IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v130y2025i5d10.1007_s11192-025-05332-z.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How lonely or influential is the Lone Wolf? An analysis of individual scholars’ solo-authorship dynamics

Author

Listed:
  • Teddy Lazebnik

    (Ariel University
    University College London)

  • Ariel Rosenfeld

    (Bar Ilan University)

Abstract

Collaboration has become a defining feature of modern science. Nevertheless, solo-authorship has not disappeared entirely. In this study, we investigate solo-authorship dynamics at the individual scholar level, a perspective often overlooked in favor of publication-level analyses, focusing on the propensity of scholars to solo-publish over their careers and this propensity’s potential relation to their academic influence. Using a dataset of 7238 scholars from Biology, Computer Science, Psychology, and Philosophy, we analyze the temporal solo-authorship patterns through heatmap analysis, time series clustering, and statistical testing. By formally defining and analyzing the notion of the academic “Lone Wolf”—a scholar who persistently solo-publishes at a high rate—we show that a global definition of a Lone Wolf may seem unreasonable. Nevertheless, we identify three characteristic solo-authorship trajectories across the four disciplines that share several commonalities and highly their differences. Our findings do not suggest any significant relation between scholars’ solo- authorship dynamics and their influence metrics.

Suggested Citation

  • Teddy Lazebnik & Ariel Rosenfeld, 2025. "How lonely or influential is the Lone Wolf? An analysis of individual scholars’ solo-authorship dynamics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 130(5), pages 3053-3069, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:130:y:2025:i:5:d:10.1007_s11192-025-05332-z
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-025-05332-z
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-025-05332-z
    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/s11192-025-05332-z?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.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Teddy Lazebnik & Stephan Beck & Labib Shami, 2023. "Academic co-authorship is a risky game," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(12), pages 6495-6507, December.
    2. Wei Wang & Shuo Yu & Teshome Megersa Bekele & Xiangjie Kong & Feng Xia, 2017. "Scientific collaboration patterns vary with scholars’ academic ages," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 112(1), pages 329-343, July.
    3. Marek Kwiek & Wojciech Roszka, 2021. "Gender Disparities In International Research Collaboration: A Study Of 25,000 University Professors," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(5), pages 1344-1380, December.
    4. Caroline S. Wagner & Travis A. Whetsell & Loet Leydesdorff, 2017. "Growth of international collaboration in science: revisiting six specialties," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 110(3), pages 1633-1652, March.
    5. Zuo, Zhiya & Zhao, Kang, 2018. "The more multidisciplinary the better? – The prevalence and interdisciplinarity of research collaborations in multidisciplinary institutions," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 12(3), pages 736-756.
    6. Vincent Larivière & Yves Gingras & Cassidy R. Sugimoto & Andrew Tsou, 2015. "Team size matters: Collaboration and scientific impact since 1900," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 66(7), pages 1323-1332, July.
    7. Vincent Larivière & Yves Gingras & Éric Archambault, 2006. "Canadian collaboration networks: A comparative analysis of the natural sciences, social sciences and the humanities," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 68(3), pages 519-533, September.
    8. Isidro F. Aguillo, 2012. "Is Google Scholar useful for bibliometrics? A webometric analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 91(2), pages 343-351, May.
    9. Xiao Han T Zeng & Jordi Duch & Marta Sales-Pardo & João A G Moreira & Filippo Radicchi & Haroldo V Ribeiro & Teresa K Woodruff & Luís A Nunes Amaral, 2016. "Differences in Collaboration Patterns across Discipline, Career Stage, and Gender," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(11), pages 1-19, November.
    10. Michael Gusenbauer, 2019. "Google Scholar to overshadow them all? Comparing the sizes of 12 academic search engines and bibliographic databases," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 118(1), pages 177-214, January.
    11. Seongkyoon Jeong & Jae Young Choi & Jaeyun Kim, 2011. "The determinants of research collaboration modes: exploring the effects of research and researcher characteristics on co-authorship," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 89(3), pages 967-983, December.
    12. Abramo, Giovanni & D’Angelo, Ciriaco Andrea & Solazzi, Marco, 2011. "Are researchers that collaborate more at the international level top performers? An investigation on the Italian university system," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 5(1), pages 204-213.
