Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

The correlation between scientific collaboration and citation count at the paper level: a meta-analysis

  • Published:
Scientometrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Collaboration has been widely investigated as a prevalent research activity. However, no consensus has been reached about the relationship between scientific collaboration and citation count. Therefore, this study aimed to comprehensively examine the strength and consistency of this relationship, using meta-analytic methods and measuring scientific collaboration by co-authorship. After the literature search and initial selection, 361 relevant papers were found. Based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria, 92 papers involving 340 effect sizes were included. A random-effect meta-analysis showed a significant positive and weak correlation between scientific collaboration and citation count (r = 0.146). Tests of publication bias and heterogeneity revealed that the result was reliable. In addition, disciplines, countries, document types and citation sources were found to influence the correlation as moderators significantly. Practical recommendations for research administrators and researchers were provided, including encouraging collaboration and maintaining a cost-benefit balance in collaboration.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Web of Science research domain categories: http://images.webofknowledge.com//WOKRS535R69/help/zh_CN/WOK/hs_research_domains.html#dsy5466-TRS.

  2. List of advanced economies: https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2005/01/data/groups.htm#1.

  3. JIF quartiles of JCR2018: https://jcr.clarivate.com/JCRJournalHomeAction.action?#.

References

  • Abramo, G., Cicero, T., & D’Angelo, C. A. (2011). Assessing the varying level of impact measurement accuracy as a function of the citation window length. Journal of Informetrics, 5(4), 659–667.

    Google Scholar 

  • Abramo, G., & D’Angelo, C. A. (2015). The relationship between the number of authors of a publication, its citations and the impact factor of the publishing journal: Evidence from Italy. Journal of Informetrics, 9(4), 746–761.

    Google Scholar 

  • Acedo, F. J., Barroso, C., Casanueva, C., & Galan, J. L. (2006). Co-authorship in management and organizational studies: An empirical and network analysis. Journal of Management Studies, 43(5), 957–983.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ahmed, A., Adam, M., Ghafar, N. A., Muhammad, M., & Ebrahim, N. A. (2016). Impact of article page count and number of authors on citations in disability related fields: A systematic review article. Iranian Journal of Public Health, 45(9), 1118–1125.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aksnes, D. W. (2003). A macro study of self-citation. Scientometrics, 56(2), 235–246.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alabousi, M., Zha, N. X., & Patlas, M. N. (2019). Predictors of citation rate for original research studies in the canadian association of radiologists journal. Canadian Association of Radiologists Journal, 70(4), 383–387.

    Google Scholar 

  • Allik, J., Lauk, K., & Realo, A. (2020). Factors predicting the scientific wealth of nations. Cross-Cultural Research, UNSP. https://doi.org/10.1177/1069397120910982.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Annalingam, A., Damayanthi, H., Jayawardena, R., & Ranasinghe, P. (2014). Determinants of the citation rate of medical research publications from a developing country. Springerplus, 3, 140. https://doi.org/10.1186/2193-1801-3-140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Asubiaro, T. (2019). How collaboration type, publication place, funding and author’s role affect citations received by publications from Africa: A bibliometric study of LIS research from 1996 to 2015. Scientometrics, 120(3), 1261–1287.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bakkalbasi, N., Bauer, K., Glover, J., & Wang, L. (2006). Three options for citation tracking: Google scholar, scopus and web of science. Biomedical Digital Libraries, 3, 7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bales, M. E., Dine, D. C., Merrill, J. A., Johnson, S. B., Bakken, S., & Weng, C. H. (2014). Associating co-authorship patterns with publications in high-impact journals. Journal of Biomedical Informatics, 52, 311–318.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bammer, G. (2008). Enhancing research collaborations: Three key management challenges. Research Policy, 37(5), 875–887.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bartneck, C., & Hu, J. (2010). The fruits of collaboration in a multidisciplinary field. Scientometrics, 85(1), 41–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bordons, M., Aparicio, J., & Costas, R. (2013). Heterogeneity of collaboration and its relationship with research impact in a biomedical field. Scientometrics, 96(2), 443–466.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P. T., & Rothstein, H. R. (2009). Introduction to meta-analysis. West Sussex: Wiley.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Borenstein, M., Higgins, J. P. T., & Hedges, L. V. (2017). Basics of meta-analysis: I2 is not an absolute measure of heterogeneity. Research Synthesis Methods, 8, 5–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bornmann, L., & Daniel, H. D. (2007). Multiple publication on a single research study: Does it pay? The influence of number of research articles on total citation counts in biomedicine. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(8), 1100–1107.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bornmann, L., & Daniel, H. D. (2008a). What do citation counts measure? A review of studies on citing behavior. Journal of Documentation, 64(1), 45–80.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bornmann, L., & Daniel, H. D. (2008b). Selecting manuscripts for a high-impact journal through peer review: A citation analysis of communications that were accepted by Angewandte Chemie International Edition, or rejected but published elsewhere. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(11), 1841–1852.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bornmann, L., Schier, H., Marx, W., & Daniel, H. D. (2012). What factors determine citation counts of publications in chemistry besides their quality? Journal of Informetrics, 6(1), 11–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borrons, M., Gomez, I., & Fernandez, M. T. (1996). Local, domestic and international scientific collaboration in biomedical research. Scientometrics, 37(2), 279–295.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bozemana, B., & Corley, E. (2004). Scientists’ collaboration strategies: Implications for scientific and technical human capital. Research Policy, 33(4), 599–616.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bozeman, B., Fay, D., & Slade, C. P. (2013). Research collaboration in universities and academic entrepreneurship: The-state-of-the-art. Journal of Technology Transfer, 38(1), 1–67.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cartes-Velasquez, R., & Manterola, C. (2017). Impact of collaboration on research quality: A case analysis of dental research. International Journal of Information Science and Management, 15(1), 89–93.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chinchilla-Rodriguez, Z., Benavent-Perez, M., de Moya-Anegon, F., & Miguel, S. (2012). International collaboration in medical research in Latin America and the Caribbean (2003–2007). Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 63(11), 2223–2238.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chi, P. S., & Glanzel, W. (2016). Do usage and scientific collaboration associate with citation impact? In Rafols, I., MolasGallart, J., CastroMartinez, E., & Woolley, R. (Eds), Proceeding—21st international conference on science and technology indicators: Peripheries, Frontiers and Beyond (STI) (pp. 1223–1228).

