|
|
|
| A Comparative Study of High-Level Basic Research Talents Between China and the United States ——Based on Data Analysis of ESI Highly Cited Scientists |
| Wang Chao1,2, Ma Ming1,3, Xu Haiyun4, Wu Huawei5, Zhu Shiwei1,2, Yu Junfeng1,2 |
1. Qilu University of Technology Shandong Academy of Sciences,Jinan 250014,China;
2. Information Research Institute of Shandong Academy of Sciences,Jinan 250014,China;
3. Institute of Science and Technology for Development of Shandong,Jinan 250014,China;
4. Business School,Shandong University of Technology, Zibo 255000,China;
5. Archives of Northwest Normal University,Lanzhou 730070,China |
|
|
|
|
Abstract At present,the basic research capabilities and output of China's science and technology are still important shortcomings that need to be made up,and innovative talents,especially high-level basic research talents,are the main force to promote original innovation and strengthen basic research.First of all,this article takes ESI highly cited scientists as representatives of high-level basic research talents,and selects Chinese and American scientists in the list of ESI highly cited scientists from 2014 to 2019 as the research objects.Secondly,this article analyzes the differences between China and the United States by comparing the spatial distribution of talents,subject areas,and affiliated institutions.Then,this article further obtains the high-level basic research results of talents in China and the United States,and conducts comparative research in terms of the number of results,funding sources and influence,and basic research cooperation.Finally,through comparative analysis,this article summarizes the comparative results and gives corresponding suggestions in order to provide valuable references for the training,introduction,management and formulation of talent policies of our country's high-level basic research talents.
|
|
Received: 02 March 2021
|
|
|
|
|
|
[1]ABRAMO G,D'ANGELO C A,SOLDATENKOVA A.The ratio of top scientists to the academic staff as an indicator of the competitive strength of universities[J].Journal of informetrics,2016,10 (2):596-605.
[2]YANG B,ROUSSEAU R,HUANG S,et al.Do first rate scientists work at first rate organizations[J].Malaysian journal of library & information science,2015,20 (1):47-60.
[3]CHAN H F,TORGLER B.Gender differences in performance of top cited scientists by field and country[J].Scientometrics,2020,125 (3):2421-2447.
[4]ABRAMO G,D'ANGELO C A,DI COSTA F.A gender analysis of top scientists'collaboration behavior:evidence from Italy[J].Scientometrics,2019,120 (2):405-418.
[5]WAN S,ZHANG N,WANG P,et al.A brief analysis of top scientists in the field of economics and business based on the essential science indicators database[G]//ATANASSOVA I,BERTIN M,MAYR P.16th International Conference on Scientometrics & Informetrics (issi 2017).Leuven:Int Soc Scientometrics & Informetrics-Issi,2017:896-901.
[6]ABRAMO G,D'ANGELO C A,DI COSTA F.The collaboration behavior of top scientists[J].Scientometrics,2019,118 (1):215-232.
[7]司月芳,孙康,朱贻文,等.高被引华人科学家知识网络的空间结构及影响因素[J].地理研究,2020,39 (12):2731-2742.
[8]ABRAMO G,D'ANGELO C A,SOLDATENKOVA A.How long do top scientists maintain their stardom? An analysis by region,gender and discipline:evidence from Italy[J].Scientometrics,2017,110 (2):867-877.
[9]靳军宝,曲建升,吴新年,等.2014—2019年我国高被引科学家跨国 (地区)流动特征研究[J].情报理论与实践,2021,44 (5):1-14.
[10]刘进,钟小琴.全球人工智能人才培养政策比较研究:以中美英加4国为例[J].重庆高教研究,2013 (13):1-15.
[11]吴婷.中美iSchool院校LIS人才培养的比较分析及启示[J].图书馆工作与研究,2017 (2):115-120.
[12]范德尚.中美博士后培养事业的比较分析[J].学术界,2010 (3):217-223+289.
[13]罗丹,李峻.中美创新人才培养衔接比较研究——以四所大学土木工程专业为例[J].高校教育管理,2015,9 (6):35-40.
[14]何兰英,龙大为.中美研究型大学专业设置与人才培养的差异及其启示[J].思想战线,2004 (4):99-102.
[15]庞思勤.中美机械专业课程设置与人才培养模式比较研究[J].中国大学教学,2007 (11):88-91+87.
[16]龚刚敏.中美经贸磋商背景下STEM教育与人才储备比较研究[J].河南师范大学学报 (哲学社会科学版),2019,46 (3):45-51.
[17]李小华,董军.中美人才使用比较及启示[J].北京行政学院学报,2007 (2):108-112.
[18]姜军,武兰芬.基于专利分析的中美纳米技术领域人才分布比较研究[J].科学管理研究,2016,34 (4):84-88.
[19]朱明明,万文涛.中美创新人才成长规律比较分析研究[J].西南民族大学学报 (人文社科版),2017,38 (4):209-217. |
|
|
|
2021, Vol. 
