|dc.description.abstract||One of the legacies of the apartheid system was the discrepancy in funding
and support for various activities, including research work in science and
technology based on racial grounds. Some institutions of higher learning and
research institutes were favoured more than others in terms of resources.
Presently, despite the fact that there is national democracy, previously
disadvantaged institutions with their culture of minimal research and poor
publication output continue to produce inadequate quantities of research and
publications while the historically developed universities are at the forefront
of research and publication.This research is a bibliometric study of the publication patterns of South African scientists. The subjects were academic scientists from ten selected universities of the Eastern Cape, Western Cape and KwaZulu Natal, which
vary considerably, with regard to standards of education, quantity of
publications, development and overall progress.
The general purpose of this study was to investigate the patterns used by
scientists in publishing the results of their research, provide valuable
information and play a significant role in evaluating the research and
publication patterns of scientists from these different institutions
The study collected two sets of data through lists of publications and a
questionnaire. The questionnaire was pretested and the comments of the
respondents enabled the investigator to make the necessary revisions in the
The questionnaire was sent to 350 full-time academic scientists in the
departments of physics, chemistry, botany, zoology and biochemistry /
microbiology in the selected universities. Out of the 350 scientists, 174
responded. Twenty one returns were discarded, hence only 153 were used in
the data analysis. Further data was obtained from the Science Citation Index
and the Foundation for Research Development.
Data were analysed using descriptive statistics, one way ANOVA and
Pearson Chi-Square test. The results obtained in this study showed that the
five null hypotheses were rejected. It was found that there was a : -
• direct relation between academic rank and productivity; academic status
• direct relation correlation between prestige and productivity.
• higher impact of "A" grade scientists over non-"A" grade scientists.
• significant difference in productivity between areas of science that are
funded and areas which receive little or no funding.||en