IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0113271.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Fragmented Romanian Sociology: Growth and Structure of the Collaboration Network

Author

Listed:
  • Marian-Gabriel Hâncean
  • Matjaž Perc
  • Lazăr Vlăsceanu

Abstract

Structural patterns in collaboration networks are essential for understanding how new ideas, research practices, innovation or cooperation circulate and develop within academic communities and between and within university departments. In our research, we explore and investigate the structure of the collaboration network formed by the academics working full-time within all the 17 sociology departments across Romania. We show that the collaboration network is sparse and fragmented, and that it constitutes an environment that does not promote the circulation of new ideas and innovation within the field. Although recent years have witnessed an increase in the productivity of Romanian sociologists, there is still ample room for improvement in terms of the interaction infrastructure that ought to link individuals together so that they could maximize their potentials. We also fail to discern evidence in favor of the Matthew effect governing the growth of the network, which suggests scientific success and productivity are not rewarded. Instead, the structural properties of the collaboration network are partly those of a core-periphery network, where the spread of innovation and change can be explained by structural equivalence rather than by interpersonal influence models. We also provide support for the idea that, within the observed network, collaboration is the product of homophily rather than prestige effects. Further research on the subject based on data from other countries in the region is needed to place our results in a comparative framework, in particular to discern whether the behavior of the Romanian sociologist community is unique or rather common.

Suggested Citation

  • Marian-Gabriel Hâncean & Matjaž Perc & Lazăr Vlăsceanu, 2014. "Fragmented Romanian Sociology: Growth and Structure of the Collaboration Network," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(11), pages 1-9, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0113271
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0113271
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0113271
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0113271&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0113271?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Cardillo, Alessio & Scellato, Salvatore & Latora, Vito, 2006. "A topological analysis of scientific coauthorship networks," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 372(2), pages 333-339.
    2. W. Glänzel & A. Schubert & H. -J. Czerwon, 1999. "A bibliometric analysis of international scientific cooperation of the European Union (1985–1995)," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 45(2), pages 185-202, June.
    3. Schreiber, Michael, 2008. "A modification of the h-index: The hm-index accounts for multi-authored manuscripts," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 2(3), pages 211-216.
    4. David N. Laband & Robert D. Tollison, 2000. "Intellectual Collaboration," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 108(3), pages 632-661, June.
    5. John Hudson, 1996. "Trends in Multi-authored Papers in Economics," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 10(3), pages 153-158, Summer.
    6. Perc, Matjaž, 2010. "Growth and structure of Slovenia’s scientific collaboration network," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 4(4), pages 475-482.
    7. Michael Schreiber, 2010. "Revisiting the g-index: The average number of citations in the g-core," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 61(1), pages 169-174, January.
    8. Patrick Doreian, 1985. "Structural equivalence in a psychology journal network," Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 36(6), pages 411-417, November.
    9. Perc, Matjaž, 2010. "Zipf’s law and log-normal distributions in measures of scientific output across fields and institutions: 40 years of Slovenia’s research as an example," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 4(3), pages 358-364.
    10. Michael Schreiber, 2010. "Revisiting the g‐index: The average number of citations in the g‐core," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 61(1), pages 169-174, January.
    11. Eduardo B Araújo & André A Moreira & Vasco Furtado & Tarcisio H C Pequeno & José S Andrade, Jr, 2014. "Collaboration Networks from a Large CV Database: Dynamics, Topology and Bonus Impact," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(3), pages 1-7, March.
    12. Barabási, A.L & Jeong, H & Néda, Z & Ravasz, E & Schubert, A & Vicsek, T, 2002. "Evolution of the social network of scientific collaborations," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 311(3), pages 590-614.
    13. Borut Lužar & Zoran Levnajić & Janez Povh & Matjaž Perc, 2014. "Community Structure and the Evolution of Interdisciplinarity in Slovenia's Scientific Collaboration Network," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(4), pages 1-5, April.
    14. John P A Ioannidis, 2008. "Measuring Co-Authorship and Networking-Adjusted Scientific Impact," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 3(7), pages 1-8, July.
    15. Edit Csajbók & Anna Berhidi & Lívia Vasas & András Schubert, 2007. "Hirsch-index for countries based on Essential Science Indicators data," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 73(1), pages 91-117, October.
    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. 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.
    2. Leifeld, Philip, 2018. "Polarization in the social sciences: Assortative mixing in social science collaboration networks is resilient to interventions," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 507(C), pages 510-523.
    3. Mario Karlovčec & Borut Lužar & Dunja Mladenić, 2016. "Core-periphery dynamics in collaboration networks: the case study of Slovenia," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(3), pages 1561-1578, December.
    4. Noémi Gaskó & Rodica Ioana Lung & Mihai Alexandru Suciu, 2016. "A new network model for the study of scientific collaborations: Romanian computer science and mathematics co-authorship networks," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 108(2), pages 613-632, August.

