IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/infome/v19y2025i4s1751157725001051.html

Measuring the relative intensity of collaboration with fractional counting methods

Author

Listed:
  • Cao, Zhe
  • Zhang, Lin
  • Rousseau, Ronald
  • Sivertsen, Gunnar

Abstract

With the rapid globalization of scientific research and the increasing tendency of countries to co-fund research programs and projects, measuring international collaboration has become a key focus in the field of scientometrics and in policy documents. The relative intensity of collaboration (RIC) has been introduced as a new approach to measure the activity in bilateral relations relative to all such relations within a network. This study proposes the application of fractional counting as an alternative to full counting methods to calculate the RIC index, thereby shifting the emphasis from the perspective of participation in collaboration to the perspective of contribution to collaboration. At the level of countries, the change of perspective corresponds to a policy perspective in which questions about the prioritization of partners and resources spent on international scientific collaboration might be asked. To illustrate the new approach, we present examples of collaboration between China, the United States, and other countries within the global research network.

Suggested Citation

  • Cao, Zhe & Zhang, Lin & Rousseau, Ronald & Sivertsen, Gunnar, 2025. "Measuring the relative intensity of collaboration with fractional counting methods," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 19(4).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:infome:v:19:y:2025:i:4:s1751157725001051
    DOI: 10.1016/j.joi.2025.101743
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1751157725001051
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.joi.2025.101743?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

    for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:eee:infome:v:19:y:2025:i:4:s1751157725001051. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/joi .

    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.