Scientometrics Research Journal

Scientometrics Research Journal

The Role of Innovation and Technology in Scientometric Governance

Document Type : Research Paper

Author
Esmaeil Shirali
Associate Professor, Department of History and Social Sciences, Faculty of Literature and Humanities, Velayat University, Iranshahr, Sistan and Baluchestan Province, Iran
10.22070/rsci.2026.21121.1875
Abstract
Purpose: Traditional scientometric tools—such as citation counts, the h-index, journal impact factors, and other quantitative indicators—while useful, have limitations in addressing the complexities of contemporary knowledge networks and rapid scientific developments. These challenges include author name ambiguities, indicator instability, linguistic and regional biases, and difficulties in identifying emerging trends. Given these challenges, integrating innovations and new technologies—such as machine learning, data mining, natural language processing, dynamic network analysis, and artificial intelligence—into the scientometric process has become essential. These technologies can improve accuracy, transparency, fairness, and accountability within the scientific evaluation system. Conversely, the concept of scientometric governance refers to a set of structures, rules, processes, and tools that determine "what and how to measure." Therefore, understanding how technology and innovation influence this governance is a critical issue that has yet to be comprehensively examined. This study aims to achieve several objectives. First, it seeks to ensure that science policymakers and decision-makers rely on scientometric data and indicators to allocate resources and design science development strategies. If these indicators lack sufficient accuracy or transparency, macro-level scientific policies may lead to incorrect or unfair decisions. Second, from a theoretical perspective, this study aims to integrate new technologies with scientific governance theories to enhance the theoretical understanding of how to govern the science evaluation system. Third, with an applied focus, it seeks to promote researchers' trust, reduce errors, and improve the efficiency of scientific evaluation systems through the use of technology in scientometric governance. In summary, this study examines the role of innovation and technology in scientometric governance.
Methodology: The present study is quantitative and descriptive-analytical in nature, employing a survey technique. It is applied research in terms of purpose. The statistical population consisted of scientometric experts, data analysts, experts and managers of scientific evaluation units at universities, as well as representatives of scientific databases, reference libraries, and scientometric service companies in Tehran. Due to the researcher's limitations and the absence of reliable statistics regarding the population, a convenience sampling method was used. Consequently, 100 individuals were selected as the sample. Data collection was conducted through fieldwork, with the researcher actively engaging in the research environment. The data collection instrument was a researcher-designed questionnaire based on English-language articles, utilizing a Likert scale ranging from "completely agree" to "completely disagree." Data analysis was performed at two levels: descriptive analysis for demographic variables and inferential analysis using simple regression to test hypotheses. The software used for analysis was SPSS version 26.
Findings: The results indicate that the use of new technologies in the scientometric process is positively associated with increased accuracy in scientific evaluation. The coefficient of determination reveals that 73 percent of the variance in accuracy is explained by the use of new technologies. Additionally, technological innovation within scientometric frameworks promotes fairness in scientific evaluation, with 64 percent of the variance in fairness explained by such innovation. Further findings show that the use of new technologies enhances transparency in scientometric governance, accounting for 70.2 percent of the variance in transparency. Finally, the coefficient of determination indicates that 61.1 percent of the variance in responsiveness in scientometric governance is explained by the use of new technologies, demonstrating that new technologies also improve responsiveness in this context.
Conclusion: New technologies increase precision by providing tools to measure previously unquantifiable aspects, enabling evaluators to move beyond the limitations of superficial quantitative metrics and gain a deeper understanding of scientific value. Technological innovation advances toward a system of blind scientific evaluation based on merit, replacing subjective judgments or narrow criteria with objective, data-driven measures. These technologies transform scientometric governance from a centralized, opaque process into an open, verifiable, data-consensus-based system, which forms the foundation of trust and credibility within the entire scientific community. Technology shifts accountability from a moral obligation to a structural imperative, where every decision is subject to review, and officials must justify not only the outcomes but also the processes that produced them. Moreover, the adoption of new technologies improves scientometric governance indicators and accelerates the pace of assessments. Such reforms also require clear standards for data quality, model validation, and auditing. Accordingly, integrating advanced technologies into scientometric governance can strengthen evidence-based policymaking and support more adaptive and sustainable scientific evaluation systems.
