Int. J. Innovation and Learning, Vol. 23, No. 2, 2018 145 Copyright © 2018 Inderscience Enterprises Ltd. Evaluating and comparing ten-year (2006–2015) research performance between Malaysian public and private higher learning institutions: a bibliometric approach Voon-Hsien Lee* and Jun-Jie Hew Faculty of Business and Finance, Universiti Tunku Abdul Rahman, Jalan Universiti Bandar Barat, 31900, Kampar, Perak, Malaysia Email: leevoonhsien@gmail.com Email: hew.jun.jie@gmail.com *Corresponding author Siew-Phaik Loke Faculty of Business, Management and Social Sciences, Quest International University Perak, Malaysia Email: lokesp@gmail.com Abstract: This study aims to bibliometrically evaluate and unprecedentedly compare the research performance accomplished by public and private Malaysian universities and their respective researchers from an international perspective, by examining publications that are indexed to Social Science Citation Index (SSCI) and Arts and Humanities Citation Index (A&HCI). Data was gathered from Web of Science, covering the most recent ten-year period from 2006 to 2015. Only 5,599 journal articles written in English were considered. Over the ten-year period, public or government funded universities have impressive number of publication counts and total citation received, while privately funded universities are better in terms of average citation per item. Moreover, the most prolific, most highly cited, and most influential author is currently affiliated with a private university. Besides, it was also discovered that both types of universities do not collaborate much with each other. Keywords: bibliometric analysis; Social Science Citation Index; SSCI; Arts and Humanities Citation Index; A&HCI; Web of Science; Malaysian higher learning institutions. Reference to this paper should be made as follows: Lee, V-H., Hew, J-J. and Loke, S-P. (2018) ‘Evaluating and comparing ten-year (2006–2015) research performance between Malaysian public and private higher learning institutions: a bibliometric approach’, Int. J. Innovation and Learning, Vol. 23, No. 2, pp.145–165.