IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v106y2016i1d10.1007_s11192-015-1790-4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The stability of co-authorship structures

Author

Listed:
  • Marjan Cugmas

    () (University of Ljubljana)

  • Anuška Ferligoj

    () (University of Ljubljana)

  • Luka Kronegger

    () (University of Ljubljana)

Abstract

This article examines the structure of co-authorship networks’ stability in time. The goal of the article is to analyse differences in the stability and size of groups of researchers that co-author with each other (core research groups) formed in disciplines from the natural and technical sciences on one hand and the social sciences and humanities on the other. The cores were obtained by a pre-specified blockmodeling procedure assuming a multi-core–semi-periphery–periphery structure. The stability of the obtained cores was measured with the Modified Adjusted Rand Index. The assumed structure was confirmed in all analysed disciplines. The average size of the cores obtained is higher in the second time period and the average core size is greater in the natural and technical sciences than in the social sciences and humanities. There are no differences in average core stability between the natural and technical sciences and the social sciences and humanities. However, if the stability of cores is defined by the splitting of cores and not also by the percentage of researchers who left the cores, the average stability of the cores is higher in disciplines from the scientific fields of Engineering sciences and technologies and Medical sciences than in disciplines of the Humanities, if controlling for the networks’ and disciplines’ characteristics. The analysis was performed on disciplinary co-authorship networks of Slovenian researchers in two time periods (1991–2000 and 2001–2010).

Suggested Citation

  • Marjan Cugmas & Anuška Ferligoj & Luka Kronegger, 2016. "The stability of co-authorship structures," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 106(1), pages 163-186, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:106:y:2016:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-015-1790-4
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-015-1790-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-015-1790-4
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    ---><---

