Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
10.5555/2655780.2655841dlproceedingsArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesasistConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Deconstructing the collaborative impact: article and author characteristics that influence citation count

Published: 01 November 2013 Publication History

Abstract

It is well known that collaborative papers tend to receive more citations than solo-authored papers. Here we try to identify the subtle factors of this collaborative effect by analyzing metadata and citation counts for co-authored papers in the biomedical domain, after accounting for attributes known to be strong predictors of citation count. Article-level metadata were gathered from 98,000 PubMed article records categorized with the term breast neoplasm, a topic offering longevity and relevance across biomedical subdisciplines, and yielding a relatively large sample size. Open access citation data was obtained from PubMed Central (PMC). Author-level attributes were encoded from disambiguated author name data in PubMed and appended as article-level attributes of collaborations. A logistic regression model was built to assess the relative weights of these factors as influences on citation counts. As expected, the journal and language of the paper were the strongest predictors. The significance of the number of authors diminished after accounting for other attributes. Some of the more subtle predictors included the group's highest h-index, which was positively correlated, while the diversity of author h-indices, minimum professional age, and author's total unique collaborators were negatively correlated. These observations indicate that smaller collaborations composed of early superstars -- young, rapidly successful researchers with relatively high and similar h-indices -- may be at least as influential in biomedical research as larger collaborations with different demographics. While minimum h-index was important, the first author's h-index was insignificant, underscoring the importance of the middle authors' publishing history. The gender diversity outcomes suggest that mixed groups may be ideal, and further research in this area is indicated.

References

[1]
Abramo, G., D'Angelo, C. A., & Di Costa, F. (2009). Research Collaboration and Productivity: Is There Correlation? Higher Education 57(2), 155--171.
[2]
Adams, J. D., Black, G. C., Clemmons, J. R., & Stephan, P. E. (2005). Scientific Teams and Institutional Collaborations: Evidence from U.S. Universities, 1981--1999. Research Policy 34(3), 259--85.
[3]
Bergh, D. D., Perry, J., & Hanke, R. (2006). Some Predictors of SMJ Article Impact. Strategic Management Journal, 27(1), 81--100.
[4]
Fischbach, K., Putzke, J., & Schoder, D. (2011) Co-authorship Networks in Electronic Markets Research. Electron Markets 21, 19--40.
[5]
Gazni, A., & Didegah, F. (2011). Investigating Different Types of Research Collaboration and Citation Impact: A Case Study of Harvard University's Publications. Scientometrics 87(2), 251--265.
[6]
Hall, M., Frank, E., Holmes, G., Pfahringer, B., Reutemann, P., & Witten, I. (2009). The WEKA Data Mining Software: An Update. SIGKDD Explorations 11(1).
[7]
Haslam, N., Ban, L., Kaufmann, L., Loughnan, S., Peters, K., Whelan, J., & Wilson, S. (2008). What Makes an Article Influential? Predicting Impact in Social and Personality Psychology. Scientometrics 76(1), 169--85.
[8]
Haslam, N., & Simon Laham, S. (2009). Early-Career Scientific Achievement and Patterns of Authorship: The Mixed Blessings of Publication Leadership and Collaboration. Research Evaluation 18(5), 405--10.
[9]
Hirsch, J. E. (2007) Does the h Index Have Predictive Power? PNAS 104(49), 19193--19198.
[10]
Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2008). Measuring Co-Authorship and Networking-Adjusted Scientific Impact. PLoS ONE 3(7), e2778.
[11]
Le Cessie, S., & Van Houwelingen, J. C. (1992). Ridge Estimators in Logistic Regression. Applied Statistics.41(1), 191--201.
[12]
Nichols, D. (2012, May 4). Metrics for Openness. CIRSS Seminar Series, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
[13]
Quinlan, R. (1993). C4.5: Programs for Machine Learning.
[14]
Parker, J. (2010). An Empirical Examination of the Roles of Ability and Gender in Collaborative Homework Assignments. The Journal of Economic Education 41(1), 15--30.
[15]
Petersen, A. M., Riccaboni, M., Stanley, H. E., & Pammolli, F. (2012). Persistence and uncertainty in the academic career. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109(14), 5213--5218.
[16]
Priem, J., Taraborelli, D., Groth, P., & Neylon, C. (2011) altmetrics: a manifesto. Retrieved from altmetrics.org/manifesto
[17]
Raghubir, P., & Valenzuela, A. (2010). Male Female Dynamics in Groups: A Field Study of The Weakest Link. Small Group Research 2010 41: 41
[18]
Rey-Rocha, J., & Martín-Sempere, M. J., Martínez-Frías, J., & López-Vera, F. (2001). Some Misuses of Journal Impact Factor in Research Evaluation. Cortex 37(4), 595--597.
[19]
Skilton, P. F. (2009). Does the Human Capital of Teams of Natural Science Authors Predict Citation Frequency? Scientometrics 78(3), 525--542.
[20]
Smith B. N., Singh M., Torvik V. I. (2013). A search engine approach to estimating temporal changes in gender orientation of first names. Proceedings of the 13th ACM/IEEE-CS joint conference on Digital libraries. JCDL '13, July 22--26, Indianapolis, IN, USA. 199--208.
[21]
Sooho, L., & Bozeman, B. (2005). The Impact of Research Collaboration on Scientific Productivity. Social Studies of Science 35.5, 673--702.
[22]
Sooryamoorthy, R. (2009). Do Types of Collaboration Change Citation? Collaboration and Citation Patterns of South African Science Publications. Scientometrics 81.1, 177--93.
[23]
Stremersch, S., & Verhoef, P. C. (2005). Globalization of Authorship in the Marketing Discipline: Does It Help or Hinder the Field? Marketing Science 24(4), 585--594.
[24]
Torvik V. I., Fegley B. D., Smith B. N. (2013). Identifying biomedical author-inventors by probabilistic disambiguation and linking names across and USPTO. Working paper Graduate School of Library and Information Science.
[25]
Torvik, V. I., & Smalheiser, N. R. (2009). Author Name Disambiguation in MEDLINE. ACM Transactions on Knowledge Discovery from Data 3(3), 11.
[26]
Torvik V. I., Weeber M., Swanson D. R., Smalheiser N. R. (2005). A probabilistic similarity metric for Medline records: A model for author name disambiguation. Journal of the American Society of Information Science and Technology 56(2), 14--158.
[27]
Wuchty, S., Jones, B. F., & Uzzi, B. (2007). The Increasing Dominance of Teams in Production of Knowledge. Science 316, 1036.

Cited By

View all

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image DL Hosted proceedings
ASIST '13: Proceedings of the 76th ASIS&T Annual Meeting: Beyond the Cloud: Rethinking Information Boundaries
November 2013
1065 pages
ISBN:0877155453

Publisher

American Society for Information Science

United States

Publication History

Published: 01 November 2013

Author Tags

  1. bibliometrics
  2. citation analysis
  3. collaboration
  4. impact

Qualifiers

  • Research-article

Conference

ASIST '13
ASIST '13: Rethinking Information Boundaries
November 1 - 5, 2013
Quebec, Montreal, Canada

Acceptance Rates

ASIST '13 Paper Acceptance Rate 83 of 128 submissions, 65%;
Overall Acceptance Rate 135 of 277 submissions, 49%

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)3
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 13 Jan 2025

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all

View Options

Login options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media