Online bibliographic databases have enabled new research through which bibliographic records are analyzed as data about science. Within these records, the acknowledgements sections of papers are often used to draw conclusions about funding support for published research. While acknowledgements and funding statements can be informative for research and policy development, this poster adds to a body of literature that highlights limitations of funding data for scientometric and policy research, using evidence gathered from a questionnaire of authors of astronomy journal articles. The study shows that only 71.4% of a sample of authors of papers tied to NSF grants through acknowledgements reported in the survey that NSF funded the research presented in the respective papers. A brief analysis of the questionnaire followed by recommendations and considerations for further research are presented. The discrepancy in reporting appears to indicate that funding streams can be fluid and not always apparent to authors, overall raising the question of what sorts of research should be addressed with funding statements, where conceptually tying a paper directly to a grant is not straightforward.
翻译:在线书目数据库使新的研究得以进行,通过这些研究将书目记录作为科学数据加以分析,在这些记录中,文件的确认部分常常被用来就为已出版的研究提供资金支持得出结论;虽然确认和供资说明可以对研究和政策制定提供信息,但这一招贴画增加了大量文献,其中利用天文学期刊文章作者问卷收集的证据,突出了为科学计量和政策研究提供资金数据的局限性;研究显示,只有71.4%的与国家战略框架赠款挂钩的论文的作者抽样通过调查所报告的国家战略框架为相关文件中的研究提供资金;对调查问卷进行了简要分析,随后提出了供进一步研究的建议和考虑;报告方面的差异似乎表明,供资流流流不易,但作者并不总是看得见,总体上提出了应当用供资说明处理何种研究的问题,而将文件直接与赠款挂钩的概念并不简单明了。