Funding acknowledgements and citation stratification: The case of bibliometrics (2000–2024)

Other conference contribution, 2026

Bibliometric indicators increasingly shape research evaluation, yet little is known about how funding, recognition, and visibility relate within bibliometrics itself. This work-in-progress examines field stratification through Merton's scientific reward system. It uses 7,337 Scopus-indexed publications (2000–2024) in Scientometrics, Journal of Informetrics, and Quantitative Science Studies, combining country co-authorship mapping, VOSviewer's average normalized citations, funder analysis, and publication-level logistic regression. Participation is concentrated: among mapped countries, the top five hold 45% of country-document attributions (Gini = 0.61). Funding acknowledgements are similarly concentrated among a few bodies, led by the National Natural Science Foundation of China, although frequencies also reflect improving metadata coverage and national or funder-specific reporting requirements. BRICS-5 (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa) supply 24% of affiliation occurrences but only 14% of the most-cited decile, or 19% when the decile is defined within publication year, reflecting their more recent output. Normalized impact averages 0.90 for BRICS-5, 1.16 for the EU-27 (39% of attributions), and 1.02 for the United States. Nordic countries account for 4.5% of attributions with impact 1.15, and the Research Council of Norway is their most frequently acknowledged funder. Funded papers are not more visible: the apparent negative association between acknowledgements and top-decile status disappears once the decile is defined within year (OR = 0.96, 95% CI 0.82–1.13), whereas international collaboration remains positively associated (OR = 1.58, 1.34–1.85). Funder visibility is therefore distinct from citation advantage. These patterns matter for Nordic policy, where performance-based funding ties indicators to resources.