  • Chi, P. S., & Glanzel, W. (2017). An empirical investigation of the associations among usage, scientific collaboration and citation impact. Scientometrics, 112(1), 403–412.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clements, J. C. (2017). Open access articles receive more citations in hybrid marine ecology journals. Facets. https://doi.org/10.1139/facets-2016-0032.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power and analysis for the behavioral science (2nd ed.). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Cummings, J. N., & Kiesler, S. (2007). Coordination costs and project outcomes in multi-university collaborations. Research Policy, 36(10), 1620–1634.

    Google Scholar 

  • Didegah, F., & Thelwall, M. (2013). Which factors help authors produce the highest impact research? Collaboration, journal and document properties. Journal of Informetrics, 7(4), 861–873.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ellis, G., Whitehead, M. A., Robinson, D., O’Neill, D., & Langhorne, P. (2011). Comprehensive geriatric assessment for older adults admitted to hospital: Meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. British Medical Journal, 343, d6653. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.d6553.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Franceschet, M., & Costantini, A. (2010). The effect of scholar collaboration on impact and quality of academic papers. Journal of Informetrics, 4(4), 540–553.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frenken, K., Holzl, W., & de Vor, F. (2005). The citation impact of research collaborations: The case of European biotechnology and applied microbiology (1988–2002). Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 22(2), 9–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fu, H. Z., & Ho, Y. S. (2018). Collaborative characteristics and networks of national, institutional and individual contributors using highly cited articles in environmental engineering in science citation index expanded. Current Science, 115(3), 410–421.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fu, H. Z., Fang, K., & Fang, C. L. (2018). Characteristics of scientific impact of resources conservation and recycling in the past 30 years. Resources Conservation and Recycling, 137, 251–259.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garcia-Aroca, M. A., Pandiella-Dominique, A., Navarro-Suay, R., Alonso-Arroyo, A., Granda-Orive, J. I., Anguita-Rodriguez, F., & Lopez-Garcia, A. (2017). Analysis of production, impact, and scientific collaboration on difficult airway through the web of science and scopus (1981–2013). Anesthesia and Analgesia, 124(6), 1886–1896.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Godin, B., & Gingras, Y. (2000). Impact of collaborative research on academic science. Science and Public Policy, 27(1), 65–73.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldfinch, S., Dale, T., & DeRouen, K. (2003). Science from the periphery: Collaboration, networks and “periphery effects” in the citation of New Zealand crown research institutes articles, 1995–2000. Scientometrics, 57(3), 321–337.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gross, P. L., & Gross, E. M. (1927). College libraries and chemical education. Bulletin of the American Association of University Professors, 66(1713), 385–389.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hart, R. L. (2007). Collaboration and article quality in the literature of academic librarianship. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 33(2), 190–195.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harzing, A. W., & Alakangas, S. (2016). Google scholar, scopus and the web of science: A longitudinal and cross-disciplinary comparison. Scientometrics, 106(2), 787–804.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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), 169–185.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hatemi-J, A., Ajmi, A. N., El Montasser, G., Inglesi-Lotz, R., & Gupta, R. (2016). Research output and economic growth in G7 countries: New evidence from asymmetric panel causality testing. Applied Economics, 48(24), 2301–2305.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayati, Z., & Didegah, F. (2010). International scientific collaboration among Iranian researchers during 1998–2007. Library Hi Tech, 28(3), 433–446.

