Knowledge production through collaborative research in sub-Saharan Africa: how much do countries contribute to each other’s knowledge output and citation impact?

This paper examines co-authorship of research articles in Thomson Reuters citation indexes in order to assess knowledge co-production in selected sub-Saharan African countries. Two indicators, namely publications and citations, were analysed to establish the patterns of knowledge co-production and its scientific impact, respectively. The study found that knowledge production through collaborative research among sub-Saharan African countries is minimal and contributes only a small percentage when compared to collaboration between sub-Saharan African countries and their foreign counterparts. Similarly, the scientific impact of international collaboration was higher than that of continental collaboration. Countries belonging to the same geographic region contributed to each other’s knowledge production more frequently than they did to the countries outside their region. It is recommended that, for knowledge co-production in sub-Saharan Africa to improve, various measures such as encouraging student and staff exchange, hosting more regional conferences and encouraging research networks need to be put in place.     

Interdisciplinarity and insularity in the diffusion of knowledge: an analysis of disciplinary boundaries between philosophy of science and the sciences

Two fundamentally different perspectives on knowledge diffusion dominate debates about academic disciplines. On the one hand, critics of disciplinary research and education have argued that disciplines are isolated silos, within which specialists pursue inward-looking and increasingly narrow research agendas. On the other hand, critics of the silo argument have demonstrated that researchers constantly import and export ideas across disciplinary boundaries. These perspectives have different implications for how knowledge diffuses, how intellectuals gain and lose status within their disciplines, and how intellectual reputations evolve within and across disciplines. We argue that highly general claims about the nature of disciplinary boundaries are counterproductive, and that research on the nature of specific disciplinary boundaries is more useful. To that end, this paper uses a novel publication and citation network dataset and statistical models of citation networks to test hypotheses about the boundaries between philosophy of science and 11 disciplinary clusters. Specifically, we test hypotheses about whether engaging with and being cited by scientific communities outside philosophy of science has an impact on one’s position within philosophy of science. Our results suggest that philosophers of science produce interdisciplinary scholarship, but they tend not to cite work by other philosophers when it is published in journals outside of their discipline. Furthermore, net of other factors, receiving citations from other disciplines has no meaningful impact—positive or negative—on citations within philosophy of science. We conclude by considering this evidence for simultaneous interdisciplinarity and insularity in terms of scientific trading theory and other work on disciplinary boundaries and communication.     

The citation advantage of foreign language references for Chinese social science papers

Contemporary scientific exchanges are international, yet language continues to be a persistent barrier to scientific communication, particularly for non-native English-speaking scholars. Since the ability to absorb knowledge has a strong impact on how researchers create new scientific knowledge, comprehensive access to and understanding of both domestic and international scientific publications is essential for scientific performance. This study explores the effect of absorbed knowledge on research impact by analyzing the relationship between the language diversity of cited references and the number of citations received by the citing paper. Chinese social sciences are taken as the research object, and the data, 950,302 papers published between 1998 and 2013 with 8,151,327 cited references, were collected from the Chinese Social Sciences Citation Index. Results show that there is a stark increase in the consumption of foreign language material within the Chinese social science community, and English material accounts for the vast majority of this consumption. Papers with foreign language references receive significantly more citations than those without, and the citation advantage of these internationalized work holds when we control for characteristics of the citing papers, such as the discipline, prestige of journal, prestige of institution, and scientific collaboration. However, the citation advantage has decreased from 1998 to 2008, largely as an artifact of the increased number of papers citing foreign language material. After 2008, however, the decline of the citation advantage subsided and became relatively stable, which suggests that incorporating foreign language literature continues to increase scientific impact, even as the scientific community itself becomes increasingly international. However, internationalization is not without concerns: the work closes with a discussion of the potential problems associated with the lack of linguistic diversity in scientific communication.

