IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v71y2007i1d10.1007_s11192-007-1648-5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Publishing in international journals

Author

Listed:
  • Jo Royle

    (The Robert Gordon University)

  • Louisa Coles

    (The Robert Gordon University)

  • Dorothy Williams

    (The Robert Gordon University)

  • Paul Evans

    (Elsevier Science and Technology)

Abstract

This paper examines patterns of Chinese authorship, focusing particularly on international co-authorship, in a sample of 37,526 articles from Elsevier journals published in 2004. Trends relating to potential influences such as subject, journal impact factor and article type are explored. A slightly higher proportion of articles with at least one Chinese author was observed as compared to previous studies. Articles that are a product of Chinese international collaboration account for almost 20% of the Chinese sample as a whole, a similar proportion to levels of international collaboration within the sample overall. Chinese international co-authorship is most common in the Earth & Environmental Sciences. Where China is involved in international collaboration, it is often a proactive participant: 49% of articles that are a result of Chinese international collaboration have a Chinese corresponding author. With some minor variations in subject categories, countries favoured in international co-authorship reflect world shares in publishing and factors such as geographical proximity and political links.

Suggested Citation

  • Jo Royle & Louisa Coles & Dorothy Williams & Paul Evans, 2007. "Publishing in international journals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 71(1), pages 59-86, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:71:y:2007:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-007-1648-5
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-007-1648-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-007-1648-5
    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/s11192-007-1648-5?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 search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Tianwei He & Jinglin Zhang & Lirong Teng, 2005. "Basic research in biochemistry and molecular biology in China: A bibliometric analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 62(2), pages 249-259, January.
    2. Nan Ma & Jiancheng Guan, 2005. "An exploratory study on collaboration profiles of Chinese publications in Molecular Biology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 65(3), pages 343-355, December.
    3. Wolfgang Glänzel & Henk F. Moed, 2002. "Journal impact measures in bibliometric research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 53(2), pages 171-193, February.
    4. Anita Engels & Tina Ruschenburg & Peter Weingart, 2005. "Recent internationalization of global environmental change research in Germany and the U.S," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 62(1), pages 67-85, January.
    5. Loet Leydesdorff & Ping Zhou, 2005. "Are the contributions of China and Korea upsetting the world system of science?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 63(3), pages 617-630, June.
    6. Christian Wichmann Matthiessen & Annette Winkel Schwarz & Søren Find, 2002. "The Top-level Global Research System, 1997-99: Centres, Networks and Nodality. An Analysis Based on Bibliometric Indicators," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 39(5-6), pages 903-927, May.
    7. Grit Laudel, 2002. "What do we measure by co-authorships?," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 11(1), pages 3-15, April.
    8. Wagner, Caroline S. & Leydesdorff, Loet, 2005. "Network structure, self-organization, and the growth of international collaboration in science," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(10), pages 1608-1618, December.
    9. Blaise Cronin, 2001. "Hyperauthorship: A postmodern perversion or evidence of a structural shift in scholarly communication practices?," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 52(7), pages 558-569.
    10. Yan Wang & Yishan Wu & Yuntao Pan & Zheng Ma & Ronald Rousseau, 2005. "Scientific collaboration in China as reflected in co-authorship," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 62(2), pages 183-198, January.
    11. Katz, J. Sylvan & Martin, Ben R., 1997. "What is research collaboration?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 1-18, March.
    12. Caroline S. Wagner, 2005. "Six case studies of international collaboration in science," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 62(1), pages 3-26, January.
    13. David N. Laband & Robert D. Tollison, 2000. "Intellectual Collaboration," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 108(3), pages 632-661, June.
    14. Martin Meyer & Sujit Bhattacharya, 2004. "Commonalities and differences between scholarly and technical collaboration," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 61(3), pages 443-456, November.
    15. Wolfgang Glänzel & András Schubert, 2001. "Double effort = Double impact? A critical view at international co-authorship in chemistry," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 50(2), pages 199-214, February.
    16. Porac, Joseph F. & Wade, James B. & Fischer, Harald M. & Brown, Joyce & Kanfer, Alaina & Bowker, Geoffrey, 2004. "Human capital heterogeneity, collaborative relationships, and publication patterns in a multidisciplinary scientific alliance: a comparative case study of two scientific teams," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 661-678, May.
    17. David A. King, 2004. "The scientific impact of nations," Nature, Nature, vol. 430(6997), pages 311-316, July.
    18. Blaise Cronin, 2004. "Bowling alone together: Academic writing as distributed cognition," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 55(6), pages 557-560, April.
    19. Joachim Schummer, 2004. "Multidisciplinarity, interdisciplinarity, and patterns of research collaboration in nanoscience and nanotechnology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 59(3), pages 425-465, March.
    20. Pavitt, Keith, 1998. "The social shaping of the national science base," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(8), pages 793-805, December.
    21. Zhou, Ping & Leydesdorff, Loet, 2006. "The emergence of China as a leading nation in science," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 83-104, February.
    22. Georghiou, Luke, 1998. "Global cooperation in research," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(6), pages 611-626, September.
    23. Shaun Goldfinch & Tony Dale & Karl DeRouen, 2003. "Science from the periphery: Collaboration, networks and 'Periphery Effects' in the citation of New Zealand Crown Research Institutes articles, 1995-2000," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 57(3), pages 321-337, July.
    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. Ingo Liefner & Stefan Hennemann, 2011. "Structural Holes and New Dimensions of Distance: The Spatial Configuration of the Scientific Knowledge Network of China's Optical Technology Sector," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 43(4), pages 810-829, April.