    Google Scholar 

  • He, Z. L., Geng, X. S., & Campbell-Hunt, C. (2009). Research collaboration and research output: A longitudinal study of 65 biomedical scientists in a New Zealand university. Research Policy, 38(2), 306–317.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herbertz, H. (1995). Does it pay to cooperate—a bibliometric case-study in molecular-biology. Scientometrics, 33(1), 117–122.

    Google Scholar 

  • Higgins, J. P. T., Thompson, S. G., Deeks, J. J., & Altman, D. G. (2003). Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. British Medical Journal, 327(7414), 557–560.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hofstede, G. (2011). Dimensionalizing cultures: The hofstede model in context. Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, 2(1), 8. https://doi.org/10.9707/2307-0919.1014.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hsiehchen, D., Espinoza, M., & Hsieh, A. (2015). Multinational teams and diseconomies of scale in collaborative research. Science Advances, 1(8), e1500211.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ibanez, A., Bielza, C., & Larranaga, P. (2013). Relationship among research collaboration, number of documents and number of citations: A case study in Spanish computer science production in 2000–2009. Scientometrics, 95(2), 698–716.

    Google Scholar 

  • Iribarren-Maestro, T., Lascurain-Sanchez, M., & Sanz-Casado, E. (2009). Are multi-authorship and visibility related? Study of ten research areas at Carlos III University of Madrid. Scientometrics, 79(1), 191–200.

    Google Scholar 

  • Katz, J. S., & Martin, B. R. (1997). What is research collaboration? Research Policy, 26(1), 1–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kraut, R. E., Galegher, J., & Egido, C. (1987). Relationships and tasks in scientific research collaboration. Human-Computer Interaction, 3(1), 31–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kumar, R. R., Stauvermann, P. J., & Patel, A. (2016). Exploring the link between research and economic growth: An empirical study of China and USA. Quality & Quantity, 50(3), 1073–1091.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lachance, C., Poirier, S., & Lariviere, V. (2014). The kiss of death? The effect of being cited in a review on subsequent citations. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 65(7), 1501–1505.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lariviere, V., Gingras, Y., Sugimoto, C. R., & Tsou, A. (2015). Team size matters: Collaboration and scientific impact since 1900. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 66(7), 1323–1332.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leimu, R., & Koricheva, J. (2005). Does scientific collaboration increase the impact of ecological articles? BioScience, 55(5), 438–443.

    Google Scholar 

  • Li, K., & He, J. (2013). Medical statistics (6th ed.). Beijing: People’s Medical Publishing House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lin, W. Y. C., & Huang, M. H. (2012). The relationship between co-authorship, currency of references and author self-citations. Scientometrics, 90(2), 343–360.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, X. L., Gai, S. S., Zhang, S. L., & Wang, P. (2015). An analysis of peer-reviewed scores and impact factors with different citation time windows: A case study of 28 ophthalmologic journals. PLoS ONE, 10(8), e0135583.

    Google Scholar 

  • Louscher, B. M., Allareddy, A., & Elangovan, S. (2019). Predictors of citations of systematic reviews in oral implantology: A cross-sectional bibliometric analysis. Sage Open, 9(1), 2158244019835941.

    Google Scholar 

  • Low, W. Y., Ng, K. H., Kabir, M. A., Koh, A. P., & Sinnasamy, J. (2014). Trend and impact of international collaboration in clinical medicine papers published in Malaysia. Scientometrics, 98(2), 1521–1533.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mingers, J., & Lipitakis, E. A. E. C. G. (2010). Counting the citations: A comparison of web of science and Google Scholar in the field of business and management. Scientometrics, 85(2), 613–625.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moldwin, M. B., & Liemohn, M. W. (2018). High-citation papers in space physics: Examination of gender, country, and paper characteristics. Journal of Geophysical Research-Space Physics, 123(4), 2557–2565.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mongeon, P., & Paul-Hus, A. (2015). The journal coverage of Web of Science and Scopus: A comparative analysis. Scientometrics, 106(1), 213–228.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, G. A., Leech, N. L., Gloecker, G. W., & Barret, K. C. (2013). IBM SPSS for introductory statistic. Use and interpretation (5th ed.). New York: Routledge Taylor & Francis Group.

    Google Scholar 

  • Muniz, F. W. M. G., Celeste, R. K., Oballe, H. J. R., & Rosing, C. K. (2018). Citation analysis and trends in review articles in dentistry. Journal of Evidence-Based Dental Practice, 18(2), 110–118.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Leary, D. E. (2008). The relationship between citations and number of downloads in decision support systems. Decision Support Systems, 45(4), 972–980.

    Google Scholar 

  • Onodera, N., & Yoshikane, F. (2015). Factors affecting citation rates of research articles. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 66(4), 739–764.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parr, N. J., Schweer-Collins, M. L., Darlington, T. M., & Tanner-Smith, E. E. (2019). Meta-analytic approaches for examining complexity and heterogeneity in studies of adolescent development. Journal of Adolescence, 77, 168–178.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peclin, S., Juznic, P., Blagus, R., Sajko, M. C., & Stare, J. (2012). Effects of international collaboration and status of journal on impact of papers. Scientometrics, 93(3), 937–948.

