Geosciences of CNPq From Research Productivity Fellows
The profile of the CNPq Research Productivity Program in Geosciences was studied using the Lattes Plataformcurricula of all researchers with grants in effect on March of 2013. Most of them are male (81,7%), working in institutionslocated in Southeastern Brazil (62,1%). The profile analysis of CNPq R...
| Autores: | , , |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Estado: | Versión publicada |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2017 |
| País: | Brasil |
| Institución: | Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ) |
| Repositorio: | Anuário do Instituto de Geociências (Online) |
| Idioma: | portugués |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:www.revistas.ufrj.br:article/7870 |
| Acceso en línea: | https://revistas.ufrj.br/index.php/aigeo/article/view/7870 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | CNPq; Geosciences; Bibliometric indexes; Research productivity; PQ fellowship CNPq; Geociências; Índices bibliométricos; Produtividade em pesquisa; Bolsista PQ |
| Sumario: | The profile of the CNPq Research Productivity Program in Geosciences was studied using the Lattes Plataformcurricula of all researchers with grants in effect on March of 2013. Most of them are male (81,7%), working in institutionslocated in Southeastern Brazil (62,1%). The profile analysis of CNPq Research Productivity Fellows (PQ) in the threesubfields of Geosciences and in their respective specialties highlighted particularities in regard to the bibliometricindicators used as judging criteria by the Geosciences Advisory Committee (CA-GC). It was observed that there is nohomogeneity among researchers in the same level/category concerning the productivity criteria used by judgers. Althoughquantitative differences in scientific productivity were observed, the data should be used wih caution since qualitativeevaluation of science output has not been studied. |
|---|