.

Meta-regulation - the rules that govern how individual policies are developed and reviewed - has not received much attention in the study of health policy. Far from value-free and objective, they have however significant potential to shape policy outputs and, as such, health outcomes.

Many Big Science projects and networks experience conflict. Yet, so far, there is no theoretical model that explains which mechanisms connect conflict cause and outbreak in Big Science. 

This article investigates higher-order rich-club phenomena in networks of collaborative research grants among institutions and their associations with research impact. 

Based on the state of research in the Science of Team Science, the question of which intra- and interpersonal factors are most significant for the success of a research team is investigated.

This analysis uncovers new dimensions of migration among scholars by investigating the return migration of published researchers, which is critical for the development of science policy.

This paper develops a new indicator based on an academic's inferred co-presence at conferences. It finds that hierarchy and influence play a stronger role in determining a scientist's performance in the context of informal networks than they do when considering formal co-publication networks.

China created a research evaluation system based on publications indexed in the SCI and on the Journal Impact Factor, which helped China become the largest contributor to scientific literature and increase the position of its universities in global rankings.

More than resource allocations, evaluations of funding applications have become central instances for status bestowal in academia. Much attention in past literature has been devoted to grasping the status consequences of prominent funding evaluations. 

This article explores the effects and interrelationships of seven collaboration problems that arise in the context of the tension between cooperation and competition. 

The Academy of Finland (AKA), Finland's major public research funding agency, uses a Web of Science (WoS) based bibliometric indicator to assess the performance of research it has funded. CRIS-based publication data can support multidimensional assessments of research performance and scholarly communication profiles, potentially also in other countries and institutions. 

This study aimed to reveal how researchers describe the collaboration with partners outside the university in research proposals.

The paper brings together the literature on citizen science and on deliberative democracy and epistemic injustice. 

This paper analyses the interrelations between academic disciplines and society beyond academia by the case of sociology in Norway. 

This paper presents several suggestions for future measurement of the interdisciplinarity of research. 

This study found that the average age of scientists at the time of the breakthrough was higher for researchers from less developed countries. Moreover, individual opportunities in the world were extremely unequal by country of birth, gender significantly conditioned any participation in research, and the probability of becoming a top researcher more than doubled for individuals with parents belonging to the most favoured occupational categories. 

The findings of this study indicate that geographical biases affect public perception of research and influence the results of grant competitions.

This article proposes a text clustering approach to derive contextual aspects of individual citations and the relationship between cited and citing work in an automated and scalable fashion. The method reveals a focal publication's absorption and use within the scientific community. It can also facilitate impact assessments at all levels. 

Apart from generally showing why political scientists publish more or less, this article specifically identifies accumulative advantage as the principal reason why women increasingly fall behind men over the course of their careers.

This is the first scientometric study of the performance of social science research on COVID-19. It provides insight into the landscape, the research fields, and international collaboration in this domain. The results are useful for finding potential collaborators and for identifying the frontier and gaps in social science research on COVID-19 to shape future studies.

Research and development are central to economic growth, and a key challenge for countries of the global South is that their research performance lags behind that of the global North. Yet, among Southern researchers, a few significantly outperform their peers and can be styled research "positive deviants" (PDs). This paper asks: who are those PDs, what are their characteristics and how are they able to overcome some of the challenges facing researchers in the global South? 

One of the most fundamental issues in academia today is understanding the differences between legitimate and questionable publishing. This study's findings show that neither the impact factor of citing journals nor the size of cited journals is a good predictor of the number of citations to the questionable journals.

The question of whether and to what extent research funding enables researchers to be more productive is a crucial one. In their recent work, Mariethoz et al. (Scientometrics, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03.855-1 ) claim that there is no significant relationship between project-based research funding and bibliometric productivity measures and conclude that this is the result of inappropriate allocation mechanisms. In this rejoinder, we argue that such claims are not supported by the data and analyses reported in the article.