    Google Scholar 

  • Polyakov, M., Polyakov, S., & Iftekhar, M. S. (2017). Does academic collaboration equally benefit impact of research across topics? The case of agricultural, resource, environmental and ecological economics. Scientometrics, 113(3), 1385–1405.

    Google Scholar 

  • Puuska, H. M., Muhonen, R., & Leino, Y. (2014). International and domestic co-publishing and their citation impact in different disciplines. Scientometrics, 98(2), 823–839.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quan, W., Mongeon, P., Sainte-Marie, P., Zhao, R. Y., & Lariviere, V. (2019). On the development of China’s leadership in international collaborations. Scientometrics, 120(2), 707–721.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ronda-Pupo, G. A., Diaz-Contreras, C., Ronda-Velazquez, G., & Ronda-Pupo, J. C. (2015). The role of academic collaboration in the impact of Latin-American research on management. Scientometrics, 102(2), 1435–1454.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenthal, R. (1991). Meta-analytic procedures for social research. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rousseau, R., & Ding, J. L. (2016). Does international collaboration yield a higher citation potential for US scientists publishing in highly visible interdisciplinary Journals? Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 67(4), 1009–1013.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sahu, S. R., & Anda, K. C. (2014). Does the multi-authorship trend influence the quality of an article? Scientometrics, 98(3), 2161–2168.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shehatta, I., & Mahmood, K. (2016). Research collaboration in Saudi Arabia 1980–2014: Bibliometric patterns and national policy to foster research quantity and quality. Libri, 66(1), 13–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simonsohn, U., Nelson, L. D., & Simmons, J. P. (2014). P-curve: A key to the file-drawer. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 143(2), 534–547.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sin, S. C. J. (2011). International coauthorship and citation impact: A bibliometric study of six lis journals, 1980–2008. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62(9), 1770–1783.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smart, J. C., & Bayer, A. E. (1986). Author collaboration and impact: A note on citation rates of single and multiple authored articles. Scientometrics, 10(5), 297–305.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sooryamoorthy, R. (2009). Do types of collaboration change citation? Collaboration and citation patterns of South African science publications. Scientometrics, 81(1), 177–193.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sooryamoorthy, R. (2017). Do types of collaboration change citation? A scientometric analysis of social science publications in South Africa. Scientometrics, 111(1), 379–400.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sud, P., & Thelwall, M. (2016). Not all international collaboration is beneficial: The mendeley readership and citation impact of biochemical research collaboration. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 67(8), 1849–1857.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tahamtan, I., Afshar, A. S., & Ahamdzadeh, K. (2016). Factors affecting number of citations: A comprehensive review of the literature. Scientometrics, 107(3), 1195–1225.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tahamtan, I., & Bornmann, L. (2018). Core elements in the process of citing publications: Conceptual overview of the literature. Journal of Informetrics, 12(1), 203–216.

    Google Scholar 

  • Talke, K., Salomo, S., & Kock, A. (2011). Top management team diversity and strategic innovation orientation: The relationship and consequences for innovativeness and performance. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 28(6), 819–832.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thelwall, M., & Maflahi, N. (2019). Academic collaboration rates and citation associations vary substantially between countries and fields. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24315.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thelwall, M., & Sud, P. (2014). No citation advantage for monograph-based collaborations? Journal of Informetrics, 8(1), 276–283.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tregenza, T. (2002). Gender bias in the refereeing process? Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 17(8), 349–350.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Raan, A. F. J. (1998). The influence of international collaboration on the impact of research results—some simple mathematical considerations concerning the role of self-citations. Scientometrics, 42(3), 423–428.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Wesel, M., Wyatt, S., & ten Haaf, J. (2014). What a difference a colon makes: How superficial factors influence subsequent citation. Scientometrics, 98(3), 1601–1615.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wagner, C. S., Whetsell, T. A., & Mukherjee, S. (2019). International research collaboration: Novelty, conventionality, and atypicality in knowledge recombination. Research Policy, 48(5), 1260–1270.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wake, S., Wormwood, J., & Satpute, A. B. (2020). The influence of fear on risk taking: A meta-analysis. Cognition & Emotion. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2020.1731428.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wray, K. B. (2006). Scientific authorship in the age of collaborative research. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 37(3), 505–514.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wuchty, S., Jones, B. F., & Uzzi, B. (2007). The increasing dominance of teams in production of knowledge. Science, 316(5827), 1036–1039.