    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. Bar-Ilan, Judit, 2008. "Informetrics at the beginning of the 21st century—A review," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 2(1), pages 1-52.
    2. Chen, Kaihua & Zhang, Yi & Fu, Xiaolan, 2019. "International research collaboration: An emerging domain of innovation studies?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 149-168.
    3. 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.
    4. Seongkyoon Jeong & Jae Young Choi, 2012. "The taxonomy of research collaboration in science and technology: evidence from mechanical research through probabilistic clustering analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 91(3), pages 719-735, June.
    5. 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.
    6. 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.
    7. 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.
    8. S. Hennemann & T. Wang & I. Liefner, 2011. "Measuring regional science networks in China: a comparison of international and domestic bibliographic data sources," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 88(2), pages 535-554, August.
    9. Radhamany Sooryamoorthy, 2009. "Do types of collaboration change citation? Collaboration and citation patterns of South African science publications," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 81(1), pages 177-193, October.
    10. Tang, Li, 2013. "Does “birds of a feather flock together” matter—Evidence from a longitudinal study on US–China scientific collaboration," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 7(2), pages 330-344.
    11. Abramo, Giovanni & D’Angelo, Ciriaco Andrea & Murgia, Gianluca, 2013. "The collaboration behaviors of scientists in Italy: A field level analysis," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 7(2), pages 442-454.
    12. 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.
    13. Li, Feng & Miao, Yajun & Yang, Chenchen, 2015. "How do alumni faculty behave in research collaboration? An analysis of Chang Jiang Scholars in China," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(2), pages 438-450.
    14. Graf, Holger & Kalthaus, Martin, 2018. "International research networks: Determinants of country embeddedness," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(7), pages 1198-1214.
    15. Radhamany Sooryamoorthy, 2010. "Medical research in South Africa: a scientometric analysis of trends, patterns, productivity and partnership," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 84(3), pages 863-885, September.
    16. Koen Jonkers & Laura Cruz-Castro, 2010. "The internationalisation of public sector research through international joint laboratories," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 37(8), pages 559-570, October.
    17. Pauline Mattsson & Patrice Laget & Anna Nilsson & Carl-Johan Sundberg, 2008. "Intra-EU vs. extra-EU scientific co-publication patterns in EU," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 75(3), pages 555-574, June.
    18. Ali Gazni & Cassidy R. Sugimoto & Fereshteh Didegah, 2012. "Mapping world scientific collaboration: Authors, institutions, and countries," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 63(2), pages 323-335, February.
    19. Jonathan M. Levitt & Mike Thelwall, 2016. "Long term productivity and collaboration in information science," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 108(3), pages 1103-1117, September.
    20. Jonathan M. Levitt, 2015. "What is the optimal number of researchers for social science research?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(1), pages 213-225, January.

    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:71:y:2007:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-007-1648-5. 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.