IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v126y2021i9d10.1007_s11192-021-04062-2.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Partnership ability and co-authorship network of information literacy field

Author

Listed:
  • Fatima Baji

    (Ahvaz Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences)

  • Ismail Mostafavi

    (Ahvaz Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences)

  • Parastoo Parsaei-Mohammadi

    (Ahvaz Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences)

  • Zivar Sabaghinejad

    (Ahvaz Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences)

Abstract

Scientific collaboration or co-authorship has different forms and can be a factor in creating knowledge and even increasing the quality of scientific works. Beyond the quantity, qualitative factors also affect scientific collaboration. Two factors Collaboration intensity and member diversity can predict research quality, so teams with constant or diverse collaborators could affect co-authorship network’s quality. Current study used scientometrics methods including SNA. Research data were “information literacy” related documents indexed in Scopus database, during years 1941–2019. Scopus.exe, UCINET 6 and NetDraw were used for analyzing data. Results show that ϕ-index has a negative relationship with number of co-authors, degree and ties. This means that the higher number of co-authors, degree and ties the lower ϕ-index, which is confirms ϕ-index meaning. Centrality betweenness has a positive relationship with the number of articles, co-authors and ties which means that betweenness of authors goes high if the author has more articles, co-authors and ties. Also, degree centrality has a significant positive relationship with the number of articles, betweenness, and ties. Findings related to correlations show that ϕ-index is a measure based on the number of articles and fixed teams of scientific collaboration while the centrality measures such as degree and betweenness are based on the number of articles, diversity in co-authors. This seems to be in contrast with the ϕ-index concept.

Suggested Citation

  • Fatima Baji & Ismail Mostafavi & Parastoo Parsaei-Mohammadi & Zivar Sabaghinejad, 2021. "Partnership ability and co-authorship network of information literacy field," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(9), pages 8205-8216, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:126:y:2021:i:9:d:10.1007_s11192-021-04062-2
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-021-04062-2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-021-04062-2
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11192-021-04062-2?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