    Google Scholar 

  • Xie, J., Gong, K., Cheng, Y., & Ke, Q. (2019). The correlation between paper length and citations: A meta-analysis. Scientometrics, 118(3), 763–786.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yu, T., & Yu, G. (2014). Features of scientific papers and the relationships with their citation impact. Malaysian Journal of Library & Information Science, 19(1), 37–50.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This study is financially supported by a research grant from the National Social Science Foundation of China (Grant Number: 17BTQ014).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Information Management, Nanjing University, Nanjing, 210093, Jiangsu Province, China

    Hongquan Shen, Juan Xie, Jiang Li & Ying Cheng

Authors
  1. Hongquan Shen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Juan Xie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jiang Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Ying Cheng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Conceptualization: Juan Xie, Jiang Li, and Ying Cheng; Methodology: Hongquan Shen and Juan Xie; Formal analysis and investigation: Hongquan Shen, and Ying Cheng. Writing—original draft preparation: Hongquan Shen, and Juan Xie; Writing—review and editing: Jiang Li, and Ying Cheng; Funding acquisition: Ying Cheng; Supervision: Jiang Li.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Juan Xie.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 44 kb)

Supplementary material 2 (XLSX 45 kb)

Appendix A: The list of papers included in meta-analysis

Appendix A: The list of papers included in meta-analysis

  • Abt, H. A. (1984). Citations to single and multiauthored papers. Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 96(583), 746–749.

  • Acedo, F. J., Barroso, C., Casanueva, C., & Galan, J. L. (2006). Co-authorship in management and organizational studies: An empirical and network analysis. Journal of Management Studies, 43(5), 957–983.

  • Ahmed, A., Adam, M., Ghafar, N. A., Muhammad, M., & Ebrahim, N. A. (2016). Impact of article page count and number of authors on citations in disability related fields: A systematic review article. Iranian Journal of Public Health, 45(9), 1118–1125.

  • Akhavan, P., Ebrahim, N. A., Fetrati, M. A., & Pezeshkan, A. (2016). Major trends in knowledge management research: a bibliometric study. Scientometrics, 107(3), 1249–1264.

  • Alabousi, M., Zha, N. X., & Patlas, M. N. (2019). Predictors of citation rate for original research studies in the Canadian association of radiologists journal. Canadian Association of Radiologists Journal, 70(4), 383–387.

  • Alimoradi, F., Javadi, M., Mohammadpoorasl, A., Moulodi, F., & Hajizadeh, M (2016). The effect of key characteristics of the title and morphological features of published articles on their citation rates. Annals of Library and Information Studies, 63(1), 74–77.

  • An, J. Y., Baiocco, J. A., & Rais-Bahrami, S. (2018). Trends in the authorship of peer reviewed publications in the urology literature. Urology Practice, 5(3), 233–239.

  • Annalingam, A., Damayanthi, H., Jayawardena, R., & Ranasinghe, P. (2014). Determinants of the citation rate of medical research publications from a developing country. Springerplus, 3, 140. https://doi.org/10.1186/2193-1801-3-140.

  • Asubiaro, T. (2019). How collaboration type, publication place, funding and author's role affect citations received by publications from Africa: A bibliometric study of LIS research from 1996 to 2015. Scientometrics,120(3), 1261–1287.

  • Avkiran, N. K. (1997). Scientific collaboration in finance does not lead to better quality research. Scientometrics, 39(1), 173–184.

  • Avkiran, N. K., & Alpert, K. (2015). The influence of co-authorship on article impact in OR/MS/OM and the exchange of knowledge with Finance in the twenty-first century. Annals of Operations Research, 235(1), 51–73.

  • Azer, S. A., & Azer, S. (2016). Bibliometric analysis of the top-cited gastroenterology and hepatology articles. British Medical Journal Open, 6(2), e009889.

  • Azer, S. A. (2016). Exploring the top-cited and most influential articles in medical education. Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions, 36, s32-s41.

  • Azer, S. A. (2017). Top-cited articles in problem-based learning: a bibliometric analysis and quality of evidence assessment. Journal of Dental Education, 81(4), 458–478.

  • Azer, S. A., & Azer, S. (2018). What can we learn from top-cited articles in inflammatory bowel disease? A bibliometric analysis and assessment of the level of evidence. British Medical Journal Open, 8(7), e021233.

  • Azer, S. A., & Azer, S. (2019). Top-cited articles in medical professionalism: a bibliometric analysis versus altmetric scores. British Medical Journal Open, 9(7), e029433.

  • Barrios, M., Borrego, A., Vilagines, A., Olle, C., & Somoza, M. (2008). A bibliometric study of psychological research on tourism. Scientometrics, 77(3), 453–467.

  • Bartneck, C., & Hu, J. (2010). The fruits of collaboration in a multidisciplinary field. Scientometrics, 85(1), 41–52.

  • Bayer, A. E. (1982). A bibliometric analysis of marriage and family literature. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 44(3), 527–538.

  • Bergh, D. D., Perry, J., & Hanke, R. (2006). Some predictors of SMJ article impact. Strategic Management Journal, 27(1), 81–100.