     

Blockmodeling of co-authorship networks in library and information science in Argentina: a case study

The paper introduces the use of blockmodeling in the micro-level study of the internal structure of co-authorship networks over time. Variations in scientific productivity and researcher or research group visibility were determined by observing authors?? role in the core-periphery structure and crossing this information with bibliometric data. Three techniques were applied to represent the structure of collaborative science: (1) the blockmodeling; (2) the Kamada-Kawai algorithm based on the similarities in co-authorships present in the documents analysed; (3) bibliometrics to determine output volume, impact and degree of collaboration from the bibliographic data drawn from publications. The goal was to determine the extent to which the use of these two complementary approaches, in conjunction with bibliometric data, provides greater insight into the structure and characteristics of a given field of scientific endeavour. The paper describes certain features of Pajek software and how it can be used to study research group composition, structure and dynamics. The approach combines bibliometric and social network analysis to explore scientific collaboration networks and monitor individual and group careers from new perspectives. Its application on a small-scale case study is intended as an example and can be used in other disciplines. It may be very useful for the appraisal of scientific developments.     

Reasons for and developments in international scientific collaboration: does an Asia–Pacific research area exist from a bibliometric point of view?

This paper describes the different forms of and tries to give reasons for international scientific collaboration in general. It focuses on eleven countries in the Asia–Pacific region by evaluating their national research output with the help of bibliometric indicators in particular. Over two million journal articles published by these countries between 1998 and 2007 in ISI-listed periodicals are analyzed. Discipline-specific publication and citation profiles reveal national strengths and weaknesses in the different research domains. The exponential increase in publication output by China over the last few years is astonishing, but in terms of visibility, i.e. citation rates, China cannot keep up with leading science nations, remaining below the world average. A discipline-specific analysis shows that Chinese authors took an active part in more than a quarter of all articles and reviews published in the field of materials science in 2007, while their contribution to medical research is very low. Co-publication networks among the eleven countries are generated to observe the development of cooperation bonds in the region. Applying Salton’s measure of international collaboration strength, an above-average strengthening of scientific collaboration in the Asia–Pacific region can be observed.     

The evolutions of the rich get richer and the fit get richer phenomena in scholarly networks: the case of the strategic management journal

Understanding how a scientist develops new scientific collaborations or how their papers receive new citations is a major challenge in scientometrics. The approach being proposed simultaneously examines the growth processes of the co-authorship and citation networks by analyzing the evolutions of the rich get richer and the fit get richer phenomena. In particular, the preferential attachment function and author fitnesses, which govern the two phenomena, are estimated non-parametrically in each network. The approach is applied to the co-authorship and citation networks of the flagship journal of the strategic management scientific community, namely the Strategic Management Journal. The results suggest that the abovementioned phenomena have been consistently governing both temporal networks. The average of the attachment exponents in the co-authorship network is 0.30 while it is 0.29 in the citation network. This suggests that the rich get richer phenomenon has been weak in both networks. The right tails of the distributions of author fitness in both networks are heavy, which imply that the intrinsic scientific quality of each author has been playing a crucial role in getting new citations and new co-authorships. Since the total competitiveness in each temporal network is founded to be rising with time, it is getting harder to receive a new citation or to develop a new collaboration. Analyzing the average competency, it was found that on average, while the veterans tend to be more competent at developing new collaborations, the newcomers are likely better at acquiring new citations. Furthermore, the author fitness in both networks has been consistent with the history of the strategic management scientific community. This suggests that coupling node fitnesses throughout different networks might be a promising new direction in analyzing simultaneously multiple networks.     

Relationship among research collaboration, number of documents and number of citations: a case study in Spanish computer science production in 2000–2009

This paper analyzes the relationship among research collaboration, number of documents and number of citations of computer science research activity. It analyzes the number of documents and citations and how they vary by number of authors. They are also analyzed (according to author set cardinality) under different circumstances, that is, when documents are written in different types of collaboration, when documents are published in different document types, when documents are published in different computer science subdisciplines, and, finally, when documents are published by journals with different impact factor quartiles. To investigate the above relationships, this paper analyzes the publications listed in the Web of Science and produced by active Spanish university professors between 2000 and 2009, working in the computer science field. Analyzing all documents, we show that the highest percentage of documents are published by three authors, whereas single-authored documents account for the lowest percentage. By number of citations, there is no positive association between the author cardinality and citation impact. Statistical tests show that documents written by two authors receive more citations per document and year than documents published by more authors. In contrast, results do not show statistically significant differences between documents published by two authors and one author. The research findings suggest that international collaboration results on average in publications with higher citation rates than national and institutional collaborations. We also find differences regarding citation rates between journals and conferences, across different computer science subdisciplines and journal quartiles as expected. Finally, our impression is that the collaborative level (number of authors per document) will increase in the coming years, and documents published by three or four authors will be the trend in computer science literature.     