    13. Nick Haslam & Simon Laham, 2009. "Early-career scientific achievement and patterns of authorship: the mixed blessings of publication leadership and collaboration," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 18(5), pages 405-410, December.
    14. Elizaveta Savchenko & Ariel Rosenfeld, 2024. "Authorship conflicts in academia: an international cross-discipline survey," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 129(4), pages 2101-2121, April.
    15. repec:plo:pone00:0189136 is not listed on IDEAS
    16. Ariel Alexi & Teddy Lazebnik & Ariel Rosenfeld, 2024. "The scientometrics and reciprocality underlying co-authorship panels in Google Scholar profiles," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 129(6), pages 3303-3313, June.
    17. Francisco José Acedo & Carmen Barroso & Cristóbal Casanueva & José Luis Galán, 2006. "Co‐Authorship in Management and Organizational Studies: An Empirical and Network Analysis," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(5), pages 957-983, July.
    18. Chenwei Zhang & Yi Bu & Ying Ding & Jian Xu, 2018. "Understanding scientific collaboration: Homophily, transitivity, and preferential attachment," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 69(1), pages 72-86, January.
    19. repec:plo:pone00:0225837 is not listed on IDEAS
    20. Marek Kwiek & Wojciech Roszka, 2022. "Are female scientists less inclined to publish alone? The gender solo research gap," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(4), pages 1697-1735, April.
    21. Liz Allen & Jo Scott & Amy Brand & Marjorie Hlava & Micah Altman, 2014. "Publishing: Credit where credit is due," Nature, Nature, vol. 508(7496), pages 312-313, April.
    22. 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.
    23. João Carlos Nabout & Micael Rosa Parreira & Fabrício Barreto Teresa & Fernanda Melo Carneiro & Hélida Ferreira Cunha & Luciana Souza Ondei & Samantha Salomão Caramori & Thannya Nascimento Soares, 2015. "Publish (in a group) or perish (alone): the trend from single- to multi-authorship in biological papers," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(1), pages 357-364, January.
    24. Yang Li & Huajiao Li & Nairong Liu & Xueyong Liu, 2018. "Important institutions of interinstitutional scientific collaboration networks in materials science," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 117(1), pages 85-103, October.
    25. Lee, You-Na & Walsh, John P. & Wang, Jian, 2015. "Creativity in scientific teams: Unpacking novelty and impact," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(3), pages 684-697.
    26. Giovanni Abramo & Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo & Flavia Di Costa, 2019. "The collaboration behavior of top scientists," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 118(1), pages 215-232, January.
    27. Alberto Martín-Martín & Mike Thelwall & Enrique Orduna-Malea & Emilio Delgado López-Cózar, 2021. "Google Scholar, Microsoft Academic, Scopus, Dimensions, Web of Science, and OpenCitations’ COCI: a multidisciplinary comparison of coverage via citations," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(1), pages 871-906, January.
    28. Giovanni Abramo & Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo & Gianluca Murgia, 2014. "Variation in research collaboration patterns across academic ranks," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 98(3), pages 2275-2294, March.
    29. Bozeman, Barry & Corley, Elizabeth, 2004. "Scientists' collaboration strategies: implications for scientific and technical human capital," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 599-616, May.
    30. repec:cai:poeine:pope_701_0033 is not listed on IDEAS
    31. Kayvan Kousha & Mike Thelwall, 2008. "Sources of Google Scholar citations outside the Science Citation Index: A comparison between four science disciplines," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 74(2), pages 273-294, February.
    32. Martín-Martín, Alberto & Orduna-Malea, Enrique & Thelwall, Mike & Delgado López-Cózar, Emilio, 2018. "Google Scholar, Web of Science, and Scopus: A systematic comparison of citations in 252 subject categories," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 12(4), pages 1160-1177.
    33. Alan L Porter & David J Roessner & Anne E Heberger, 2008. "How interdisciplinary is a given body of research?," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 17(4), pages 273-282, December.
    34. Alberto Martín-Martín & Mike Thelwall & Enrique Orduna-Malea & Emilio Delgado López-Cózar, 2021. "Correction to: Google Scholar, Microsoft Academic, Scopus, Dimensions, Web of Science, and OpenCitations’ COCI: a multidisciplinary comparison of coverage via citations," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(1), pages 907-908, January.
    35. Giovanni Abramo & Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo & Flavia Costa, 2019. "A gender analysis of top scientists’ collaboration behavior: evidence from Italy," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 120(2), pages 405-418, August.
    36. ., 2017. "Standing on the shoulders of giants," Chapters, in: Endogenous Innovation, chapter 1, pages 3-24, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    37. Mott Greene, 2007. "The demise of the lone author," Nature, Nature, vol. 450(7173), pages 1165-1165, December.