    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. Luka Kronegger & Franc Mali & Anuška Ferligoj & Patrick Doreian, 2015. "Classifying scientific disciplines in Slovenia: A study of the evolution of collaboration structures," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 66(2), pages 321-339, February.
    2. Abbasi, Alireza & Hossain, Liaquat & Leydesdorff, Loet, 2012. "Betweenness centrality as a driver of preferential attachment in the evolution of research collaboration networks," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 6(3), pages 403-412.
    3. Luka Kronegger & Anuška Ferligoj & Patrick Doreian, 2011. "On the dynamics of national scientific systems," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 45(5), pages 989-1015, August.
    4. 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.
    5. Grit Laudel, 2002. "What do we measure by co-authorships?," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 11(1), pages 3-15, April.
    6. Hollis, Aidan, 2001. "Co-authorship and the output of academic economists," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 8(4), pages 503-530, September.
    7. Melin, Goran, 2000. "Pragmatism and self-organization: Research collaboration on the individual level," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 31-40, January.
    8. Borrett, Stuart R. & Moody, James & Edelmann, Achim, 2014. "The rise of Network Ecology: Maps of the topic diversity and scientific collaboration," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 293(C), pages 111-127.
    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. Ahmed N. Albatineh & Magdalena Niewiadomska-Bugaj & Daniel Mihalko, 2006. "On Similarity Indices and Correction for Chance Agreement," Journal of Classification, Springer;The Classification Society, vol. 23(2), pages 301-313, September.
    12. Patrick Doreian & Anuška Ferligoj & Luka Kronegger, 2011. "On the dynamics of national scientific systems: a reply," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 45(5), pages 1025-1029, August.
    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. Marjan Cugmas & Franc Mali & Aleš Žiberna, 2020. "Scientific collaboration of researchers and organizations: a two-level blockmodeling approach," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(3), pages 2471-2489, December.
    2. Hajdeja Iglič & Patrick Doreian & Luka Kronegger & Anuška Ferligoj, 2017. "With whom do researchers collaborate and why?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 112(1), pages 153-174, July.
    3. Jie Zheng & Jianya Gong & Rui Li & Kai Hu & Huayi Wu & Siluo Yang, 2017. "Community evolution analysis based on co-author network: a case study of academic communities of the journal of “Annals of the Association of American Geographers”," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 113(2), pages 845-865, November.
    4. Zewen Hu & Angela Lin & Peter Willett, 2019. "Identification of research communities in cited and uncited publications using a co-authorship network," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 118(1), pages 1-19, January.
    5. 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. Marjan Cugmas & Franc Mali & Aleš Žiberna, 2020. "Scientific collaboration of researchers and organizations: a two-level blockmodeling approach," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(3), pages 2471-2489, December.
    2. Zaida Chinchilla-Rodríguez & Anuska Ferligoj & Sandra Miguel & Luka Kronegger & Félix Moya-Anegón, 2012. "Blockmodeling of co-authorship networks in library and information science in Argentina: a case study," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 93(3), pages 699-717, December.
    3. Wang, Jian, 2016. "Knowledge creation in collaboration networks: Effects of tie configuration," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 68-80.
    4. Cimenler, Oguz & Reeves, Kingsley A. & Skvoretz, John, 2015. "An evaluation of collaborative research in a college of engineering," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 9(3), pages 577-590.
    5. Susan Biancani & Daniel McFarland, 2013. "Social Networks Research in Higher Education," Educational Studies, Higher School of Economics, issue 4, pages 85-126.
    6. Hugo Confraria & Fernando Vargas, 2019. "Scientific systems in Latin America: performance, networks, and collaborations with industry," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(3), pages 874-915, June.
    7. 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.
    8. Chin-Chang Tsai & Elizabeth A. Corley & Barry Bozeman, 2016. "Collaboration experiences across scientific disciplines and cohorts," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 108(2), pages 505-529, August.
    9. Abbasi, Alireza & Jaafari, Ali, 2013. "Research impact and scholars’ geographical diversity," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 7(3), pages 683-692.
    10. Hajdeja Iglič & Patrick Doreian & Luka Kronegger & Anuška Ferligoj, 2017. "With whom do researchers collaborate and why?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 112(1), pages 153-174, July.
    11. Šubelj, Lovro & Fiala, Dalibor & Ciglarič, Tadej & Kronegger, Luka, 2019. "Convexity in scientific collaboration networks," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 10-31.
    12. Cimenler, Oguz & Reeves, Kingsley A. & Skvoretz, John, 2014. "A regression analysis of researchers’ social network metrics on their citation performance in a college of engineering," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 8(3), pages 667-682.
    13. 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.
    14. Letina, Srebrenka, 2016. "Network and actor attribute effects on the performance of researchers in two fields of social science in a small peripheral community," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 571-595.
    15. Giovanni Abramo & Ciriaco Andrea D'Angelo & Flavia Costa, 2012. "Identifying interdisciplinarity through the disciplinary classification of coauthors of scientific publications," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 63(11), pages 2206-2222, November.
    16. Elisa Bellotti & Luka Kronegger & Luigi Guadalupi, 2016. "The evolution of research collaboration within and across disciplines in Italian Academia," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(2), pages 783-811, November.
    17. van Rijnsoever, Frank J. & Hessels, Laurens K. & Vandeberg, Rens L.J., 2008. "A resource-based view on the interactions of university researchers," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 1255-1266, September.
    18. Aliakbar Akbaritabar & Vincent Antonio Traag & Alberto Caimo & Flaminio Squazzoni, 0. "Italian sociologists: a community of disconnected groups," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 0, pages 1-22.
    19. Aliakbar Akbaritabar & Vincent Antonio Traag & Alberto Caimo & Flaminio Squazzoni, 2020. "Italian sociologists: a community of disconnected groups," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(3), pages 2361-2382, September.
    20. Krzysztof Klincewicz, 2016. "The emergent dynamics of a technological research topic: the case of graphene," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 106(1), pages 319-345, January.

    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:106:y:2016:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-015-1790-4. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.