Important institutions of interinstitutional scientific collaboration networks in materials science

Interinstitutional scientific collaboration plays an important role in knowledge production and scientific development. Together with the increasing scale of scientific collaboration, a few institutions that positively participate in interinstitutional scientific collaboration are important in collaboration networks. However, whether becoming an important institution in collaboration networks could be a contributing factor to research success and how these important institutions collaborate are still indistinct. In this paper, we identified the scientific institutions that possess the highest degree centrality as important institutions of an interinstitutional scientific collaboration network in materials science and examined their collaboration preferences utilizing several network measures. We first visualized the appearance of these important institutions that had the most positive collaborations in the interinstitutional scientific collaboration networks during the period of 2005–2015 and found an obvious scale-free feature in interinstitutional scientific collaboration networks. Then, we measured the advantages of being important in collaboration networks to research performance and found that positive interinstitutional collaborations can always bring both publication advantages and citation advantages. Finally, we identified two collaboration preferences of these important institutions in collaboration networks—one type of important institution represented by the Chinese Academy of Science plays an intermediary role between domestic institutions and foreign institutions with high betweenness centrality and a low clustering coefficient. This type of important institution has better performance in the number of publications. The other type of important institution represented by MIT tends to collaborate with similar institutions that have positive collaborations and possess a larger citation growth rate. Our finding can provide a better understanding of important institutions’ collaboration preferences and have significant reference for government policy and institutional collaboration strategies.     

Regional analysis on Chinese scientific output

Based on data from the Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE) and using scientometric methods, we conducted a systematic analysis of Chinese regional contributions and international collaboration in terms of scientific publications, publication activity, and citation impact. We found that regional contributions are highly skewed. The top positions measured by number of publications or citations, share of publications or citations are taken by almost the same set of regions. But this is not the case when indicators for relative citation impact are used. Comparison between regional scientific output and R&D expenditure shows that Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient between the two indicators is rather low among the leading publication regions.     

International collaboration of three ‘giants’ with the G7 countries in emerging nanobiopharmaceuticals

Nanobiopharmaceuticals is a hopeful research domain from recent scientific advances with massive marketable potential. Although some researchers have studied international collaboration from some aspects, few articles are as comprehensive as this article to consider international cooperation from so many different aspects. We lay more emphasis on international collaboration in the field of nanobiopharmaceuticals involving China. Incremental citation impact values show that in order to move forward and improve the overall competitiveness in the field, China requires to carry out more international collaboration in the field, especially with USA, Germany, and England. Startlingly, multinational collaboration does not sway Chinese citation impact as much as we anticipate in the field. China has reached the first rank in the world in terms of publication amount per year in the field in 2009. Few papers about international collaboration compare small world phenomenon. We use small world quotient to find that it is important for Chinese international co-authors to strengthen to cultivate a cooperation networks in which a node’s partners are also buddies to each other.     

Investigating different types of research collaboration and citation impact: a case study of Harvard University’s publications

This study aims to investigate the influence of different patterns of collaboration on the citation impact of Harvard University’s publications. Those documents published by researchers affiliated with Harvard University in WoS from 2000–2009, constituted the population of the research which was counted for 124,937 records. Based on the results, only 12% of Harvard publications were single author publications. Different patterns of collaboration were investigated in different subject fields. In all 22 examined fields, the number of co-authored publications is much higher than single author publications. In fact, more than 60% of all publications in each field are multi-author publications. Also, the normalized citation per paper for co-authored publications is higher than that of single author publications in all fields. In addition, the largest number of publications in all 22 fields were also published through inter-institutional collaboration and were as a result of collaboration among domestic researchers and not international ones. In general, the results of the study showed that there was a significant positive correlation between the number of authors and the number of citations in Harvard publications. In addition, publications with more number of institutions have received more number of citations, whereas publications with more number of foreign collaborators were not much highly cited.     