    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. Perc, Matjaž, 2010. "Growth and structure of Slovenia’s scientific collaboration network," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 4(4), pages 475-482.
    2. Antoni Rubí-Barceló, 2012. "Core/periphery scientific collaboration networks among very similar researchers," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 72(4), pages 463-483, April.
    3. Zheng Xie, 2021. "A distributed hypergraph model for simulating the evolution of large coauthorship networks," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(6), pages 4609-4638, June.
    4. Jinseok Kim & Liang Tao & Seok-Hyoung Lee & Jana Diesner, 2016. "Evolution and structure of scientific co-publishing network in Korea between 1948–2011," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 107(1), pages 27-41, April.
    5. Xie, Zheng, 2020. "Predicting the number of coauthors for researchers: A learning model," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 14(2).
    6. 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).
    7. Türker, İlker & Çavuşoğlu, Abdullah, 2016. "Detailing the co-authorship networks in degree coupling, edge weight and academic age perspective," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 386-392.
    8. Ana Paula dos Santos Rubem & Ariane Lima Moura & João Carlos Correia Baptista Soares de Mello, 2015. "Comparative analysis of some individual bibliometric indices when applied to groups of researchers," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(1), pages 1019-1035, January.
    9. Zheng Xie & Zonglin Xie & Miao Li & Jianping Li & Dongyun Yi, 2017. "Modeling the coevolution between citations and coauthorship of scientific papers," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 112(1), pages 483-507, July.
    10. Noémi Gaskó & Rodica Ioana Lung & Mihai Alexandru Suciu, 2016. "A new network model for the study of scientific collaborations: Romanian computer science and mathematics co-authorship networks," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 108(2), pages 613-632, August.
    11. Yan Zhou & Jong-Wook Kwon, 2020. "Overview of Hofstede-Inspired Research Over the Past 40 Years: The Network Diversity Perspective," SAGE Open, , vol. 10(3), pages 21582440209, August.
    12. Leifeld, Philip, 2018. "Polarization in the social sciences: Assortative mixing in social science collaboration networks is resilient to interventions," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 507(C), pages 510-523.
    13. Susan Biancani & Daniel McFarland, 2013. "Social Networks Research in Higher Education," Voprosy obrazovaniya / Educational Studies Moscow, National Research University Higher School of Economics, issue 4, pages 85-126.
    14. Andrikopoulos, Andreas & Samitas, Aristeidis & Kostaris, Konstantinos, 2016. "Four decades of the Journal of Econometrics: Coauthorship patterns and networks," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 195(1), pages 23-32.
    15. Mario Karlovčec & Borut Lužar & Dunja Mladenić, 2016. "Core-periphery dynamics in collaboration networks: the case study of Slovenia," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(3), pages 1561-1578, December.
    16. Jacob Wood & Gohar Feroz Khan, 2015. "International trade negotiation analysis: network and semantic knowledge infrastructure," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 105(1), pages 537-556, October.
    17. 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.
    18. Medoff, Marshall H., 2003. "Collaboration and the quality of economics research," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 10(5), pages 597-608, October.
    19. Andrej Kastrin & Jelena Klisara & Borut Lužar & Janez Povh, 2017. "Analysis of Slovenian research community through bibliographic networks," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 110(2), pages 791-813, February.
    20. Matthias Weber, 2016. "The Effects of Listing Authors in Alphabetical Order: A survey of the Empirical Evidence," Bank of Lithuania Occasional Paper Series 12, Bank of Lithuania.

    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:plo:pone00:0113271. 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.