Keywords
Scientometric governance
Technological innovation
Scientometrics
Data governance
Subjects
دولانی، ع.، رسولی قطورلار، ل.، و غائبی، الف. (1402). بررسی شاخص‌های آلتمتریکس مقالات نشریات پزشکی ایرانی نمایه شده در پایگاه اطلاعاتی پاب‏مد رؤیت شده در رسانه‌های اجتماعی. مطالعات دانش‌پژوهی، 2(4)، 97-123. https://doi.org/10.22034/jkrs.2024.60214.1061
کاشانی، م.، و داستانی، م. (1403). تحلیل روند موضوعی تولیدات علمی پژوهشگران ایرانی در زمینه هوش مصنوعی در علوم پزشکی: مطالعه علم‌سنجی. اطلاع‌‌رسانی پزشکی نوین، ۱۰(۳)، ۲46-۲31.
    https://jmis.hums.ac.ir/article-1-543-fa.html
نوروزی چاکلی، س.، و موسوی خانقاه، الف. (1405). تحلیل ساختار دانشی، تکامل موضوعی و جهت‌گیری‌های آینده و نوظهور در پژوهش‌های طراحی رابط کاربری برای هوش مصنوعی توضیح‌پذیر (XAI) در داشبوردهای تصمیم‌گیری: مطالعه‌ای علم‌سنجی. پژوهش‌نامه علم‌سنجی، ۱۲(۲)، ۲۳۵- ۲۶۸.
    https://rsci.shahed.ac.ir/article_5073.html
نوروزی چاکلی، ع. (1405). سخن سردبیر: علم‌سنجی در آستانه دگرگونی: از سنجش و ارزیابی انسان‌محور تا همزیستی مسئولانه با هوش مصنوعی. پژوهش‌نامه علم‌سنجی، ۱۲(۱)، ۱-۶.
    https://doi.org/10.22070/rsci.2026.5033
نوروزی چاکلی، ع.، نوروزی چاکلی، س.، و نوروزی، ح. (۱۴۰۳). شناسایی ابعاد، چالش‌ها، معیارها، شاخص‌ها و الزامات مطرح در چرخه داوری علمی ارزیابانه عملیاتی و ارائه چارچوبی برای داوری آثار علمی در کشور [گزارش طرح پژوهشی]. وزارت علوم، تحقیقات و فناوری، معاونت پژوهش و فناوری. بازیابی شده در اردیبهشت ۲۵، ۱۴۰۵، از https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.32964269
نوروزی، ی.، رادفر، ح.، و جعفری‌فر، ن. (1402). پژوهش‌های حیطه امنیت اطلاعات در ایران: یک تحلیل علم‌سنجی. تحقیقات کتابداری و اطلاع‌رسانی دانشگاهی، ۵۷(۳)، 95 - 113.
    https://doi.org/10.22059/jlib.2024.367194.1713
Bernardo, B. M. V., Mamede, H. S., Barroso, J. M. P., & dos Santos, V. M. P. D. (2024). Data governance & quality management—Innovation and breakthroughs across different fields. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge, 9(4), 100598.
      https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jik.2024.100598
Bharadwaj, A., El Sawy, O. A., Pavlou, P. A., & Venkatraman, N. (2013). Digital business strategy: Toward a next generation of insights. MIS Quarterly, 37(2), 471–482.
      https://www.jstor.org/stable/43825919
Bornmann, L., & Leydesdorff, L. (2014). Scientometrics in a changing research landscape: Accuracy and integrity in evaluation. Journal of Informetrics, 15(2), 101-113.
      https://doi.org/10.15252/embr.201439608
Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. (1990). Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), 128–152.
      https://doi.org/10.2307/2393553
Danneels, E. (2016). Survey measures of first- and second-order competences. Strategic Management Journal, 37(10), 2174–2188. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2428
Ding, L., Lawson, C. & Shapira, P. (2025). Rise of Generative Artificial Intelligence in Science. Scientometrics, 130, 5093–5114. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-025-05413-z
Dolani, A., Rasouli Qatourlar, L., & Ghaebi, A. (2023). Altmetrics indicators of Iranian medical journal articles indexed in PubMed and mentioned in social media. Knowledge Research Studies, 2(4), 97–123. https://doi.org/10.22034/jkrs.2024.60214.1061 [In Persian].
Doulani, A., Rasouli Ghotorlar, L. & Ghaebi, A. (2024). Review of altmetric index articles of Iranian medical publications indexed in Pubmed information database in scientific social media. Journal of Knowledge-Research Studies, 2(4), 97-123.
      https://doi.org/10.22034/jkrs.2024.60214.1061 [In Persian].
El-Ouahi, J. (2024). Scientometric rules as a guide to transform science systems. Scientometrics, 129, 869-888. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-023-04916-x
Etrati, S. A., Etrati, S. M., Noroozi Chakoli, S., & Haji Seyyed Javadi, H. (2025, December 17-18). Security challenges in large language models across the data life cycle: A cryptography-aware comprehensive review [Conference presentation]. 10th International Conference on Combinatorics, Cryptography, Computer Science and Computation, Iran University of Science & Technology, & Saravan University. Retrieved December 24, 2025, from
https://scholar.google.com/citations?view_op=view_citation&hl=fa&user=YLzRSegAAAAJ&citation_for_view=YLzRSegAAAAJ:u5HHmVD_uO8C
Garcia, R., & Calantone, R. (2002). A critical look at technological innovation typology and innovativeness terminology: a literature review. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 19(2), 110–132. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0737-6782(01)00132-1
Hicks, D., Wouters, P., Waltman, L., de Rijcke, S., & Rafols, I. (2015). Bibliometrics: The Leiden Manifesto for research metrics. Nature, 520(7548), 429–431.
      https://doi.org/10.1038/520429a
Kashani, M., & Dastani, M. (2024). Analysis of thematic trends in scientific publications of Iranian researchers in artificial intelligence for medical sciences: A scientometric study. Journal of Modern Medical Information Science, 10(3), 231-246.
      https://jmis.hums.ac.ir/article-1-543-fa.html [In Persian].