Dentistry scientometric analysis: a comparative study between Brazil and other most productive countries in the area

This research aims at performing a comparative study between the Brazilian scientific production in Dentistry, from 2000 to 2009 and countries that contribute with at least 2 % of the world’s scientific production indexed in the Scopus database. More specifically, we intend to assess the annual Brazilian scientific production by comparing it to the other countries’, analyze the Brazilian and other countries’ publications in journals with higher impact factors, as well as to highlight the scientific production from these countries and its international visibility, measured by its total and by its average of citations and normalized citation index per year, by comparing the countries, and to compare the index h of such countries. As work procedure, the SCImago Journal and Country Rank was used as source, identifying the group of producing countries in the Dentistry area from 1996 to 2009. From a total of 136 countries, 13 were highlighted as the most productive, each one of them accounting for at least 2 % the worldwide scientific production in the area. The following indicators were raised for each country: number of produced documents, total of citations, self-citations, average of citations per document and index h. We verified that Brazil is the only country in Latin America that is pictured among the most productive ones in the Dentistry area. We observed that Brazil presents a growing visibility and impact in the international scenery, what suggests that its production is constantly consolidating, with Brazilian scientific recognition in the main vehicles of dissemination in the area.     

How much is a collaboration worth? A calibrated bibliometric model

Interest in collaboration is increasing in policy circles. There are numerous international and national programs to encourage collaboration, for example, between university and industry researchers. However, little is know about the way in which collaboration changes the impact of a research publication. This paper explores how the impact (average citations per paper) varies with different types of collaboration. A calibrated bibliometric model is derived that demonstrates that collaborating with an author from the home institution or another domestic institution increases the average impact by approximately 0.75 citations while collaborating with an author from a foreign institution increases the impact by about 1.6 citations.     

Applying research collaboration as a new way of measuring research performance in Korean universities

The purpose of this study is to explore the possibility of applying research collaboration as a new way of measuring research performance in Korean universities. In this study, we examine whether the activeness of research collaboration between university–government–industry can also enact as a way to measure the research performance aside from the typical indicators such as number of published articles or citations resulted from universities. Also this study focuses to analyze whether such performance differs according to universities’ characteristics and disciplines. For the analysis of the study, we gathered publication and citation data (2000–2009) of 46 Korean universities that are actively involved in research and analyzed their science citation index-expanded and the social sciences citation index (SSCI) data. Notable findings include (1) Several low ranked universities have shown rapid improvement with their research performance despite the rigid hierarchical characteristic of Korean higher education system, (2) Although universities in Korea are involved in various kinds of collaboration methods, it was evident that such dynamic is not necessarily reflected in existing hierarchy structure, (3) Academic relations with education oriented universities and research oriented universities have different dynamics and patterns in research collaboration, (4) In terms of the collaborative publication rate, private universities collaborate more actively amongst university sector whereas public universities collaborate more with government and industry. (5) Due to the nature of the social science subject itself, it was found that the research in SSCI is inevitably more based on the researcher’s independence, hence more international collaboration was found amongst researchers in natural science and engineering subjects.     

In-depth analysis on China’s international cooperation in science

It has been about 30 years since China adopted an open-up and reform policy for global competition and collaboration. This opening-up policy is accompanied by a spectacular growth of the country’s economy as well as visibility in the world’s scientific literature. Also China’ competitiveness in scientific research has grown, and is mirroring the development of the country’s economy. On the other hand, international collaboration of most countries dramatically increased during the last two decades and accompanied the growth of science in emerging economies. Thus the question arises of whether growth of competitiveness in research is accompanied by an intensification of collaboration in China as well. In the present study we analyse the dynamics and the national characteristics of China’s co-operation in a global context. We also study research profile and citation impact of international collaboration with respect to the corresponding domestic ‘standards’.     