  • Bordons, M., Aparicio, J., & Costas, R. (2013). Heterogeneity of collaboration and its relationship with research impact in a biomedical field. Scientometrics, 96(2), 443–466.

  • Bornmann, L. (2017). Is collaboration among scientists related to the citation impact of papers because their quality increases with collaboration? An analysis based on data from f1000prime and normalized citation scores. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 68(4), 1036–1047.

  • Borsuk, R. M., Budden, A. E., Leimu, R., Aarssen, L. W., & Lortie, C (2009). The influence of author gender, national language and number of authors on citation rate in ecology. Open Ecology Journal, 2(1), 25–28.

  • Bote, V. P. G., Olmeda-Gomez, C., & de Moya-Anegon, F. (2013). Quantifying the benefits of international scientific collaboration. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 64(2), 392–404.

  • Braticevic, M. N., Babic, I., Abramovic, I., Jokic, A., & Horvat, M. (2020). Title does matter: a cross-sectional study of 30 journals in the Medical Laboratory Technology category. Biochemia Medica, 30(1), 010,708. https://doi.org/10.11613/BM.2020.010708.

  • Bridgstock, M. (1991). The quality of single and multiple authored papers—an unresolved problem. Scientometrics, 21(1), 37–48.

  • Carpenter, C. R., Sarli, C. C., Fowler, S. A., Kulasegaram, K., Vallera, T., Lapaine, P., Schalet, G., & Worster, A. (2013). Best Evidence in Emergency Medicine (BEEM) Rater Scores Correlate With Publications' Future Citations. Academic Emergency Medicine, 20(10), 1004–1012.

  • Cheng, K.L., Dodson, T. B., Egbert, M. A., & Susarla, S. M. (2017). Which Factors Affect Citation Rates in the Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Literature? Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, 75(7), 1313–1318.

  • Chi, P. S., & Glanzel, W. (2016). Do usage and scientific collaboration associate with citation impact? In I. Rafols, J. MolasGallart, E. CastroMartinez, and R. Woolley (Eds), Proceeding—21st international conference on science and technology indicators: Peripheries, Frontiers and Beyond (STI) (pp. 1223–1228).

  • Chi, P. S., & Glanzel, W. (2017). An empirical investigation of the associations among usage, scientific collaboration and citation impact. Scientometrics, 112(1), 403–412.

  • Clements, J. C. (2017). Open access articles receive more citations in hybrid marine ecology journals. Facets, 2. https://doi.org/ 10.1139/facets-2016–0032.

  • Das, P. K. (2019). Visualizing research collaboration in statistical science: A scientometric perspective. Library Philosophy and Practice. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/libphilprac/3039.

  • Davarpanah, M. R., & Amel, F. (2009). Author self-citation pattern in science. Library Review, 58(4), 301–309.

  • Didegah, F., & Thelwall, M. (2013). Which factors help authors produce the highest impact research? Collaboration, journal and document properties. Journal of Informetrics, 7(4), 861–873.

  • Falagas, M. E., Zarkali, A., & Karageorgopoulos, D. E., Bardakas, V., & Mavros, M. N. (2013). The impact of article length on the number of future citations: a bibliometric analysis of general medicine journals. PLoS ONE, 8(2), e49476.

  • Garcia-Aroca, M. A., Pandiella-Dominique, A., Navarro-Suay, R., Alonso-Arroyo, A., Granda-Orive, J. I., Anguita-Rodriguez, F., & Lopez-Garcia, A. (2017). Analysis of production, impact, and scientific collaboration on difficult airway through the Web of science and Scopus (1981–2013). Anesthesia and Analgesia, 124(6), 1886–1896.

  • Glynn, R. W., Kerin, M. J., & Sweeney, K. J. (2010). Authorship trends in the surgical literature. British Journal of Surgery, 97(8), 1304–1308.

  • Gorraiz, J., Reimann, R., Gumpenberger, C. (2012). Key factors and considerations in the assessment of international collaboration:a case study for Austria and six countries. Scientometrics, 91(2), 417–433.

  • Hart, RL. (2007). Collaboration and article quality in the literature of academic librarianship. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 33(2), 190–195.

  • 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), 169–185.

  • Haslam, H., & Koval, P. (2010). Predicting long-term citation impact of articles in social and personality psychology. Psychological Reports, 106(3), 891–900.

  • Hayati, Z., & Didegah, F. (2010). International scientific collaboration among Iranian researchers during 1998–2007. Library Hi Tech, 28(3), 433–446.

  • Herbertz, H. (1995). Does it pay to cooperate—a bibliometric case-study in molecular-biology. Scientometrics, 33(1), 117–122.

  • Hinnant, C. C., Stvilia, B., Wu,SH., Worrall, A., Burnett, G., Burnett, K., Kazmer, M. M., & Marty, P. F. (2012). Author-team diversity and the impact of scientific publications: Evidence from physics research at a national science lab. Library & Information Science Research, 34(4), 249–257.

