Scientific collaboration in Library and Information Science viewed through the Web of Knowledge: the Spanish case

This study analyzes the level of co-authorship of Spanish research in Library and Information Science (LIS) until 2009, the chronological development that has taken place, and the level of local, domestic and international cooperation. This bibliometric study was made using the data retrieved from the Web of Knowledge (WoK) following a dual strategy—on the one hand through the filter of the category Information Science & Library Science, and on the other hand through a subject search. In this way a significant number of works has been retrieved, some of which are in journals indexed in SCI or A&HCI and not in the SSCI. The results show a significant increase in all co-authorship, including publications in English and those involving international collaboration. As with the increase in Spanish participation in social science (WoK), this growth, coupled with the significant increase in Spanish scientific production in the area of LIS, suggests that the discipline in Spain has entered a more mature phase—although so far it has focused particularly on bibliometric studies.     

The evaluation of scientific productivity in Brazil: An assessment of the mental health field

Brazilian scientific production has increased significantly over the last decade, and mental health has been a leading research field in the country, with a growing number of articles published in high quality international journals. This article analyses the scientific output of mental health research between 2004 and 2006 and estimates individual research performance based on four different strategies. A total of 106 mental health scientists were included in the analysis; together they published 1,209 articles indexed in Medline or ISI, with over 65% of the production in journals with impact factor ≥1. Median impact factor of publications was 2. Spearman correlation coefficient showed a large positive correlation between all four different measures used to estimate individual research output. Ten investigators were together responsible for almost 30% of the articles published in the period, whereas 65% of the sample contributed with less than 10 articles.     

Modelling and measuring multilateral co-authorship in international scientific collaboration. Part I. Development of a new model using a series expansion approach

International co-operation has strongly intensified during the last decades owing to rapid developments in scientific communication. Economic, political, and intra-scientific factors also strongly influence international collaboration links among individual countries. Obviously research results of international scientific co-operation are reflected in the documented scientific communication as international co-authorship links in scientific publications. Most bibliometric studies on this issue pertain to the share of international co-authored papers in national publication output and their impact on national and international research, or to the analysis and mapping of the structure of collaboration links. The present study attempts to develop a model to measure and analyse the extent of multilateral international co-authorship links. A new indicator, the Multilateral Collaboration Index (ρ) is introduced and analysed as a function of the share of internationally co-authored papers (f). Based onf a series expansion approach is applied that can be considered an extension of a fractionation model byNederhof andMoed and allows classifying the extent of multilateral links both among science fields and among individual countries. The paper is concluded by a first attempt to estimate the errors involved in our approach.     

Visibility of collaboration on the Web

The emerging influence of new information and communication technologies (ICT) on collaboration in science and technology has to be considered. In particular, the question of the extent to which collaboration in science and in technology is visible on the Web needs examining. Thus the purpose of this study is to examine whether broadly similar results would occur if solely Web data was used rather than all available bibliometric co-authorship data. For this purpose a new approach of Web visibility indicators of collaboration is examined. The ensemble of COLLNET members is used to compare co-authorship patterns in traditional bibliometric databases and the network visible on the Web. One of the general empirical results is a high percentage (78%) of all bibliographic multi- authored publications become visible through search of engines in the Web. One of the special studies has shown Web visibility of collaboration is dependent on the type of bibliographic multi-authored papers. The social network analysis (SNA) is applied to comparisons between bibliographic and Web collaboration networks. Structure formation processes in bibliographic and Web networks are studied. The research question posed is to which extent collaboration structures visible in the Web change their shape in the same way as bibliographic collaboration networks over time. A number of special types of changes in bibliographic and Web structures are explained. This revised version was published online in June 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.     

