article

A new network model for the study of scientific collaborations: Romanian computer science and mathematics co-authorship networks

Authors:

Rodica Ioana Lung,

Mihai Alexandru SuciuAuthors Info & Claims

Scientometrics, Volume 108, Issue 2

Pages 613 - 632

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-1968-4

Published: 01 August 2016 Publication History

Abstract

Co-authorship networks have been used to study collaboration patterns in various fields, evaluate researchers and recommend policies. In their simplest form they are constructed by considering authors to be network nodes connected to each other if they published a paper together. We propose to further explore the same data by constructing a different network, in which nodes are articles linked to one another if they have a common author. For papers published in the fields of computer science and mathematics with affiliations to Romanian institutions, we show that this type of network reveals patterns of collaborative behavior and offers new insights about practices in the field. We find that the proposed networks are smaller and denser than the co-authorship networks, have a better defined community structure, and directly represent the results of collaborative endeavors by focusing on the actual outcome, i.e., published papers.

References

[1]

Abbasi, A., Chung, K. S. K., & Hossain, L. (2012a). Egocentric analysis of co-authorship network structure, position and performance. Information Processing and Management, 48(4), 671-679.

Digital Library

[2]

Abbasi, A., Hossain, L., & Leydesdorff, L. (2012b). Betweenness centrality as a driver of preferential attachment in the evolution of research collaboration networks. Journal of Informetrics, 6(3), 403-412.

[3]

Ahn, S. A., & Jung, Y. (2015). High performance computing research activity: Co-authorship network analysis. ICIC Express Letters, Part B: Applications, 6(5), 1437-1441.

[4]

Amblard, F., Casteigts, A., Flocchini, P., Quattrociocchi, W., & Santoro, N. (2011). On the temporal analysis of scientific network evolution. In 2011 International Conference on Computational Aspects of Social Networks (CASoN), IEEE, pp. 169-174.

[5]

Barabási, A. L., & Albert, R. (1999). Emergence of scaling in random networks. Science, 286(5439), 509-512.

[6]

Barabási, A. L., Jeong, H., Néda, Z., Ravasz, E., Schubert, A., & Vicsek, T. (2002). Evolution of the social network of scientific collaborations. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, 311(3), 590-614.

[7]

Blondel, V. D., Guillaume, J. L., Lambiotte, R., & Lefebvre, E. (2008). Fast unfolding of communities in large networks. Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment, 2008(10), P10,008.

[8]

Bordons, M., Aparicio, J., González-Albo, B., & Díaz-Faes, A. A. (2015). The relationship between the research performance of scientists and their position in co-authorship networks in three fields. Journal of Informetrics, 9(1), 135-144.

[9]

Cardillo, A., Scellato, S., & Latora, V. (2006). A topological analysis of scientific coauthorship networks. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, 372(2), 333-339.

[10]

Cheong, F., & Corbitt, B. (2009). A social network analysis of the co-authorship network of the australasian conference of information systems from 1990 to 2006. In 17th European Conference on Information Systems, ECIS 2009.

[11]

Chubin, D. E., & Studer, K. E. (1979). Knowledge and structures of scientific growth measurement of a cancer problem domain. Scientometrics, 1(2), 171-193.

[12]

Cugmas, M., Ferligoj, A., & Kronegger, L. (2016). The stability of co-authorship structures. Scientometrics, 106(1), 163-186.

Digital Library

[13]

Delgado-Garcia, J.F., Laender, A.H., & Meira, W. (2014). Analyzing the Coauthorship Networks of Latin American Computer Science Research Groups. In 9th Latin American Web Congress, IEEE, pp 77-81.

[14]

Ding, Y. (2011). Scientific collaboration and endorsement: Network analysis of coauthorship and citation networks. Journal of informetrics, 5(1), 187-203.

[15]

Fortunato, S. (2010). Community detection in graphs. Physics Reports, 486, 75-174.

[16]

Ghafouri, H. B., Mohammadhassanzadeh, H., Shokraneh, F., Vakilian, M., & Farahmand, S. (2013). Social network analysis of Iranian researchers on emergency medicine: A sociogram analysis. Emergency Medicine Journal, 31(8), 619-624.

[17]

Giuliani, F., De Petris, M. P., & Nico, G. (2010). Assessing scientific collaboration through coauthorship and content sharing. Scientometrics, 85(1), 13-28.

[18]

Glänzel, W. (2001). National characteristics in international scientific co-authorship relations. Scientometrics, 51(1), 69-115.

