IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v68y2006i3d10.1007_s11192-006-0113-1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparative analysis of co-authorship networks considering authors' roles in collaboration: Differences between the theoretical and application areas

Author

Listed:
  • Fuyuki Yoshikane

    (Faculty of University Evaluation and Research, National Institution for Academic Degrees and University Evaluation)

  • Takayuki Nozawa

    (Faculty of University Evaluation and Research, National Institution for Academic Degrees and University Evaluation)

  • Keita Tsuji

    (University of Tsukuba)

Abstract

Summary Many studies have analyzed “direct” partnerships in co-authorship networks. On the other hand, the global network structure, including “indirect” links between researchers, has not yet been sufficiently studied. This study analyzes researchers' activities from the viewpoints considering their roles in the global structures of co-authorship networks, and compares the co-authorship networks between the theoretical and application areas in computer science. The modified HITS algorithm is used to calculate the two types of importance of researchers in co-authorship networks, i.e., the importance as the leader and that as the follower.

Suggested Citation

  • Fuyuki Yoshikane & Takayuki Nozawa & Keita Tsuji, 2006. "Comparative analysis of co-authorship networks considering authors' roles in collaboration: Differences between the theoretical and application areas," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 68(3), pages 643-655, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:68:y:2006:i:3:d:10.1007_s11192-006-0113-1
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-006-0113-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-006-0113-1
    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.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Jianlin Zhou & An Zeng & Ying Fan & Zengru Di, 2018. "Identifying important scholars via directed scientific collaboration networks," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 114(3), pages 1327-1343, March.
    2. Haiyang Lu & Yuqiang Feng, 2009. "A measure of authors’ centrality in co-authorship networks based on the distribution of collaborative relationships," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 81(2), pages 499-511, November.
    3. Han-Wen Chang & Mu-Hsuan Huang, 2014. "Cohesive subgroups in the international collaboration network in astronomy and astrophysics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 101(3), pages 1587-1607, December.
    4. Fuyuki Yoshikane & Takayuki Nozawa & Susumu Shibui & Takafumi Suzuki, 2009. "An analysis of the connection between researchers’ productivity and their co-authors’ past attributions, including the importance in collaboration networks," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 79(2), pages 435-449, May.
    5. Yufang Peng & Jin Shi & Marcelo Fantinato & Jing Chen, 2017. "A study on the author collaboration network in big data," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 19(6), pages 1329-1342, December.
    6. José Luis Ortega, 2011. "Collaboration patterns in patent networks and their relationship with the transfer of technology: the case study of the CSIC patents," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 87(3), pages 657-666, June.
    7. Zhigang Hu & Chaomei Chen & Zeyuan Liu, 2014. "How are collaboration and productivity correlated at various career stages of scientists?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 101(2), pages 1553-1564, November.
    8. Luis Cisneros & Mihai Ibanescu & Christian Keen & Odette Lobato-Calleros & Juan Niebla-Zatarain, 2018. "Bibliometric study of family business succession between 1939 and 2017: mapping and analyzing authors’ networks," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 117(2), pages 919-951, November.

    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:spr:scient:v:68:y:2006:i:3:d:10.1007_s11192-006-0113-1. 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.

    We have no 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.

    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.