Scientometrics, bibliometrics and infometrics: accounting of scientific research and the progress of science from the point of view of the philosophy of global sustainable development strategy




science, education, quantitative methods, philosophy, scientometrics, bibliometrics, infometrics, global sustainable development


Scientometrics, as a rule, is considered in details – the more accurate and ex­pressive the detailing, the more effective is the accounting of scientific research: the measurement of quantitative parameters of the results of scientific activity is aimed at improving the quality of scientific communication and, ultimately, the progress of science. This led to the transition from usual bibliometrics to sciento­metrics, and later to other more sophisticated forms of accounting for scientific activity, which can be divided into infometrics and altmetrics. Infometrics and its modifications take into account everything that could be formalized, while altmetrics seeks to include qualitative parameters in the realm of quantitative measurements. In this article, attention is focused precisely on the analysis of the relationship between quantitative methods and quantitative indicators of scien­tific activity with the progress of science thanks to a comparative assessment of bibliometrics, scientific metrics and infometrics from philosophical positions. A way out of the problematic situations in which attempts to provide a quantita­tive description of the quality of scientific activity inevitably fall, should be sought beyond the quantitative methods themselves – in the identification of their ulti­mate goal. Such a goal is the development of humanity through the progress of science. The UN program “Transforming Our World: Agenda 2030 for Sustainable Development” offers a systematic vision of ways to accomplish this task, which, in particular, sets the goal of achieving equal development opportunities for every person. Bibliometrics, scientometrics and infometrics contribute to overcoming many types of social inequality – provided that people are actively involved in sci­entific activity: personal scientific achievements level out property, gender, reli­gious, ethnic and many other types of social inequality and give every participant of scientific research access to a public career and personal development. The development of each person on a rational basis is the ultimate goal of science, which is the basis of the philosophy of the strategy of global sustainable develop­ment of Mankind.

Author Biographies

Mykhailo Boichenko, Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv

Doctor of Sciences in Philosophy, Professor, Profes­sor of the Department of Theoretic and Practical Philosophy;

leading researcher of the Department of Interaction between Universities and Society, Institute of Higher Education of the National Academy of Pedagogical Sciences of Ukraine

Viktor Zinchenko, Institute of Higher Education of National Academy of Pedagogical Sciences of Ukraine

Doctor of Sciences in Philosophy, Senior Researcher, main researcher of the Department of Research Agency of Universities


Allik, J., Lauk, K. & Realo, A. (2020). The Scientific Impact Derived From the Dis¬ciplinary Profiles. Frontiers in Research Metrics and Analytics 5: 569268.

Aseev, G. (2016). Scientometrics, informometrics, bibliometrics: definitions and distinctions. [In Ukrainian]. Library Herald (2), 3–10.

Boichenko M. (2019). Institutional Principles of Academic Integrity: philosophical and le¬gal conceptualization. [In Ukrainian]. Philosophy of Education 24(1), 97–114.

Bornmann, L. (2015). Alternative metrics in scientometrics: a meta-analysis of research into three altmetrics. Scientometrics 103, 1123–1144. s11192-015-1565-y

British Standard Institution. (1976). Glossary of Documentations Terms. London UK: BSI.

IDF. (2022). DOI. Web site of the International DOI Foundation.

Elsevier. (2022). Journal- and article-level metrics. Elsevier. Editors. https://www.elsevier. com/editors/journal-and-article-metrics

Enago. (2021). Understanding Research Metrics: Journal-Level, Article-Level, and Au¬thor-Level. Enago Academy.

Eom, S. B. (2008). Author Cocitation Analysis: Quantitative Methods for Mapping the Intel¬lectual Structure of an Academic Discipline. Information Science Reference. Hershey, PA: IGI Global.

Frontiers in Research Metrics and Analytics. (2022).¬nals/research-metrics-and-analytics

Gorraiz, J. I. (2021) Editorial: Best Practices in Bibliometrics & Bibliometric Services. Frontiers in Research Metrics and Analytics 6: 771999. frma.2021.771999

Guerrero-Bote, V. P., Chinchilla-Rodríguez, Z., Mendoza, A. & de Moya-Anegón, F. (2021). Comparative Analysis of the Bibliographic Data Sources Dimensions and Scopus: An Approach at the Country and Institutional Levels. Frontiers in Research Metrics and Analytics 5: 593494.

Guzhva, A. (2020). Procurement strategies: challenges of the digital age. [In Ukrainian]. Library Herald (3), 10–13.

Hawking, S. (2022). Stephen Hawking Articles. Google Scholar. com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=stephen+hawking&oq=Stephen+

Idamokoro, E. M. & Hosu, Y. S. (2022). Out-Look on Worldwide Trends of Related Stud¬ies on Citrus Waste as Feed for Livestock Production: A Scientometric Analysis. Frontiers in Research Metrics and Analytics 7: 869974. frma.2022.869974

Kostenko, L., Zhabin, O., Kuznetsov, O., Kukharchuk, E., & Symonenko, T. (2014). Bibliometrics of Ukrainian science: information and analytical system. [In Ukrainian]. Library Herald (4), 8–12.