[19]

Glänzel, W. (2002). Coauthorship patterns and trends in the sciences (1980-1998): A bibliometric study with implications for database indexing and search strategies. Library Trends, 50(3), 461-473.

[20]

Glänzel, W., & Schubert, A. (2005). Handbook of quantitative science and technology research: The use of publication and patent statistics in studies of S&T systems (pp. 257-276). Dordrecht: Springer.

[21]

Han, Y., Zhou, B., Pei, J., & Jia, Y. (2009). Understanding importance of collaborations in coauthorship networks: A supportiveness analysis approach. In Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics - 9th SIAM International Conference on Data Mining 2009, Proceedings in Applied Mathematics, vol 3, pp. 1105-1116.

[22]

Hâncean, M. G., Perc, M., & Vlasceanu, L. (2014). Fragmented romanian sociology: Growth and structure of the collaboration network. PloS One, 9(11), e113,271.

[23]

He, B., Ding, Y., Tang, J., Reguramalingam, V., & Bollen, J. (2013). Mining diversity subgraph in multidisciplinary scientific collaboration networks: A meso perspective. Journal of Informetrics, 7(1), 117-128.

[24]

Huang, J., Zhuang, Z., Li, J., & Giles, C.L. (2008). Collaboration over time: characterizing and modeling network evolution. In Proceedings of the 2008 International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining, ACM, pp. 107-116.

[25]

Kretschmer, H., Ozel, B., & Kretschmer, T. (2015a). Who is collaborating with whom? Part I. Mathematical model and methods for empirical testing. Journal of Informetrics, 9(2), 359-372.

[26]

Kretschmer, H., Ozel, B., & Kretschmer, T. (2015b). Who is collaborating with whom? Part II. Application of the methods to male and to female networks. Journal of Informetrics, 9(2), 373-384.

[27]

Kumar, S. (2015). Co-authorship networks: A review of the literature. Aslib Journal of Information Management, 67(1), 55-73.

[28]

Kumar, S. (2016). Effect of gender on collaborative associations of researchers in Malaysia. The Electronic Library, 34(1), 74-82.

[29]

Kurosawa, T., & Takama, Y. (2012). Co-Authorship networks visualization system for supporting survey of researchers future activities. Journal of Emerging Technologies in Web Intelligence, 4(1), 3-14.

[30]

Lancichinetti, A., Radicchi, F., Ramasco, J. J., & Fortunato, S. (2011). Finding statistically significant communities in networks. PloS One, 6(4), e18,961.

[31]

Li, L., & Xuezhu, G. (2012). Innovation performance of university co-authorship network. In Information Management, Innovation Management and Industrial Engineering (ICIII), 2012 International Conference on, IEEE, vol 1, pp 410-413.

[32]

Liu, J., Li, Y., Ruan, Z., Fu, G., Chen, X., Sadiq, R., et al. (2015). A new method to construct coauthor networks. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, 419, 29-39.

[33]

Liu, Y.X., Lu, B., & Zhang, Q. (2013). Empirical analysis of the coauthorship network based on DBLP. In International Conference on Machine Learning and Cybernetics, IEEE, vol 3, pp 1070-1076.

[34]

Logan, E. L., & Shaw, W. M. (1991). A bibliometric analysis of collaboration in a medical specialty. Scientometrics, 20(3), 417-426.

[35]

Lozano, S., Rodríguez, X. P., & Arenas, A. (2013). Atapuerca: evolution of scientific collaboration in an emergent large-scale research infrastructure. Scientometrics, 98(2), 1505-1520.

[36]

Lu¿ar, B., Levnajic, Z., Povh, J., & Perc, M. (2014). Community structure and the evolution of interdisciplinarity in slovenia's scientific collaboration network. PLoS One, 9(4), e94,429.

[37]

Matusiak, A., & Morzy, M. (2012). Social Network Analysis in Scientometrics. In 2012 Eighth International Conference on Signal Image Technology and Internet Based Systems, IEEE, pp. 692-699.

[38]

Mena-Chalco, J.P., & Cesar Junior, R.M. (2011). Towards Automatic Discovery of co-authorship Networks in the Brazilian Academic Areas. In 2011 IEEE Seventh International Conference on e-Science Workshops, IEEE, pp. 53-60.

