When the Data Don’t Mean What They Say: Japan’s Comparative Underperformance in Citation Impact

Abstract

The significant gap in citation impact performance between Japan and other nations with advanced scientific research systems invites investigation. The honoree of this festschrift has explored national science indicators and has warned against oversimple readings of citation rates as measures of merit alone. Many factors contribute to citation impact. This chapter examines the publication and citation record for Japan according to language of publication, average number of authors, international collaboration, researcher mobility, self-citation, and national research focus and diversity. These factors influencing citations (FICs) appear by themselves inadequate to explain Japan’s underperformance in citation impact. An additional FIC for Japan is substantial publication in venues that have a more national than international orientation, and it is proposed here that this significantly dampens the citation opportunity of many Japanese papers. A structural deficit in citation impact, moreover, is likely amplified over time through cumulative disadvantage. A science policymaker or journalist may easily misconstrue the meaning of a national citation rate relative to other countries and, as in Japan’s case, conclude that the nation’s research is qualitatively below world average. In fact, national science indicators for Japan have been interpreted in these terms by the Japanese government and the press. Citation indicators of national research performance require, as Henk Moed has repeatedly demonstrated, careful interpretation.