China’s emerging centrality in the contemporary international scientific collaboration network

In this paper we analyze the evolution of China’s growing importance in international scientific collaboration over the past 15 years. Using co-authored publications indexed in Clarivate Analytics’s Web of Science Core Collection we develop novel weighted and unweighted centrality measures to quantify China’s emerging role in the global scientific research network. We analyze the networks formed by international co-authorship in three 5-year periods: 2001–2005, 2006–2010, and 2011–2015. This analysis highlights China’s sharp increase in prominence in international scientific collaborations. The analysis of China’s co-authored, highly cited papers also illustrates China’s rising importance in scientific research and collaboration from a different perspective. The impact of multilaterally co-authored papers to the centrality measure is also analyzed both theoretically and empirically. The results show that multilateral collaboration is also a key factor that influences the centrality of a country beyond simply the scale of international co-authorship. We further contextualize our work in a discussion of international scientific collaboration as both a key driver of China’s economy and its emerging perception as a first-world innovator and intellectual power. Finally, we suggest directions for further research including more granular analysis by academic discipline and an alternative investigation based on the fractional counting method.     

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.     

Focus on China: the current status of entrepreneurship research in China

This review study is a first attempt to map the state of entrepreneurship research in China by focusing on the contributions of Chinese researchers. Leading contributors, research collaboration and theoretical underpinnings in both domestic-oriented and international-oriented research are discussed. The review comprises 508 articles published in domestic Chinese journals indexed by the Chinese Social Science Citation Index and 189 articles published in international journals indexed by the Social Science Citation Index between 2000 and 2011. Two bibliometric approaches, co-authorship analysis and co-citation analysis, were utilized. The results indicate that entrepreneurship research in China is characterized by a clear division, not only in terms of researchers in each community, collaborating network but also with regard to theoretical foundation. Domestic-oriented research is still in its infancy. The research community has attracted a majority of Chinese researchers who focus on inter-institutional collaboration based on mentorship and directing relationship. Scholars involved in international-oriented research engage in more open communication by collaborating not only with researchers from other Chinese institutions but also with those from foreign countries. At the same time, they contribute to the understanding of Chinese entrepreneurship by linking the entrepreneurship phenomenon in Chinese context to theoretical frameworks.     

Collaboration uncovered: Exploring the adequacy of measuring university-industry collaboration through co-authorship and funding

Summary Analysing co-authored publications has become the standard way to measure research collaborations. At the same time bibliometric researchers have advised that co-authorship based indicators should be handled with care as a source of evidence on actual scientific collaboration. The aim of this study is to assess how well university-industry collaborations can be identified and described using co-authorship data. This is done through a comparison of co-authorship data with industrial funding to a medical university. In total 436 companies were identified through the two methods. Our results show that one third of the companies that have provided funding to the university had not co-authored any publications with the university. Further, the funding indicator identified only 16% of the companies that had co-authored publications. Thus, both co-authorship and funding indicators provide incomplete results. We also observe a case of conflicting trends between funding and co-authorship indicators. We conclude that uncritical use of the two indicators may lead to misinterpretation of the development of collaborations and thus provide incorrect data for decision-making.     

Measuring institutional research productivity for the life sciences: the importance of accounting for the order of authors in the byline

Accurate measurement of institutional research productivity should account for the real contribution of the research staff to the output produced in collaboration with other organizations. In the framework of bibliometric measurement, this implies accounting for both the number of co-authors and each individual’s real contribution to scientific publications. Common practice in the life sciences is to indicate such contribution through the order of author names in the byline. In this work, we measure the distortion introduced to university-level bibliometric productivity rankings when the number of co-authors or their position in the byline is ignored. The field of observation consists of all Italian universities active in the life sciences (Biology and Medicine). The analysis is based on the research output of the university staff over the period 2004–2008. Based on the results, we recommend against the use of bibliometric indicators that ignore co-authorship and real contribution of each author to research outputs.     