[39]

Meng, W., & Pang, J. (2010). Analysis of network characteristic and community structure of coauthorship network for information science in China. Wuhan Daxue Xuebao (Xinxi Kexue Ban)/Geomatics and Information Science of Wuhan University, 35(Special Issue 2), 102-106.

[40]

Milojevic, S. (2010). Modes of collaboration in modern science: Beyond power laws and preferential attachment. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 61(7), 1410-1423.

Digital Library

[41]

Nikzad, M., Jamali, H. R., & Hariri, N. (2011). Patterns of Iranian co-authorship networks in social sciences: A comparative study. Library and Information Science Research, 33(4), 313-319.

[42]

Olmeda-Gómez, C., Perianes-Rodríguez, A., Antonia Ovalle-Perandones, M., Guerrero-Bote, V. P., & de Moya, Anegón F. (2009). Visualization of scientific coauthorship in Spanish universities. Aslib Proceedings, 61(1), 83-100.

[43]

Ortega, J. L. (2014). Influence of co-authorship networks in the research impact: Ego network analyses from Microsoft Academic Search. Journal of Informetrics, 8(3), 728-737.

[44]

Ovalle-Perandones, M.A., Perianes-Rodriguez, A., & Olmeda-Gomez, C. (2009). Hubs and Authorities in a Spanish Co-authorship Network. In 2009 13th International Conference Information Visualisation, IEEE, pp. 514-518.

[45]

Parada, G.A., Ceballos, H.G., Cantu, F.J., & Rodriguez-Aceves, L.(2013). Recommending intra-institutional scientific collaborationthrough coauthorship network visualization. In Proceedings of the 2013 workshop on Computational scientometrics: theory & applications - CompSci '13, ACM Press, New York, NYk, USA, pp. 7-12.

[46]

Perc, M. (2010). Growth and structure of Slovenia's scientific collaboration network. Journal of Informetrics, 4(4), 475-482.

[47]

Perc, M. (2014). The matthew effect in empirical data. Journal of The Royal Society Interface, 11(98), 20140, 378.

[48]

Perianes-Rodríguez, A., Olmeda-Gómez, C., & Moya-Anegón, F. (2009). Detecting, identifying and visualizing research groups in co-authorship networks. Scientometrics, 82(2), 307-319.

[49]

Pujari, S.C., Hadgu, A.T., Lex, E., & Jäschke, R. (2015). Social activity versus academic activity: A case study of computer scientists on twitter. In Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Knowledge Technologies and Data-driven Business, ACM, i-KNOW '15, pp. 12:1-12:8.

[50]

Rosvall, M., & Bergstrom, C. T. (2008). Maps of random walks on complex networks reveal community structure. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 105(4), 1118-1123.

[51]

Savic, M., Ivanovic, M., Radovanovic, M., Ognjanovic, Z., Pejovic, A., & Jak¿ic Krüger, T. (2014). The structure and evolution of scientific collaboration in Serbian mathematical journals. Scientometrics, 101(3), 1805-1830.

Digital Library

[52]

Sun, Wj., & Jiang, Ax. (2009). The collaboration network in China's management science. In 2009 International Conference on Management Science and Engineering, IEEE, pp 40-44.

[53]

Tomassini, M., & Luthi, L. (2007). Empirical analysis of the evolution of a scientific collaboration network. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, 385(2), 750-764.

[54]

Velden, T., & Lagoze, C. (2009). Patterns of Collaboration in Co-authorship Networks in Chemistry - Mesoscopic Analysis and Interpretation. In Proceedings of Issi 2009--12th International Conference of the International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics, Vol. 2 pp 764-775.

[55]

Wagner, C. S., Horlings, E., Whetsell, T. A., Mattsson, P., & Nordqvist, K. (2015). Do nobel laureates create prize-winning networks? An analysis of collaborative research in physiology or medicine. PLoS One, 10(7), e0134,164.

[56]

Wang, T., Zhang, Q., Liu, Z., Liu, W., & Wen, D. (2012). On social computing research collaboration patterns: A social network perspective. Frontiers of Computer Science, 6(1), 122-130.

Digital Library

[57]

Xiang, D., & Li, H. (2012). Analyzing international scientific collaboration pattern for China by using ESI database. In 2012 IEEE International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management, IEEE, pp. 1386-1390.

[58]

Xu, J. J., Chau, M., & Tan, B. C. Y. (2014). The development of social capital in the collaboration network of information systems scholars. Journal of the Association of Information Systems, 15(12), 835-859.

