November 20, 2018: Most content in the UA Campus Repository is not accessible using the search/browse functions due to a performance bug; we are actively working to resolve this issue. If you are looking for content you know is in the repository, but cannot get to it, please email us at email@example.com with your questions and we'll make sure to get the content to you.
Research activity in major research universities and fields of science.
AuthorGroth, Randall Howard.
AdvisorLeslie, Larry L.
MetadataShow full item record
PublisherThe University of Arizona.
RightsCopyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author.
AbstractThe primary purposes of this study were to (1) verify the criteria for selection of variables that are measures of research activity; (2) replicate for 1987 the development of a composite measure of research activity index (RAI) for the top 100 research universities in the United States; (3) cluster the top 100 research universities according to the Carnegie Foundation's classifications and rank each university by its respective RAI within the cluster; (4) evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of the RAI and compare the results to those of previous studies; (5) pilot the development of a component Fields of Science and Engineering Research Activity Index (FSERAI) for the top 100 research universities in two specific fields of science (physical and social sciences) and rank the universities according to their respective component FSERAIs; and (6) examine a productivity quotient for each of the top 100 research universities. A review of the literature provided the eleven variables used in the development of the composite RAI. The statistical instrument used to develop the Research Activity Index Score (RAIS) was a subroutine of factor analysis known as principal components analysis. The RAI scores were produced for each institution and ranked in descending order. Ultimately, two comparisons were made. First, the RAIs for the year 1987 were compared with previous RAIs for the years 1980 and 1985. Second, the RAIs for the years 1980 and 1985 were recalculated exclusive of the personnel variables unavailable for the year 1987. Institutions were then clustered according to Carnegie Foundation classifications and were ranked by their respective RAIs within each category. The same basic design, used to produce the composite RAI, was used to produce the composite FSERAI. Of the seventeen variables initially gathered, eight were used in the derivation of the component FSERAI. Ultimately, 48 institutions were ranked in the physical sciences and 67 were ranked in the social sciences. Lastly, a relative productivity index for each of the top 100 research universities was produced.
Degree ProgramEducational Foundations and Administration