  • Huang, M. H., Wu, L. L., & Wu, Y. C. (2015). A study of research collaboration in the pre-web and post-web stages: A co-authorship analysis of the information systems discipline. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 66(4), 778–797.

  • Ibanez, A., Bielza, C., & Larranaga, P. (2013). Relationship among research collaboration, number of documents and number of citations: a case study in Spanish computer science production in 2000–2009. Scientometrics, 95(2), 698–716.

  • Iribarren-Maestro, T., Lascurain-Sanchez, M., & Sanz-Casado, E. (2009). Are multi-authorship and visibility related? Study of ten research areas at Carlos III University of Madrid. Scientometrics, 79(1), 191–200.

  • Jang, H., Chun, K. W., & Kim, H. (2019). Comparison between Korean and foreign authors concerning the citation impact of Korean journals indexed in Scopus. Science Editing, 6(1), 47–57.

  • Leimu, R., & Koricheva, J. (2005). Does scientific collaboration increase the impact of ecological articles? Bioscience, 55(5), 438–443.

  • Leimu, R., & Koricheva, J. (2005). What determines the citation frequency of ecological papers? Trends In Ecology & Evolution, 20(1), 28–32.

  • Lin, W. Y. C., & Huang, M. H. (2012). The relationship between co-authorship, currency of references and author self-citations. Scientometrics, 90(2), 343–360.

  • Louscher, B. M., Allareddy, A., & Elangovan, S. (2019). Predictors of citations of systematic reviews in oral implantology: A cross-sectional bibliometric analysis. Sage Open, 9(1), 2,158,244,019,835,941.

  • Low,W. Y., Ng, K. H., Kabir, M. A., Koh, AP., & Sinnasamy, J. (2014). Trend and impact of international collaboration in clinical medicine papers published in Malaysia. Scientometrics, 98(2), 1521–1533.

  • Lu, C., Bu, Y., Zhang, C. W., Ding, Y., Torvik, V. I., & Zhang, C. (2017). Does collaboration bring high-impact studies? A preliminary study. Proceedings of the Association for Information Science & Technology, 54(1), 750–751.

  • Ma, N., & Guan, J. C. (2005). An exploratory study on collaboration profiles of Chinese publications in Molecular Biology. Scientometrics, 65(3), 343–355.

  • Moldwin, M. B., & Liemohn, M. W. (2018). High-citation papers in space physics: Examination of gender, country, and paper characteristics. Journal of Geophysical Research-Space Physics, 123(4), 2557–2565.

  • Montefusco, A. M., do Nascimento, F. P., Sennes, L. U., Bento, R. F., & Imamura, R. (2019). Influence of international authorship on citations in Brazilian medical journals: a bibliometric analysis. Scientometrics, 119(3), 1487–1496.

  • Montpetit, E., Blais, A., & Foucault, M. (2008). What does it take for a canadian political scientist to be cited? Social Science Electronic Publishing, 89(3), 802–816.

  • Muniz, F. W. M. G., Celeste, R. K., Oballe, H. J. R., & Rosing, C. K. (2018). Citation analysis and trends in review articles in dentistry. Journal of Evidence-Based Dental Practice, 18(2), 110–118.

  • Okike, K., Kocher, MS., Torpey, JL., Nwachukwu, B. U., Mehlman, C. T., & Bhandari, M. (2011). Level of evidence and conflict of interest disclosure associated with higher citation rates in orthopedics. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 64(3), 331–338.

  • Onodera, N., & Yoshikane, F. (2015). Factors Affecting Citation Rates of Research Articles. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 66(4), 739–764.

  • Oromaner, M. (1975). Collaboration and impact:The career of multi-authored publications. Social Science Information, 14(1), 147–155.

  • Peclin, S., Juznic, P., Blagus, R., Sajko, M. C, & Stare, J. (2012). Effects of international collaboration and status of journal on impact of papers. Scientometrics, 93(3), 937–948.

  • Peng, T. Q., & Zhu, J. J. H. (2012). Where you publish matters most: A multilevel analysis of factors affecting citations of internet studies. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 63(9), 1789–1803.

  • Peters, H. P. F., & Vanraan, A. F. J. (1994). On determinants of citation scores—a case-study in chemical-engineering. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 45(1), 39–49.

  • Puuska, H. M., Muhonen, R., & Leino, Y. (2014). International and domestic co-publishing and their citation impact in different disciplines. Scientometrics, 98(2), 823–839.

  • Ronda-Pupo, G. A., Diaz-Contreras, C., Ronda-Velazquez, G., & Ronda-Pupo, J. C. (2015). The role of academic collaboration in the impact of Latin-American research on management. Scientometrics, 102(2), 1435–1454.

  • Rovira-Esteva, S., Aixela, J. F., & Olalla-Soler, C. (2020). A bibliometric study of co-authorship in Translation Studies. Onomazein, 47. https://doi.org/ 10.7764/onomazein.47.09.