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

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Schubert, András, 2012. "Jazz discometrics – A network approach," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 6(4), pages 480-484.
    2. Said, Yasmin H. & Wegman, Edward J. & Sharabati, Walid K. & Rigsby, John T., 2008. "Social networks of author-coauthor relationships," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 52(4), pages 2177-2184, January.
    3. Dorte Henriksen, 2016. "The rise in co-authorship in the social sciences (1980–2013)," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 107(2), pages 455-476, May.
    4. Dehdarirad, Tahereh & Nasini, Stefano, 2017. "Research impact in co-authorship networks: a two-mode analysis," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 11(2), pages 371-388.
    5. Raf Guns & Yu Xian Liu & Dilruba Mahbuba, 2011. "Q-measures and betweenness centrality in a collaboration network: a case study of the field of informetrics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 87(1), pages 133-147, April.
    6. Chien Hsiang Liao, 2011. "How to improve research quality? Examining the impacts of collaboration intensity and member diversity in collaboration networks," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 86(3), pages 747-761, March.
    7. Branco Ponomariov & Craig Boardman, 2016. "What is co-authorship?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(3), pages 1939-1963, December.
    8. Abbasi, Alireza & Altmann, Jörn & Hossain, Liaquat, 2011. "Identifying the effects of co-authorship networks on the performance of scholars: A correlation and regression analysis of performance measures and social network analysis measures," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 5(4), pages 594-607.
    9. Katz, J. Sylvan & Martin, Ben R., 1997. "What is research collaboration?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 1-18, March.
    10. Lambiotte, R. & Panzarasa, P., 2009. "Communities, knowledge creation, and information diffusion," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 3(3), pages 180-190.
    11. Tahereh Dehdarirad & Stefano Nasini, 2017. "Research impact in co-authorship networks: a two-mode analysis," Post-Print hal-01745330, HAL.
    12. András Schubert, 2012. "A Hirsch-type index of co-author partnership ability," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 91(1), pages 303-308, April.
    13. Guillaume Cabanac, 2013. "Experimenting with the partnership ability φ-index on a million computer scientists," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 96(1), pages 1-9, July.
    14. Giovanni Abramo & Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo & Marco Solazzi, 2011. "The relationship between scientists’ research performance and the degree of internationalization of their research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 86(3), pages 629-643, March.
    15. Han Woo Park & Jungwon Yoon & Loet Leydesdorff, 2016. "The normalization of co-authorship networks in the bibliometric evaluation: the government stimulation programs of China and Korea," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(2), pages 1017-1036, November.
    16. Dorte Henriksen, 2018. "What factors are associated with increasing co-authorship in the social sciences? A case study of Danish Economics and Political Science," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 114(3), pages 1395-1421, March.
    17. Shaun Goldfinch & Tony Dale & Karl DeRouen, 2003. "Science from the periphery: Collaboration, networks and 'Periphery Effects' in the citation of New Zealand Crown Research Institutes articles, 1995-2000," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 57(3), pages 321-337, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Wang, Chun-Chieh & Lin, Jia-Tian & Chen, Dar-Zen & Lo, Szu-Chia, 2023. "A New Look at National Diversity of Inventor Teams within Organizations," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 17(1).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jing Tu, 2019. "What connections lead to good scientific performance?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 118(2), pages 587-604, February.
    2. Cristina Arhiliuc & Raf Guns, 2023. "Disciplinary collaboration rates in the social sciences and humanities: what is the influence of classification type?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(6), pages 3419-3436, June.
    3. Šubelj, Lovro & Fiala, Dalibor & Ciglarič, Tadej & Kronegger, Luka, 2019. "Convexity in scientific collaboration networks," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 10-31.
    4. Marian-Gabriel Hâncean & Matjaž Perc & Jürgen Lerner, 2021. "The coauthorship networks of the most productive European researchers," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(1), pages 201-224, January.
    5. Seongkyoon Jeong & Jae Young Choi, 2012. "The taxonomy of research collaboration in science and technology: evidence from mechanical research through probabilistic clustering analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 91(3), pages 719-735, June.
    6. Sandra Cristina Oliveira & Juliana Cobre & Danilo Florentino Pereira, 2021. "A measure of reliability for scientific co-authorship networks using fuzzy logic," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(6), pages 4551-4563, June.
    7. Gómez-Ferri, Javier & González-Alcaide, Gregorio & LLopis-Goig, Ramón, 2019. "Measuring dissatisfaction with coauthorship: An empirical approach based on the researchers’ perception," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 13(4).
    8. Shen, Hongquan & Xie, Juan & Ao, Weiyi & Cheng, Ying, 2022. "The continuity and citation impact of scientific collaboration with different gender composition," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(1).
    9. Shen, Hongquan & Cheng, Ying & Ju, Xiufang & Xie, Juan, 2022. "Rethinking the effect of inter-gender collaboration on research performance for scholars," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(4).
    10. Christian Schneijderberg & Nicolai Götze & Lars Müller, 2022. "A study of 25 years of publication outputs in the German academic profession," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(1), pages 1-28, January.
    11. Li, Eldon Y. & Liao, Chien Hsiang & Yen, Hsiuju Rebecca, 2013. "Co-authorship networks and research impact: A social capital perspective," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(9), pages 1515-1530.
    12. Paul-Hus, Adèle & Mongeon, Philippe & Sainte-Marie, Maxime & Larivière, Vincent, 2017. "The sum of it all: Revealing collaboration patterns by combining authorship and acknowledgements," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 11(1), pages 80-87.
    13. Stefano Scarazzati & Lili Wang, 2019. "The effect of collaborations on scientific research output: the case of nanoscience in Chinese regions," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 121(2), pages 839-868, November.
    14. Liliana Arroyo Moliner & Eva Gallardo-Gallardo & Pedro Gallo de Puelles, 2017. "Understanding scientific communities: a social network approach to collaborations in Talent Management research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 113(3), pages 1439-1462, December.
    15. Chen, Kaihua & Zhang, Yi & Fu, Xiaolan, 2019. "International research collaboration: An emerging domain of innovation studies?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 149-168.
    16. Rojko, Katarina & Lužar, Borut, 2022. "Scientific performance across research disciplines: Trends and differences in the case of Slovenia," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(2).
    17. Mehmet Ali Koseoglu, 2016. "Mapping the institutional collaboration network of strategic management research: 1980–2014," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(1), pages 203-226, October.
    18. Alfonso Ibáñez & Concha Bielza & Pedro Larrañaga, 2013. "Relationship among research collaboration, number of documents and number of citations: a case study in Spanish computer science production in 2000–2009," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 95(2), pages 689-716, May.
    19. Tang, Li, 2013. "Does “birds of a feather flock together” matter—Evidence from a longitudinal study on US–China scientific collaboration," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 7(2), pages 330-344.
    20. Christopher McCarty & James W. Jawitz & Allison Hopkins & Alex Goldman, 2013. "Predicting author h-index using characteristics of the co-author network," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 96(2), pages 467-483, August.

    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:spr:scient:v:126:y:2021:i:9:d:10.1007_s11192-021-04062-2. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.