<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 12 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Consolas;
panose-1:2 11 6 9 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p.MsoPlainText, li.MsoPlainText, div.MsoPlainText
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Plain Text Char";
margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:Consolas;}
span.PlainTextChar
{mso-style-name:"Plain Text Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Plain Text";
font-family:Consolas;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;}
@page WordSection1
{size:612.0pt 792.0pt;
margin:72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
/* List Definitions */
@list l0
{mso-list-id:2011521434;
mso-list-type:hybrid;
mso-list-template-ids:-41416150 1146491026 201916441 201916443 201916431 201916441 201916443 201916431 201916441 201916443;}
@list l0:level1
{mso-level-text:"\(%1\)";
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
margin-left:54.0pt;
text-indent:-36.0pt;}
ol
{margin-bottom:0cm;}
ul
{margin-bottom:0cm;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=EN-AU link=blue vlink=purple><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoPlainText>Thank you Andrew. Exactly true, but that simply says that the task is harder; it does not make it undesirable. I simply am not interested in counting articles except as this helps in establishing the question I asked. Counting articles has been done many times by people with more money than I have and the estimates are still quite wide-spread, though satisfactory as engineering estimates. Similar problems arise win publications with the fake journals and the quality spectrum (exactly the same problem you referred to in relation to counting researchers).<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>To tease out another category you did not mention I have coined the terms <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText style='margin-left:54.0pt;text-indent:-36.0pt;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1'><![if !supportLists]><span style='mso-list:Ignore'>(1)<span style='font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"'> </span></span><![endif]>'producing researcher' to be a person who adds to the scholarly literature as an author or co-author at least once every three years, and<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText style='margin-left:54.0pt;text-indent:-36.0pt;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1'><![if !supportLists]><span style='mso-list:Ignore'>(2)<span style='font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"'> </span></span><![endif]>'non-productive researcher' as a person who researches the scholarly literature but has no intention of adding to the corpus, such as a teacher (school to university-level), a science journalist, most undergraduate students, or a member of the general public.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>The words 'active' vs 'non-active' simply will not do. <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>I have been pointed to a UNESCO Report which is proving very useful. I’ll post something when I have more to write and a better estimate than 1M < N <10M.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Best wishes<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Arthur Sale<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>University of Tasmania, Australia<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span lang=EN-US>-----Original Message-----<br>From: goal-bounces@eprints.org [mailto:goal-bounces@eprints.org] On Behalf Of Andrew Odlyzko<br>Sent: Wednesday, 4 January 2012 12:02 AM<br>To: goal@eprints.org<br>Subject: [GOAL] Re: How many researchers are there?</span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Arthur,<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>There is far more difficulty in counting researchers than in counting<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>articles. The problem is the inherent ambiguity in the term "researcher."<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Who qualifies? How do you tell the difference between research and<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>development? What do you do about all the support staff (such as the<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>technicians who run the often ultra-sophisticated equipment)? How do<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>you count students (graduate and undergraduate) who get involved in<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>researchy projects?<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>One can certainly do something, but one needs to define the terms<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>one uses with some precision.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Andrew<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>"Arthur Sale" <ahjs@ozemail.com.au> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> Thank you Arif. I have read the article this afternoon (3 January) and will<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> download and look through your thesis asap.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> However I feel compelled to re-emphasize to the list that I am not looking<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> for an estimate of how many articles are published annually, or ever. The<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> first of those pieces of data is useful for estimating what I really want to<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> know: how many active researchers are employed in year y? Particularly 2011.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> Of course, it will be useful to have article counts by discipline, however<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> rough, because publication practices differ widely between disciplines. A<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> publication in some disciplines is worth far less than in others, the number<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> of authors/article differs widely, and journal prestige varies at least as<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> much.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> There are many other confusing factors in estimates based on article<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> production rates which I touched on in my reply to Stevan Harnad, not least<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> of which is the frequency of publication of equally highly respected<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> researchers. Some publish rarely (say once every three years), others<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> produce multiple articles per year. There are distributions in all these<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> things which we should understand. If I mention just one, the huge disparity<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> between articles/title in ISI and non-ISI journals listed in your article<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> (111 vs 26, from Bjork et al) must give anyone cause to reflect! That's over<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> 4:1, too big to gloss over.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> I know of course that I cannot determine exactly the number of researchers<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> in the world, any more than anyone else can determine exactly how many<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> articles were written or published. As an engineer in a previous career,<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> absolute precision in these matters is not required, rather sufficient<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> confidence that we are in the right ballpark. Anyway, thank you very much<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> for your help and links, which I greatly appreciate.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> Arthur Sale<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> University of Tasmania<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> From: goal-bounces@eprints.org [mailto:goal-bounces@eprints.org] On Behalf<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> Of Arif Jinha<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> Sent: Tuesday, 3 January 2012 5:26 AM<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> To: Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci)<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> Subject: [GOAL] Re: How many researchers are there?