Search Results

You are looking at 141 - 150 of 273 items for :

  • "Co-authorship" x
  • Refine by Access: All Content x
Clear All

Abstract  

To analyse the relationship between research group size and scientific productivity within the highly cooperative research environment characteristic of contemporary biomedical science, an investigation of Norwegian Microbiology was undertaken. By an author-gated retrieval from ISI's database National Science Indicators on Diskette (NSIOD), of journal articles published by Norwegian scientists involved in microbiological research during the period 1992–1996, a total of 976 microbiological and 938 non-microbiological articles, by 3,486 authors, were obtained. Functional research groups were defined bibliometrically on the basis of co-authorship, yielding a total of 180 research groups varying in size from one author/one article to 180 authors/83 articles (all authors associated with a group during the whole five-year period were included, hence the large group size). Most of Norwegian microbiological research (73% of the microbiology articles) appears to be performed by specialist groups (with 70% of their production as microbiology), the remainder being published by groups with a broader biomedical research profile (who were responsible for 95% of the non-microbiological articles). The productivity (articles per capita) showed only moderate (Poisson-distributed) variability between groups, and was remarkably constant across all subfields, at about 0.1 article per author per year. No correlation between group size and productivity was found.

Restricted access

Abstract  

International scientific collaboration is very sensitive to political and economic changes in a country or a geopolitical region. Collaboration in research is reflected by the corresponding coauthorship of the published results which can be analysed with the help of bibliometric methods. Based on data from theScience Citation Index (SCI), the change of annual international coauthorship patterns ofBulgaria, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Poland andRomania have been analysed for the periods 1981–1985 and 1984–1993, respectively. It is shown that international collaboration was not developing similarly in the countries under study. Whilst scientific communities of Hungary and Poland have already been opening in the early 80s, the international collaboration of the other East-European countries was still dominated by COMECON relations till 1989. As expected, since 1990 an increasing scientific collaboration with highly developed countries can be observed in all five countries. At the same time, scientific collaboration with the former communist countries shows a clear decline. The great share of international co-authorship links is some countries reflect various tendencies part of which are interpreted with the help of a cardiologic model.

Restricted access

Abstract  

I studied the publication efforts in physics in Egypt, Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Syria, and Turkey in terms of a total number of 2368 papers from these countries in international journals for 1990–1994. I looked for the national contributions, main subjects of activity, journal preferences of authors, and co-authorship patterns. Comparisons show that physicists from Egypt and Turkey combined, produced 75% of the total publication output. Half of the Egyptian papers went only to 16% of a set of 115 journals that publish papers from this country. Such a high concentration of papers in a few journals was not the case for the rest of the countries. Condensed matter physics was found to be among the three most active subjects for the countries except Iran. Iranian authors tended to be more active in astrosciences, and nuclear science and technology. I found a change in the publication patterns of the Middle Eastern physicists in the direction of decreasing isolation and increasing collaboration.

Restricted access

Abstract

This study applies bibliometric analysis to investigate the quantity and citation impact of scientific papers in the field of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM). The data are collected from 19 CAM journals in the Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-E) database during 1980–2009, and 17,002 papers are identified for analysis. The study analyzes the document types, geographical and institutional distribution of the authorship, including international scientific collaboration. This study suggests that the major type of document is original article. The CAM papers are mostly published by North America, East Asia, and European countries, of which publications authored in East Asia are cited most. Country-wise, major contributors of CAM papers are from USA, People's Republic of China, India, England and Germany. India has the highest CPP value, attracting high attentions in CAM community. This article also finds that international co-authorship in the CAM field has increased rapidly during this period. In addition, internationally collaborated publications generate higher citation impact than papers published by authors from single country. Finally, the research identifies productive institutions in CAM, and China Medical University located in Taiwan is the most productive organization.

Restricted access

Abstract  

Studies of strafication in science have increasingly accepted the idea that science is a highly stratified and elitist system with skewed distributions of productivity and rewards. Attempts to explain the higher productivity of higher status scientists by pointing to their greater ease of publication as far as acceptance of their work by journals and publishers is concerned were not supported by the data in some recent studies. If status in general does not confer greater ease of publication the present paper argues that position within a research organization does confer greater ease of author — or co-authorship — and this is the major explanatory variable accounting for productivity differences within research laboratories as far as quantity of articles (and books) is concerned. upward moves in a laboratory's formal or informal position hierarchy are associated with a change of a scientist's research involvement from goal executing to goal setting functions as well as with an increasing access to scientific manpower and project money. Goal setting tasks provide for a significant reduction of time-expenditures in research necessary to assure that the scientist is identified with the research results; consequently, they allow for an involvement in more research tasks than originally. Equivalently, resources in scientific manpower and project money act as a multiplying element as far as quantity of output is concerned.

Restricted access

Abstract  

A bibliometric study using the lists of publications and work of 207 scientists working in Asia, Latin America and Africa was conducted. Number of authored and co-authored articles published in scientific journals and bulletins, conference papers, books, chapters of books, reports were taken into consideration to measure the total scientific output. Local vs. international production was also determined by scientific fields, geographic areas, sexe and language of publication. Co-authorship studies were also used to particularly measure the degree of collaboration and dependance of Developing Countries' (DC) scientists on foreign co-authors. An analysis of the references used (age, origins) was also made. Conclusions drawn concern the comparatively specific nature of science produces by DC's researcher. Partly given the importance of the scientific production published in local journals, the inadequacy of international databases to study Dc science is confirmed. Most of the DC scientists published in both national and international journals. They often cite their colleagues from the developed countries but their own work being less visible is seldom cited.

Restricted access

Abstract  

The study examines aspects of both neo-colonial ties and neo-colonial science in research papers produced by Central African countries. The primary focus is on the extent and pattern of neo-colonial ties and other foreign participation in the co-authorship of Central African research papers. The analysis revealed that 80% of Central Africa’s research papers are produced in collaboration with a partner from outside the region. Moreover, 46% of papers are produced in collaboration with European countries as the only partner, and 35% in collaboration with past colonial rulers. The top collaborating countries are France (32%), the USA (14%), and the UK and Germany (both 12%). Foreign powers also facilitate the production of regionally and continentally co-authored papers in Central Africa, where European countries participate in 77% of regionally co-authored papers. The practice of neo-colonial science, on the other hand, features in a survey of reprint authors of Cameroonian papers. The survey investigated specific contributions made by Cameroon coauthors to the research processes underlying a paper. Cameroonian researchers contribute intellectually and conceptually to the production of research papers, irrespective of whether the collaboration involves partners from past colonial or non-colonial countries. Their most frequent role in collaborative research with foreign researchers remains the conduct of fieldwork.

Restricted access

the field. Citation performance There is a general acceptance that scientific collaboration, particularly if it is manifested in co-authorship, raises citation rate of publications resulted from the joint research

Restricted access

Collaboration between researchers from academic and non-academic organisations

A case study of co-authorship in 12 Hungarian universities

Acta Oeconomica
Authors:
A. Inzelt
and
A. Schubert

Glänzel, W. — Schubert, A. (2005): Domesticity and Internationality in Co-authorship, References and Citations. Scientometrics , 65(3): 323–342. Schubert A. Domesticity and

Restricted access
Scientometrics
Authors:
Victor Bucheli
,
Adriana Díaz
,
Juan Pablo Calderón
,
Pablo Lemoine
,
Juan Alejandro Valdivia
,
José Luis Villaveces
, and
Roberto Zarama

research activities, as well as the rising number of active FTE PhD professors and doctoral programs, changes in the structure of the co-authorship network, and other changes. The following section presents an empirical study of IC accumulation between 2003

Restricted access