IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/rseval/v22y2013i3p145-156.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Bibliographic coupling and network analysis to assess knowledge coalescence in a research center environment

Author

Listed:
  • Jan Youtie
  • Luciano Kay
  • Julia Melkers

Abstract

Science is increasingly organized in large-scale science centers. Expectations are that center-based research should yield qualitatively different research than single-investigator-produced research, but demonstrating the particular effects of a center is challenging. The notion of 'centerness' is that science centers can yield findings that reflect conceptual collisions across disciplinary or geographic boundaries between a center's scientific members. Collaborative research commonly is assessed using co-authorships of scientific publications. Co-authorship measures can be conveniently and unobtrusively operationalized, yet they can yield indicators (especially for a small center) showing little change in collaboration in a center-context, while richer findings of collaboration are evidenced in observing other aspects of center members' behavior. This article puts forth the use of social network analysis and bibliographic coupling as measures of 'centerness' and presents their characteristics in the context of an National Science Foundation (NSF) science center. Bibliographic coupling is characterized as a measure of centerness over the time period of the establishment of an NSF-funded science center. We also examine changes in bibliographic coupling indicators alongside changes in co-authorship networks and a social network survey of center participants. Bibliographic coupling is shown to make a distinctive contribution to measurement of centerness, demonstrating increasing coupling from the pre-center and since-center periods. This increase in centerness as represented in bibliographic coupling does not dramatically change when self-citations are removed. Overall, results show this to be a useful and consistent measure of centerness and knowledge coalescence within the research center environment. Copyright The Author 2013. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com, Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Jan Youtie & Luciano Kay & Julia Melkers, 2013. "Bibliographic coupling and network analysis to assess knowledge coalescence in a research center environment," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 22(3), pages 145-156, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:rseval:v:22:y:2013:i:3:p:145-156
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/reseval/rvt002
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Li, Munan & Porter, Alan L. & Suominen, Arho, 2018. "Insights into relationships between disruptive technology/innovation and emerging technology: A bibliometric perspective," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 285-296.
    2. Jan Youtie, 2014. "The use of citation speed to understand the effects of a multi-institutional science center," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 100(3), pages 613-621, September.
    3. Pedro López-Rubio & Norat Roig-Tierno & Francisco Mas-Verdú, 2022. "Assessing the Origins, Evolution and Prospects of National Innovation Systems," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 13(1), pages 161-184, March.
    4. Carter Bloch & Jesper W Schneider & Thomas Sinkjær, 2016. "Size, Accumulation and Performance for Research Grants: Examining the Role of Size for Centres of Excellence," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(2), pages 1-17, February.
    5. Elizabeth M Ginexi & Grace Huang & Michael Steketee & Sophia Tsakraklides & Keith MacAllum & Julie Bromberg & Amanda Huffman & Douglas A Luke & Scott J Leischow & Janet M Okamoto & Todd Rogers, 2017. "Social network analysis of a scientist–practitioner research initiative established to facilitate science dissemination and implementation within states and communities," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 26(4), pages 316-325.
    6. Alan L. Porter & David J. Schoeneck & Jan Youtie & Gregg E. A. Solomon & Seokbeom Kwon & Stephen F. Carley, 2019. "Learning about learning: patterns of sharing of research knowledge among Education, Border, and Cognitive Science fields," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 118(3), pages 1093-1117, March.
    7. Carla Mara Hilário & Maria Cláudia Cabrini Grácio & Daniel Martínez-Ávila & Dietmar Wolfram, 2023. "Authorship order as an indicator of similarity between article discourse and author citation identity in informetrics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(10), pages 5389-5410, October.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:rseval:v:22:y:2013:i:3:p:145-156. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/rev .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.