Publishing in international journals

This paper examines patterns of Chinese authorship, focusing particularly on international co-authorship, in a sample of 37,526 articles from Elsevier journals published in 2004. Trends relating to potential influences such as subject, journal impact factor and article type are explored. A slightly higher proportion of articles with at least one Chinese author was observed as compared to previous studies. Articles that are a product of Chinese international collaboration account for almost 20% of the Chinese sample as a whole, a similar proportion to levels of international collaboration within the sample overall. Chinese international co-authorship is most common in the Earth & Environmental Sciences. Where China is involved in international collaboration, it is often a proactive participant: 49% of articles that are a result of Chinese international collaboration have a Chinese corresponding author. With some minor variations in subject categories, countries favoured in international co-authorship reflect world shares in publishing and factors such as geographical proximity and political links. In the context of this project, the term ‘Chinese authors’ is used to refer to authors, regardless of nationality, who are based at Chinese institutions. The term does not include Chinese nationality authors who are based in institutions outwith China.     

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.     

Trend and efficiency analysis of co-authorship network

Although co-authorship in scientific research has a long history the analysis of co-authorship network to explore scientific collaboration among authors is a relatively new research area. Studies of current literature about co-authorship networks mostly give emphasis to understand patterns of scientific collaborations, to capture collaborative statistics, and to propose valid and reliable measures for identifying prominent author(s). However, there is no such study in the literature which conducts a longitudinal analysis of co-authorship networks. Using a dataset that spans over 20 years, this paper attempts to explore efficiency and trend of co-authorship networks. Two scientists are considered connected if they have co-authored a paper, and these types of connections between two scientists eventually constitute co-authorship networks. Co-authorship networks evolve among researchers over time in specific research domains as well as in interdisciplinary research areas. Scientists from diverse research areas and different geographical locations may participate in one specific co-authorship network whereas an individual scientist may belong to different co-authorship networks. In this paper, we study a longitudinal co-authorship network of a specific scientific research area. By applying approaches to analyze longitudinal network data, in addition to known methods and measures of current co-authorship literature, we explore a co-authorship network of a relatively young and emerging research discipline to understand its trend of evolution pattern and proximity of efficiency.     

Knowledge network hubs and measures of research impact, science structure, and publication output in nanostructured solar cell research

This study on co-authorship networks in the area of nanostructured solar cells aims to contribute to a further understanding of the use of research evaluation measures of science output, impact and structure in an emerging research field. The study incorporates quantitative bibliometric methods of analysis and social network analysis in combination with a qualitative case study research approach. Conclusions drawn from the results emphasise, firstly, the importance of distinguishing between early and later phases of the evolution of a novel research field, and secondly, the application of a systemic view on learning processes and knowledge diffusion in a science-based technology field.     

Brazilian immunology: One hundred years later

Brazilian immunology dates from the end of the 19^th century. The aim of the present paperwas to analyze the impact of this field in contemporary Brazilian biomedical research. For this, a15 years period (1981-1995) was studied. Production of immunological articles in Brazilrepresented in 1995 a percentage of 8.66 of total papers in biomedical sciences in this country.This level was achieved by an exponential increase in 1991 in the number of papers inimmunology followed by a steady increase in the subsequent years. This growth was onlyobserved in articles published in international immunology journals listed by ISI, a similarincrease did not occur when the most representative Brazilian journal in biomedical sciences wasanalyzed. The production in immunology in the last five years (1991-1995) represented 60.69% oftotal articles in this field published in the whole 15 years period. When quality was assessed basedon impact factor of the journals were the articles appeared, 52.71% of total immunology papershad been published in journals with impact factors varying between 7.29 and 3.24. A higherdegree of international co-authorship was seen both in articles published in international journalsand presentations at international congresses compared to national ones. The main countriescollaborating with Brazil were: EUA, England and France. Within Brazil, immunology researchwas not equally distributed. Around 80% of the articles were produced by four states (São Paulo,Rio de Janeiro, Minas Gerais and Bahia), São Paulo being responsible for more than half of thosearticles. This geographic distribution closely resembles the distribution of the Brazilian Society ofImmunology (SBI) membership. The main field of study throughout the period wasimmunoparasitology.     