Renewable energy research 1995–2009: a case study of wind power research in EU, Spain, Germany and Denmark

The paper reports the developments and citation patterns over three time periods of research on Renewable Energy generation and Wind Power 1995–2011 in EU, Spain, Germany and Denmark. Analyses are based on Web of Science and incorporate journal articles as well as conference proceeding papers. Scientometric indicators include publication collaboration ratios, top-player distribution as well as citedness and correspondence analyses of citing publications, relative citation impact, distributions of top-cited as well as top-citing institutions and publication sources and cluster analysis of citing title terms to map knowledge export areas. Findings show an increase in citation impact for Renewable Energy and Wind Power research albeit hampered by scarcely cited conference papers. Although EU maintains its global top position in producing Renewable Energy and Wind Power research the developments of EU and German world shares as well as citation impact are negative during the most recent 7 year period. During the same time the citation impact of Spain and Denmark increase and place both nations among the top-ranking countries in Wind Power research. Spain is the only EU country that increases its world production share from 2000. China is currently ranked three after EU and USA in research output, however with a very low citation impact. Spain, Denmark and Germany each demonstrates distinct collaboration patterns and publication source and citation distribution profiles. More than half the citations to EU Wind Power research are EU-self citations. An expected intensified EU collaboration in the Wind Energy field does not come about. The most productive research institutions in Denmark and Spain are also the most cited ones.     

The organization of scientific knowledge: the structural characteristics of keyword networks

The understanding of scientific knowledge itself may promote further advances in science and research on the organization of knowledge may be an initiative to this effort. This stream of research, however, has been mainly driven by the analysis of citation networks. This study uses, as an alternative knowledge element, information on the keywords of papers published in business research and examines how they are associated with each other to constitute a body of scientific knowledge. The results show that, unlike most citation networks, keyword networks are not small-word networks but, rather, locally clustered scale-free networks with a hierarchic structure. These structural patterns are robust against the scope of scientific fields involved. In addition, this paper discusses the origins and implications of the identified structural characteristics of keyword networks.     

Do types of collaboration change citation? Collaboration and citation patterns of South African science publications

Bibliographic records are extensively used in the study of citations. Based on ISI data, this paper examines citation patterns of the publications of South African scientists in recent years. In particular, the focus of this paper is on citations as to the collaborative dimensions of South African scientists in their publications. The study reveals that the number of citations received by a publication varies not only according to the collaboration but also to the types of collaboration of the authors who are involved in its production. Furthermore, it emerges that the impact of citations on publications differs from discipline to discipline, and affiliating sector to sector, regardless of collaboration.     

The citation impacts and citation environments of Chinese journals in mathematics

Based on the citation data of journals covered by the China Scientific and Technical Papers and Citations Database (CSTPCD), we obtained aggregated journal-journal citation environments by applying routines developed specifically for this purpose. Local citation impact of journals is defined as the share of the total citations in a local citation environment, which is expressed as a ratio and can be visualized by the size of the nodes. The vertical size of the nodes varies proportionally to a journal’s total citation share, while the horizontal size of the nodes is used to provide citation information after correction for the within-journal (self-) citations. In the “citing” environment, the equivalent of the local citation performance can also be considered as a citation activity index. Using the “citing” patterns as variables one is able to map how the relevant journal environments are perceived by the collective of authors of a journal, while the “cited” environment reflects the impact of journals in a local environment. In this study, we analyze citation impacts of three Chinese journals in mathematics and compare local citation impacts with impact factors. Local citation impacts reflect a journal’s status and function better than (global) impact factors. We also found that authors in Chinese journals prefer international instead of domestic ones as sources for their citations.     

The use of deciles of the citation impact to evaluate different fields of research in Israel

One often uses the average citation impact factor in order to perform international comparisons between the levels of scientific performance within given disciplines. In averaging over all (or all cited) papers one may gives undue weight to papers with few citations while, in fact, the standing of a country within a given field would be better assessed by looking only at the “successful” papers in that discipline. The present papers suggests that one should do so by averaging citations only over the ten (or twenty) percent of the most cited papers in a discipline and use these in order to establish a ranking between countries. The case of Israel is used as an illustration of this approach.