[59]

Yan, E., & Ding, Y. (2012). Scholarly network similarities: How bibliographic coupling networks, citation networks, cocitation networks, topical networks, coauthorship networks, and coword networks relate to each other. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 63(7), 1313-1326.

Digital Library

[60]

Yan, E., & Guns, R. (2014). Predicting and recommending collaborations: An author-, institution-, and country-level analysis. Journal of Informetrics, 8(2), 295-309.

[61]

Yan, E., Ding, Y., & Zhu, Q. (2009). Mapping library and information science in China: a coauthorship network analysis. Scientometrics, 83(1), 115-131.

[62]

Yoshikane, F., & Kageura, K. (2004). Comparative analysis of coauthorship networks of different domains: The growth and change of networks. Scientometrics, 60(3), 435-446.

Cited By

Isfandyari-Moghaddam ASaberi MTahmasebi-Limoni SMohammadian SNaderbeigi F(2023)Global scientific collaborationJournal of Information Science10.1177/0165551521104065549:4(1126-1141)Online publication date: 1-Aug-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1177/01655515211040655
Sarvghad AFranqui-Nadal RReznik-Zellen RChawla RMahyar N(2023)Scientometric Analysis of Interdisciplinary Collaboration and Gender Trends in 30 Years of IEEE VIS PublicationsIEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics10.1109/TVCG.2022.315823629:7(3340-3353)Online publication date: 1-Jul-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1109/TVCG.2022.3158236
Han LZhang GYong BHe QFeng FZhou Q(2019)Statistical study of characteristics of online reading behavior networks in university digital libraryWorld Wide Web10.1007/s11280-018-0593-y22:3(1175-1187)Online publication date: 21-May-2019
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/s11280-018-0593-y
Show More Cited By

Recommendations

Analysis of intra-institutional research collaboration: a case of a Serbian faculty of sciences

Current research information systems (CRISs) offer great opportunities for scientometric studies of institutional research outputs. However, many of these opportunities have not been explored in depth, especially for the analysis of intra-institutional ...
Analysing scientific collaborations of new zealand institutions using scopus bibliometric data
ACSW '18: Proceedings of the Australasian Computer Science Week Multiconference

Scientific collaborations are among the main enablers of development in small national science systems. Although analysing scientific collaborations is a well-established subject in scientometrics, evaluations of scientific collaborations within a ...
Scientific collaboration dynamics in a national scientific system

This paper examines the collaboration structures and dynamics of the co-authorship network of all Slovenian researchers. Its goal is to identify the key factors driving collaboration and the main differences in collaboration behavior across scientific ...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image Scientometrics

Scientometrics Volume 108, Issue 2

August 2016

507 pages

ISSN:0138-9130

Issue’s Table of Contents

Copyright © Copyright © 2016 Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary.

Publisher

Springer-Verlag

Berlin, Heidelberg

Publication History

Published: 01 August 2016

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Article

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

5
Total Citations
View Citations
0
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)0
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0

Reflects downloads up to 06 Oct 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Isfandyari-Moghaddam ASaberi MTahmasebi-Limoni SMohammadian SNaderbeigi F(2023)Global scientific collaborationJournal of Information Science10.1177/0165551521104065549:4(1126-1141)Online publication date: 1-Aug-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1177/01655515211040655
Sarvghad AFranqui-Nadal RReznik-Zellen RChawla RMahyar N(2023)Scientometric Analysis of Interdisciplinary Collaboration and Gender Trends in 30 Years of IEEE VIS PublicationsIEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics10.1109/TVCG.2022.315823629:7(3340-3353)Online publication date: 1-Jul-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1109/TVCG.2022.3158236
Han LZhang GYong BHe QFeng FZhou Q(2019)Statistical study of characteristics of online reading behavior networks in university digital libraryWorld Wide Web10.1007/s11280-018-0593-y22:3(1175-1187)Online publication date: 21-May-2019
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/s11280-018-0593-y
Singh CJolad S(2019)Structure and evolution of Indian physics co-authorship networksScientometrics10.1007/s11192-018-02999-5118:2(385-406)Online publication date: 1-Feb-2019
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/s11192-018-02999-5
Lung RGaskó NSuciu M(2018)A hypergraph model for representing scientific outputScientometrics10.1007/s11192-018-2908-2117:3(1361-1379)Online publication date: 1-Dec-2018
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/s11192-018-2908-2

View Options

View options

Get Access

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Issue’s Table of Contents