<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> Arthur,<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> You're not going to be able to determine the exact number of researchers in<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> the world and you will have to make good estimates. But there are direct<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> relationships between the number of researchers, the number of articles<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> published annually and the number of active peer-reviewed journals. Good<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> sources for methodology are my thesis<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> <http://arif.jinhabrothers.com/sites/arif.jinhabrothers.com/files/aj.pdf> -<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> http://arif.jinhabrothers.com/sites/arif.jinhabrothers.com/files/aj.pdf<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> (defended and submitted this fall)<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> - Article 50 million -<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> <http://www.mendeley.com/research/article-50-million-estimate-number-scholar<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> ly-articles-existence-6/><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> http://www.mendeley.com/research/article-50-million-estimate-number-scholarl<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> y-articles-existence-6/<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> Methods and data are based chiefly on:<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> Bjork et al's studies on OA share growth 2006 to current<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> Mabe and Amin, Tenopir and King - works 1990s to early 2000s<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> Derek De Sallo Price - 1960s - the 'father of scientometrics.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> - you can get the number of article from Bjork's methods and data and mine.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> - you can get the number of researchers from UN data but there is ratio of<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> researchers to publishing researchers, and publishing researchers publish an<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> average of 1 article per year, so if you can determine good estimate for<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> that ratio you are on your way. You have good data on growth rates of<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> researchers, articles and journals, but growth rates have increased<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> dramatically since 2000 as demonstrated in my thesis. It got a bit complex<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> and I tried to sort it best I could in my thesis.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> all the best,<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> Arif<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> ----- Original Message ----- <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> From: Arthur Sale <mailto:ahjs@ozemail.com.au> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> To: 'Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci)' <mailto:goal@eprints.org><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> Sent: Saturday, December 31, 2011 6:25 PM<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> Subject: [GOAL] How many researchers are there?<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> I am trying to get a rough estimate of the number of active researchers in<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> the world. Unfortunately all the estimates seem to be as rough as the famous<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> Drake equation for calculating the number of technological civilizations in<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> the universe: in other words all the factors are extremely fuzzy. I seek<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> your help. My interest is that this is the number of people who need to<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> adopt OA for us to have 100% OA. (Actually, we will approach that sooner, as<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> the average publication has more than one author and we need only one to<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> make it OA.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> To share some thinking, let me take Australia. In 2011 it had 35<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> universities and 29,226 academic staff with a PhD. Let me assume that this<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> is the number of research active staff. The average per institution is 835,<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> and this spans big universities down to small ones. Australia produces<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> according to the OECD 2.5% of the world's research, so let's estimate the<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> number of active researchers in the world (taking Australia as 'typical' of<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> researchers) as 29226 / 0.025 = 1,169,040 researchers in universities. Note<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> that I have not counted non-university research organizations (they'll make<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> a small difference) nor PhD students (there is usually a supervisor listed<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> in the author list of any publication they produce).<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> Let's take another tack. I have read the number of 10,000 research<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> universities in the world bandied about. Let's regard 'research university'<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> as equal to 'PhD-granting university'. If each of them have 1,000 research<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> active staff on average, then that implies 10000 x 1000 = 10,000,000<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> researchers.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> That narrows the estimate, rough as it is, to<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> 1.1M < no of researchers < 10M<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> I can live with this, as it is only one power of ten (order of magnitude)<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> between the two bounds. The upper limit is around 0.2% of the world's<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> population.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> Another tactic is to try to estimate the number of people whose name<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> appeared in an author list in the last decade. Disambiguation of names rears<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> its ugly head. This will also include many non-researchers in big labs, some<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> of them will be dead, and there will be new researchers who have just not<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> yet published, but I am looking for ball-park figures, not pinpoint<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> accuracy. I haven't done this work yet.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> Can we do better than these estimates, in the face of different national<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> styles? It is even difficult to get one number for PhD granting<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> universities in the US, and as for India and China @$#!<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> Arthur Sale<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> University of Tasmania, Australia<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>_______________________________________________<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>GOAL mailing list<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>GOAL@eprints.org<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal<o:p></o:p></p></div></body></html>