Kostenko, L., Zhabin, O., Kuznetsov, O., Kukharchuk, E., & Symonenko, T. (2015). Scientometrics: methodology and tools. [In Ukrainian]. Bulletin of the Book Chamber (9), 25–29.

Kushnir, N. O., Valko, N. V., & Vinnyk, M. O. (2016). Improving the qualifications of university teachers as an element of the development of the information and educational environment of the university. [In Ukrainian]. Open educational e-environment of the modern university 2, 204–214.

LIS Education network. (2018). Bibliometrics. Library & Information Scince academic blog.

Montazerian, M. & Dorch, B. F. (2022). Editorial: Quality and Quantity in Research Assess¬ment: Examining the Merits of Metrics. Frontiers in Research Metrics and Analytics, 28 March 2022. Sec. Research Assessment.

Nazarovets, S. (2014). Infometric diagnosis of the flow of web publications of Ukrainian librarians. [In Ukrainian]. PhD thesis, Kharkiv State Academy of Culture.

Nazarovets, M. (2022). Support for open science in the Technische Informationsbibliothek. [In Ukrainian]. Bulletin of the Kharkiv State Academy of Culture (61), 7–16.

Nazarovets, M. (2016). Information monitoring service as a structural unit of a modern academic library. [In Ukrainian]. Bulletin of the Book Chamber (8), 24–26.

Passmor, N. P., & Zarvyrog, I. P. (2017). Impact factor as a scientometric indicator of the significance of a scientific journal. [In Ukrainian]. ONU Bulletin. Series: Library science, bibliography science, book science 22(2), 325–337. 1447.2017.2(18).118365

Põder E. (2022). What Is Wrong With the Current Evaluative Bibliometrics? Frontiers in Re¬search Metrics and Analytics 6: 824518.

Pritchard, A. (1969). Statistical Bibliography or Bibliometrics? Journal of Documentation 25(4), 348–349.

Scientometrics. An International Journal for all Quantitative Aspects of the Science of Sci¬ence, Communication in Science and Science Policy. (2022). journal/11192

Simonenko, T. (2015). Scopus and Google Scholar bibliometric systems: areas of use. [In Ukrainian]. Library Herald (2), 10–13.

Supporting Taylor & Francis journal editors. (2022). Understanding research metrics. Taylor & Francis Editor Resources. understanding-research-metrics

Szomszor, M., Adams, J., Fry, R., Gebert, C., Pendlebury, D. A., Potter, R. W. K. & Rogers, G. (2021). Interpreting Bibliometric Data. Frontiers in Research Metrics and Analytics 5: 628703.

Tague-Sutcliffe, J. (1992). An introduction to informetrics. Information Processing & Management 28(1), 1–3.

UN. (2015). Goal of sustainable development 4. Quality education. [In Ukrainian]. United Nations. Ukraine.

UN. (2015). Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.

Wormell, I. (1998). Informetrics: an emerging subdiscipline in information science. Asian Libraries 7(10), 258–277.

Yang, S., & Yuan, Q. (2017). Are Scientometrics, Informetrics, and Bibliometrics different? Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Scientometrics and Informetrics, ISSI 2017, Wuhan, China, October 16–20, 2017. 1507–1518.

Yaroshenko, T. (2006). Scientific communications of the XXI century: electronic resources for science and education of Ukraine. [In Ukrainian]. Library Herald (5), 204–214.

Yaroshenko, T., & Borisova, T. (2015). Scholarly Communication in the Digital Age: From the Perspectives of Researchers, Publishers, and Librarians. [In Ukrainian]. Bulletin of the Book Chamber (4), 44–49.

Zinchenko, V. (2020). Scientometric indicators, ranking and scientific identification as fac¬tors of internationalization of higher education and science in the context of sustain¬able development. [In Ukrainian]. Zinchenko, V. (ed.). Strategies of higher education in conditions of internationalization for sustainable development of society: methodical recommendations. Kyiv: Institute of Higher Education of the National Academy of Sci¬ences of Ukraine, 16–38.

Zinchenko, V. V., Boichenko, M. I., & Popovych, M. D. (2021). Higher Education And Sustainable Development Promotion: International Potential And Its Elabora¬tion In Ukraine, IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 635: 012012.


Abstract views: 64



How to Cite

Boichenko, M., & Zinchenko, V. (2022). Scientometrics, bibliometrics and infometrics: accounting of scientific research and the progress of science from the point of view of the philosophy of global sustainable development strategy. Filosofiya Osvity. Philosophy of Education, 28(1), 119–138.






Download data is not yet available.

Most read articles by the same author(s)

1 2 > >>