Leydesdorff, L., & Milojević, S. (2015). Scientometrics. In James D. Wright (Ed.), International Encyclopedia of Social and Behavioral Sciences (2nd ed., pp. 322–327). Elsevier.    
      https://arxiv.org/abs/1208.4566
Leydesdorff, L., Rotolo, D., & de Nooy, W. (2013). Innovation as a nonlinear process, the scientometric perspective, and the specification of an Innovation Opportunities Explorer. arXiv. Retrieved June 14, 2024, from https://arxiv.org/abs/1202.6235
Li, H., & Atuahene-Gima, K. (2001). Product innovation strategy and the performance of new technology ventures in China. Academy of Management Journal, 44(6), 1123–1134.
      https://www.jstor.org/stable/3069392
Moher, D., Naudet, F., Cristea, I. A., Miedema, F., Ioannidis, J. P. A., & Goodman, S. N. (2018). Assessing scientists for hiring, promotion, and tenure. PLOS Biology, 16(3), e2004089. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.2004089
Motohashi, K., Koshiba, H., & Ikeuchi, K. (2024). Measuring science and innovation linkage using text mining of research papers and patent information. Scientometrics, 129(4), 2159–2179. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-024-04949-w
Noroozi Chakoli, A. (2026). Note from the Editor-in-Chief: Scientometrics at a turning point: From human-centered assessment and evaluation to responsible coexistence with artificial intelligence. Scientometrics Research Journal, 12(1), 1-6.
      https://doi.org/10.22070/rsci.2026.5033 [In Persian].
Noroozi Chakoli, A., Noroozi Chakoli, S., & Norouzi, H. (2024). Identifying the Dimensions, Challenges, Criteria, Indicators, and Requirements of the Scholarly Peer Review Process and Proposing a Framework for the Evaluation of Scientific Works in Iran [Research project]. Ministry of Science, Research and Technology of Iran, Deputy of Research and Technology. Retrieved May 15, 2026, from https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.32964269
      [In Persian].
Noroozi Chakoli, S., & Mousavi Khaneghah, E. (2026). Analysis of the knowledge structure, thematic evolution, and emerging and future research directions in user interface design for Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) in decision-making dashboards: A scientometric study. Scientometrics Research Journal, 12(2), 235-268.
      https://rsci.shahed.ac.ir/article_5073.html?lang=en [In Persian].
Norouzi, Y., Radfar, H., & JafarFar, N. (2023). Information security research in Iran: A scientometric analysis. Academic Librarianship and Information Research, 57(3), 95-113.
      https://doi.org/10.22059/jlib.2024.367194.1713 [In Persian].
Raman, R., Pattnaik, D., Hughes, L., & Nedungadi, P. (2024). Unveiling the dynamics of AI applications: A review of reviews using scientometrics and BERTopic modeling. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge, 9(3), 100517. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jik.2024.100517
Rijcke, S. de, Wouters, P. F., Rushforth, A. D., Franssen, T. P., & Hammarfelt, B. (2016). Evaluation practices and effects of indicator use—a literature review. Research Evaluation, 25(2), 161–169. https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvv038
Rotolo, D., Rafols, I., Hopkins, M., Leydersdorff, L. (2014). Scientometric Mapping as a Strategic Intelligence Tool for the Governance of Emerging Technologies [Working paper series SWPS 2014-10]. University of Sussex. https://hdl.handle.net/10779/uos.23406140.v1
Saeidnia, H. R., Hosseini, E., Abdoli, S., & Ausloos, M. (2024-a). Unleashing the power of AI: A systematic review of cutting-edge techniques in AI-enhanced Scientometrics, Webometrics, and Bibliometrics. arXiv, 2403.18838. Retrived December 12, 2024, from
      https://arxiv.org/abs/2403.18838
Todorov, L., Shopova, M., Panteleeva, I. M., & Todorova, L. (2024). Innovation Metrics: A Critical Review. Economies, 12(12), 327. https://doi.org/10.3390/economies12120327
Zahra, S. A., & George, G. (2002). Absorptive capacity: A review, reconceptualization, and extension. Academy of Management Review, 27(2), 185–203.
      https://www.jstor.org/stable/4134351
Zhao, Z., Pan, X. & Hua, W.  (2021). Comparative analysis of the research productivity, publication quality, and collaboration patterns of top ranked library and information science schools in China and the United States. Scientometrics, 126, 931–950 (2021).
      https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03796-9
Scientometrics Research Journal
Volume 12, Issue 2 - Serial Number 24
(Issue 2, Autumn & Winter)
October 2026
Pages 503-522