Publications of Patrick Herron    :chronological  alphabetical  combined listing:

%% Articles Published   
@article{fds317939,
   Author = {Herron, P and Mehta, A and Cao, C and Lenoir, T},
   Title = {Research diversification and impact: the case of national
             nanoscience development},
   Journal = {Scientometrics},
   Volume = {109},
   Number = {2},
   Pages = {629-659},
   Publisher = {Springer Nature},
   Year = {2016},
   Month = {November},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-2062-7},
   Abstract = {© 2016, Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary. Newcomer
             nations, promoted by developmental states, have poured
             resources into nanotechnology development, and have
             dramatically increased their nanoscience research influence,
             as measured by research citation. Some achieved these gains
             by producing significantly higher impact papers rather than
             by simply producing more papers. Those nations gaining the
             most in relative strength did not build specializations in
             particular subfields, but instead diversified their
             nanotechnology research portfolios and emulated the global
             research mix. We show this using a panel dataset covering
             the nanotechnology research output of 63 countries over
             12 years. The inverse relationship between research
             specialization and impact is robust to several ways of
             measuring both variables, the introduction of controls for
             country identity, the volume of nanoscience research output
             (a proxy for a country’s scientific capability) and
             home-country bias in citation, and various attempts to
             reweight and split the samples of countries and journals
             involved. The results are consistent with scientific
             advancement by newcomer nations being better accomplished
             through diversification than specialization.},
   Doi = {10.1007/s11192-016-2062-7},
   Key = {fds317939}
}

@article{fds317940,
   Author = {Bernhardt, B and Herndon, J and Herron, P and Smith, K and Strong, R and Miller, H},
   Title = {Revolutionizing scholarship: A panel discussion on text and
             data mining},
   Journal = {Serials Review},
   Volume = {41},
   Number = {3},
   Pages = {184-186},
   Publisher = {Informa UK Limited},
   Year = {2015},
   Month = {January},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00987913.2015.1064514},
   Abstract = {© Beth Bernhardt, Joel Herndon, Patrick Herron, Kevin
             Smith, Roger Strong, and Hillary Miller. The panel
             discussion at the 24th North Carolina Serials Conference,
             moderated by Beth Bernhardt, offered four different
             perspectives on text and data mining from Patrick Herron, a
             faculty member who employs text and data mining in his
             research; Kevin Smith, an academic library scholarly
             communications officer; Joel Herndon, a data and
             visualization specialist; and Roger Strong, a vendor
             representative. Each discussed their perspective on how text
             and data mining is changing the way that electronic
             resources are used. A question-and-answer session followed
             the panel discussion.},
   Doi = {10.1080/00987913.2015.1064514},
   Key = {fds317940}
}

@article{fds317941,
   Author = {Patrick Herron and TL},
   Title = {The NCI and the Takeoff of Nanomedicine},
   Journal = {Journal of Nanomedicine & Biotherapeutic
             Discovery},
   Volume = {05},
   Number = {03},
   Publisher = {OMICS Publishing Group},
   Year = {2015},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.4172/2155-983x.1000135},
   Doi = {10.4172/2155-983x.1000135},
   Key = {fds317941}
}

@article{fds317942,
   Author = {Mehta, A and Herron, P and Motoyama, Y and Appelbaum, R and Lenoir,
             T},
   Title = {Globalization and de-globalization in nanotechnology
             research: The role of China},
   Journal = {Scientometrics},
   Volume = {93},
   Number = {2},
   Pages = {439-458},
   Publisher = {Springer Nature},
   Year = {2012},
   Month = {January},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11192-012-0687-8},
   Abstract = {The share of nanotechnology publications involving authors
             from more than one country more than doubled in the 1990s,
             but then fell again until 2004, before recovering somewhat
             during the latter years of the decade. Meanwhile, the share
             of nanotechnology papers involving at least one Chinese
             author increased substantially over the last two decades.
             Papers involving Chinese authors are far less likely to be
             internationally co-authored than papers involving authors
             from other countries. Nonetheless, this appears to be
             changing as Chinese nanotechnology research becomes more
             advanced. An arithmetic decomposition confirms that China's
             growing share of such research accounts, in large part, for
             the observed stagnation of international collaboration. Thus
             two aspects of the globalization of science can work in
             opposing directions: diffusion to initially less
             scientifically advanced countries can depress international
             collaboration rates, while at the same time scientific
             advances in such countries can reverse this trend. We find
             that the growth of China's scientific community explains
             some, but not all of the dynamics of China's international
             collaboration rate. We therefore provide an institutional
             account of these dynamics, drawing on Stichweh's [Social
             Science information 35(2):327-340, 1996] original paper on
             international scientific collaboration, which, in examining
             the interrelated development of national and international
             scientific networks, predicts a transitional phase during
             which science becomes a more national enterprise, followed
             by a phase marked by accelerating international
             collaboration. Validating the application of this approach,
             we show that Stichweh's predictions, based on European
             scientific communities in the 18th and 19th centuries, seem
             to apply to the Chinese scientific community in the 21st
             century. © 2012 Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest,
             Hungary.},
   Doi = {10.1007/s11192-012-0687-8},
   Key = {fds317942}
}

@article{fds317943,
   Author = {Lenoir, T and Herron, P},
   Title = {Tracking the current rise of chinese pharmaceutical
             bionanotechnology.},
   Journal = {Journal of Biomedical Discovery and Collaboration},
   Volume = {4},
   Pages = {8},
   Year = {2009},
   Month = {January},
   Abstract = {BACKGROUND: THE CONTEXT AND PURPOSE OF THE STUDY: Over the
             last decade China has emerged as a major producer of
             scientific publications, currently ranking second behind the
             US. During that time Chinese strategic policy initiatives
             have placed indigenous innovation at the heart of its
             economy while focusing internal R&D investments and the
             attraction of foreign investment in nanotechnology as one of
             their four top areas. China's scientific research
             publication and nanotechnology research publication
             production has reached a rank of second in the world, behind
             only the US. Despite these impressive gains, some scholars
             argue that the quality of Chinese nanotech research is
             inferior to US research quality due to lower overall times
             cited rates, suggesting that the US is still the world
             leader. We combine citation analysis, text mining, mapping,
             and data visualization to gauge the development and
             application of nanotechnology in China, particularly in
             biopharmananotechnology, and to measure the impact of
             Chinese policy on nanotechnology research production.
             RESULTS, THE MAIN FINDINGS: Our text mining-based methods
             provide results that counter existing claims about Chinese
             nanotechnology research quality. Due in large part to its
             strategic innovation policy, China's output of
             nanotechnology publications is on pace to surpass US
             production in or around 2012.A closer look at Chinese
             nanotechnology research literature reveals a large increase
             in research activity in China's biopharmananotechnology
             research since the implementation in January, 2006 of
             China's Medium & Long Term Scientific and Technological
             Development Plan Guidelines for the period 2006-2020
             ("MLP"). CONCLUSIONS, BRIEF SUMMARY AND POTENTIAL
             IMPLICATIONS: Since the implementation of the MLP, China has
             enjoyed a great deal of success producing bionano research
             findings while attracting a great deal of foreign investment
             from pharmaceutical corporations setting up advanced drug
             discovery operations. Given the combination of current
             scientific production growth as well as economic growth, a
             relatively low scientific capacity, and the ability of its
             policy to enhance such trends, China is in some sense
             already the new world leader in nanotechnology. Further, the
             Chinese national innovation system may be the new standard
             by which other national S&T policies should be
             measured.},
   Key = {fds317943}
}