Measuring the use of public research in firm R&D in the Hsinchu Science Park

Knowledge flow between public and private sectors is widely recognized as a way to stimulate innovation and regional development, particularly in science parks. This work employs a bibliometric approach, based on patent citation, non-patent citation, and public?Cprivate co-authorship of scientific publications to measure the use of public research in Hsinchu Science Park (HSP) in Taiwan. The result shows that the number of jointly published papers has increased constantly, implying the collaboration between HSP and universities has become more common. However, from the aspect of co-patenting, patent citation, and non-patent reference, technological innovation stemming from public research needs to be enhanced.     

Bibliometrics as a tool for measuring gender-specific research performance: an example from South African invasion ecology

Citations to published work are gaining increasing prominence in evaluations of the research performance of scientists. Considering the importance accorded to gender issues in South African science, it is surprising that (to our knowledge) no research has as yet ascertained the extent of sex differences in citations to the published work of scientists in this country. Our literature study shows that studies that have been conducted elsewhere tend to neglect in their analyses important gender-related and other factors, such as the sex composition of multi-authored papers and the extent of foreign co-authorship. Against this background, we illustrate the difficulties inherent in measuring the quality aspect of sex-specific research performance by means of an analysis of a dataset of articles (n = 229) that were published between 1990 and 2002 in the field of invasion ecology and in journals included in the Thomson Reuters Web of Science. Each article has at least one South African author address. The results indicate that foreign co-authorship is a better correlate of high citations than the sex of South African authors, and this is true irrespective of whether the annual citation rate or window period is used, whether or not self-citations are excluded, and whether or not the number of authors is controlled for by calculating fractional counts. The paper highlights these and other considerations that are relevant for future gender-focused bibliometric research, both in South Africa and beyond.     

International cooperation of polish researchers with partners from abroad: A scientometric study

Publications resulting from international cooperation and included in seven SCI annual files 1987–1989 and 1992–1995 were analyzed. It was observed that after the political changes of the turn of 1980s considerable increase in the number of publications was accompanied by the geographic development of co-authorship. Information coming from SCI 1992–1995, elaborated, completed and encoded were entered into an own database designed for analytical purposes. During these four years above 9600 papers were published in over 1600 prestige journals, of which almost 2200 publications resulted from multilateral cooperation. Altogether the foreign coauthors came from 102 countries, but over 80% of international papers were published in cooperation with the partners from 11 countries. The domestic participants came from over 200 research and educational organizations. It was found that the biggest share of papers within this multidisciplinary file represented physics (≈40%), chemistry (≈21%), and biomedical research (≈11%).     

Double effort = Double impact? A critical view at international co-authorship in chemistry

An attempt is made to find statistical evidences of the relation between international co-authorship and citation impact. It was found that international co-authorship, in average, results inpublications with higher citation rates than purely domestic papers. No correlation has beenfound, however, between the strength of co-authorship links and the relative citation eminence ofthe resulting publications. International co-authorship links in chemistry, as represented by thewell-known Salton's measure, displayed a characteristic pattern reflecting geopolitical, historical,linguistic, etc. relations among countries. A new indicator, representing also the asymmetry ofco-authorship links was used to reveal main "attractive" and "repulsive" centres of co-operation.     

Meta-analysis in psychology: a bibliometric study

Meta-analysis refers to the statistical methods used in research synthesis for combining and integrating results from individual studies. The present study draws on the strengths of bibliometric methods in order to offer an overview of meta-analytic research activity in psychology, as well as to characterize its most important aspects and their evolution over time. A total of 2,874 articles published in scientific journals were identified and standard bibliometric indicators (e.g., number of articles, productivity by country, and national and international collaborations) and laws (e.g., Price’s and Lotka’s law) were applied to these data. The results suggest a clear upward trend not only in the number of articles published since the 1970s (with a peak of productivity in 2010), but also in both the number of authors by article ( $ \bar{x} = 2. 7 5 $ , SD = 1.53) and internationalization, especially since the 1990s. The interest in meta-analysis extends to many authors (n = 5,445), countries (n = 44) and scientific journals (n = 394), as well as to several areas of psychology that mostly fit a growing exponential model. In future studies it would be interesting to explore the citing behaviour and patterns in the meta-analysis literature.