    38. Lutz Bornmann & Hans‐Dieter Daniel, 2007. "What do we know about the h index?," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 58(9), pages 1381-1385, July.
    39. Lorenzo Ductor, 2015. "Does Co-authorship Lead to Higher Academic Productivity?," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 77(3), pages 385-407, June.
    40. Amjad, Tehmina & Ding, Ying & Xu, Jian & Zhang, Chenwei & Daud, Ali & Tang, Jie & Song, Min, 2017. "Standing on the shoulders of giants," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 11(1), pages 307-323.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Xie, Qing & Zhang, Xinyuan & Kim, Giyeong & Song, Min, 2022. "Exploring the influence of coauthorship with top scientists on researchers’ affiliation, research topic, productivity, and impact," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(3).
    2. Marek Kwiek & Wojciech Roszka, 2022. "Are female scientists less inclined to publish alone? The gender solo research gap," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(4), pages 1697-1735, April.
    3. Giovanni Abramo & Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo & Flavia Costa, 2019. "A gender analysis of top scientists’ collaboration behavior: evidence from Italy," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 120(2), pages 405-418, August.
    4. Kjersten Bunker Whittington & Molly M. King & Isabella Cingolani, 2024. "Structure, status, and span: gender differences in co-authorship networks across 16 region-subject pairs (2009–2013)," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 129(1), pages 147-179, January.
    5. Giovanni Abramo & Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo & Flavia Di Costa, 2019. "The collaboration behavior of top scientists," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 118(1), pages 215-232, January.
    6. 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.
    7. Michael Gusenbauer, 2022. "Search where you will find most: Comparing the disciplinary coverage of 56 bibliographic databases," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(5), pages 2683-2745, May.
    8. Liyin Zhang & Yuchen Qian & Chao Ma & Jiang Li, 2023. "Continued collaboration shortens the transition period of scientists who move to another institution," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(3), pages 1765-1784, March.
    9. Wang, Wei & Ren, Jing & Alrashoud, Mubarak & Xia, Feng & Mao, Mengyi & Tolba, Amr, 2020. "Early-stage reciprocity in sustainable scientific collaboration," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 14(3).
    10. Sang Yoon Kim & Won Kyung Lee & Su Jung Jee & So Young Sohn, 2025. "Discovering AI adoption patterns from big academic graph data," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 130(2), pages 809-831, February.
    11. Ren, Linlin & Guo, Lei & Yu, Hui & Guo, Feng & Wang, Xinhua & Han, Xiaohui, 2025. "Collaborating with top scientists may not improve paper novelty: A causal analysis based on the propensity score matching method," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 19(1).
    12. Teddy Lazebnik & Stephan Beck & Labib Shami, 2023. "Academic co-authorship is a risky game," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(12), pages 6495-6507, December.
    13. 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).
    14. Oliver Wieczorek & Markus Eckl & Madeleine Bausch & Erik Radisch & Christoph Barmeyer & Malte Rehbein, 2021. "Better, Faster, Stronger: The Evolution of Co-authorship in International Management Research Between 1990 and 2016," SAGE Open, , vol. 11(4), pages 21582440211, November.
    15. Kristoffer Rørstad & Dag W Aksnes & Fredrik Niclas Piro, 2021. "Generational differences in international research collaboration: A bibliometric study of Norwegian University staff," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(11), pages 1-21, November.
    16. Raminta Pranckutė, 2021. "Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today’s Academic World," Publications, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-59, March.
    17. Delgado-Quirós, Lorena & Ortega, José Luis, 2025. "Citation counts and inclusion of references in seven free-access scholarly databases: A comparative analysis," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 19(1).
    18. Li, Xin & Tang, Xuli, 2021. "Characterizing interdisciplinarity in drug research: A translational science perspective," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 15(4).
    19. Lu, Chao & Bu, Yi & Dong, Xianlei & Wang, Jie & Ding, Ying & Larivière, Vincent & Sugimoto, Cassidy R. & Paul, Logan & Zhang, Chengzhi, 2019. "Analyzing linguistic complexity and scientific impact," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 13(3), pages 817-829.
    20. Mike Thelwall, 2023. "Are successful co-authors more important than first authors for publishing academic journal articles?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(4), pages 2211-2232, April.

    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:spr:scient:v:130:y:2025:i:5:d:10.1007_s11192-025-05332-z. 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.