  • Royle, P., Kandala, N. B., Barnard, K., Waugh, N. (2013). Bibliometrics of systematic reviews: analysis of citation rates and journal impact factors. Systematic Reviews, 2, 74. https://doi.org/10.1186/2046-4053-2-74.

  • Samanci, Y., Samanci, B., & Sahin, E. (2019). Bibliometric analysis of the top-cited articles on idiopathic intracranial hypertension. Neurology India, 67(1), 78–84.

  • Sanfilippo, P., Hewitt, A. W., & Mackey, D. A. (2018). Plurality in multi-disciplinary research: multiple institutional affiliations are associated with increased citations. Peerj, 6, e5664.

  • Shah, T. A., Gul, S., & Gaur, R. C. (2015). Authors self-citation behaviour in the field of Library and Information Science. Aslib Journal of Information Management, 67(4), 458–468.

  • Shehatta, I., & Mahmood, K. (2016). Research Collaboration in Saudi Arabia 1980–2014: Bibliometric Patterns and National Policy to Foster Research Quantity and Quality. Libri, 66(1), 13–29.

  • Slyder, J. B., Stein, B. R., Sams, B. S., Walker, D. M., Beale, B. J., Feldhaus, J. J., & Copenheaver, C. A. (2011). Citation pattern and lifespan: a comparison of discipline, institution, and individual. Scientometrics, 89(3), 955–966.

  • Smart, J. C., & Bayer, A. E. (1986). Author collaboration and impact:A note on citation rates of single and multiple authored articles. Scientometrics, 10(5), 297–305.

  • So, M., Kim, J., Choi, S., Park, H. W. (2015). Factors affecting citation networks in science and technology:focused on non-quality factors. Quality & Quantity, 49(4), 1513–1530.

  • Sooryamoorthy, R. (2009). Do types of collaboration change citation? Collaboration and citation patterns of South African science publications. Scientometrics, 81(1), 177–193.

  • Sooryamoorthy, R. (2010). The visibility of engineering research in south africa, 1975–2005. South African Journal of Industrial Engineering, 21(2), 1–12.

  • Sooryamoorthy, R. (2017). Do types of collaboration change citation? A scientometric analysis of social science publications in South Africa. Scientometrics, 111(1), 379–400.

  • Sooryamoorthy, R. (2019). Scientific knowledge in South Africa: information trends, patterns and collaboration. Scientometrics, 119(3), 1365–1386.

  • Sud, P., & Thelwall, M. (2016). Not all international collaboration is beneficial: The mendeley readership and citation impact of biochemical research collaboration. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 67(8), 1849–1857.

  • Tagliacozzo, R. (1977). Self-citations in scientific literature.Journal of Documentation, 33(4), 251–265.

  • Thelwall, M., & Sud, P. (2014). No citation advantage for monograph-based collaborations? Journal of Informetrics, 8(1), 276–283.

  • Tregenza, T. (2002). Gender bias in the refereeing process? Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 17(8), 349–350.

  • Uthman, O. A., Okwundu, C. I., Wiysonge, C. S., Young, T., & Clarke, A. (2013). Citation classics in systematic reviews and meta-analyses: Who wrote the top 100 most cited articles? PLoS ONE, 8(10), e78517.

  • Vanclay, J. K. (2013). Factors affecting citation rates in environmental science. Journal of Informetrics, 7(2), 265–271.

  • van Wesel, M., Wyatt, S., & ten Haaf, J. (2014). What a difference a colon makes: how superficial factors influence subsequent citation. Scientometrics, 98(3), 1601–1615.

  • Webster, G. D., Jonason, P. K., & Schember, T. O. (2009). Hot topics and popular papers in evolutionary psychology:analyses of title words and citation counts in evolution and human behavior,1979–2008. Evolutionary Psychology, 7(3), 348–362.

  • Xie, J., Gong, K, L., Li J., Ke, Q., Kang, H. C., & Cheng, Y. (2019). A probe into 66 factors which are possibly associated with the number of citations an article received. Scientometrics, 119(3), 1429–1454.

  • Yu, T., & Yu, G. (2014). Features of scientific papers and the relationships with their citation impact. Malaysian Journal of Library & Information Science, 19(1), 37–50.

  • Zong, Q. J., Fan, L. L., Xie, Y. F., & Huang, J. S. (2020). The relationship of polarity of post-publication peer review to citation count evidence from publons. Online Information Review. http://doi.org/10.1108/OIR-01-2019-0027

  • Zong, Q. J., Xie, Y. F., Tuo, R. C., Huang, J. S., & Yang, Y. (2019). The impact of video abstract on citation counts: evidence from a retrospective cohort study of New Journal of Physics. Scientometrics, 119(3), 1715–1727.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Shen, H., Xie, J., Li, J. et al. The correlation between scientific collaboration and citation count at the paper level: a meta-analysis. Scientometrics 126, 3443–3470 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-021-03888-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-021-03888-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation