IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v95y2013i2d10.1007_s11192-012-0882-7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Researchers profile, co-authorship pattern and knowledge organization in information science in Brazil

Author

Listed:
  • Cristina Gomes Souza

    (Federal Centre for Technological Education Celso Suckow da Fonseca, CEFET/RJ)

  • Marta Lúcia Azevedo Ferreira

    (Federal Centre for Technological Education Celso Suckow da Fonseca, CEFET/RJ)

Abstract

This paper aimed to present the profile of the researchers, the pattern of scientific collaboration and the knowledge organization in the area of information science in Brazil. The study covered sex differences, skills by region and type of institution, academic formation, indicators of productivity, relations of co-authorship, interactions with other fields of knowledge, and sectors of application of the researches developed in the area. The survey, covering the period 2000–2010, was based on information from the curricula vitae of the researchers with Research Productivity Grant funded by a government agency and from the Directory of Research Group of the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development. The results revealed that the majority of the researchers are women, both in research and postgraduate; there is a significant regional asymmetry; the studies are concentrated in public universities; the papers are published mainly in national journals with open access; the scientific production follows the same pattern of the areas of humanities, social sciences, and linguistics, literature and arts; there is a tendency of increasing the incidence and extent of co-authored papers; there is interaction with other 20 areas of knowledge, which are directly or indirectly connected, forming a single component that comprises all of them; and ‘information and S&T management’ followed by ‘education’ are the main sectors of application of the studies developed by the Brazilian researchers. The study therefore showed an overview of this scientific community seeking to contribute to a better understanding of its characteristics and specificities.

Suggested Citation

  • Cristina Gomes Souza & Marta Lúcia Azevedo Ferreira, 2013. "Researchers profile, co-authorship pattern and knowledge organization in information science in Brazil," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 95(2), pages 673-687, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:95:y:2013:i:2:d:10.1007_s11192-012-0882-7
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-012-0882-7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-012-0882-7
    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/s11192-012-0882-7?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. Julia Lane, 2010. "Let's make science metrics more scientific," Nature, Nature, vol. 464(7288), pages 488-489, March.
    2. Fernanda Morillo & María Bordons & Isabel Gómez, 2001. "An approach to interdisciplinarity through bibliometric indicators," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 51(1), pages 203-222, April.
    3. Mu-Hsuan Huang & Yu-Wei Chang, 2012. "A comparative study of interdisciplinary changes between information science and library science," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 91(3), pages 789-803, June.
    4. 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.
    5. Katz, J. Sylvan & Martin, Ben R., 1997. "What is research collaboration?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 1-18, March.
    6. Sonia M. R. Vasconcelos & Martha M. Sorenson & Jacqueline Leta, 2009. "A new input indicator for the assessment of science & technology research?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 80(1), pages 217-230, July.
    7. David N. Laband & Robert D. Tollison, 2000. "Intellectual Collaboration," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 108(3), pages 632-661, June.
    8. Haiyan Hou & Hildrun Kretschmer & Zeyuan Liu, 2008. "The structure of scientific collaboration networks in Scientometrics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 75(2), pages 189-202, May.
    9. Alan L. Porter & Alex S. Cohen & J. David Roessner & Marty Perreault, 2007. "Measuring researcher interdisciplinarity," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 72(1), pages 117-147, July.
    10. Vincent Larivière & Cassidy R. Sugimoto & Blaise Cronin, 2012. "A bibliometric chronicling of library and information science's first hundred years," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 63(5), pages 997-1016, May.
    11. Jordi Ardanuy, 2012. "Scientific collaboration in Library and Information Science viewed through the Web of Knowledge: the Spanish case," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 90(3), pages 877-890, March.
    12. Vincent Larivière & Cassidy R. Sugimoto & Blaise Cronin, 2012. "A bibliometric chronicling of library and information science's first hundred years," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 63(5), pages 997-1016, May.
    13. Alan L. Porter & Ismael Rafols, 2009. "Is science becoming more interdisciplinary? Measuring and mapping six research fields over time," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 81(3), pages 719-745, December.
    14. Paula Leite & Rogério Mugnaini & Jacqueline Leta, 2011. "A new indicator for international visibility: exploring Brazilian scientific community," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 88(1), pages 311-319, July.
    15. Jacqueline Leta & Wolfgang Glänzel & Bart Thijs, 2006. "Science in Brazil. Part 2: Sectoral and institutional research profiles," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 67(1), pages 87-105, April.
    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. Guillaume Cabanac & Gilles Hubert & Béatrice Milard, 2015. "Academic careers in Computer Science: continuance and transience of lifetime co-authorships," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(1), pages 135-150, January.
    2. Guijie Zhang & Luning Liu & Yuqiang Feng & Zhen Shao & Yongli Li, 2014. "Cext-N index: a network node centrality measure for collaborative relationship distribution," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 101(1), pages 291-307, October.

    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. Jingjing Ren & Fang Wang & Minglu Li, 2023. "Dynamics and characteristics of interdisciplinary research in scientific breakthroughs: case studies of Nobel-winning research in the past 120 years," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(8), pages 4383-4419, August.
    2. Tracy Klarenbeek & Nelius Boshoff, 2018. "Measuring multidisciplinary health research at South African universities: a comparative analysis based on co-authorships and journal subject categories," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(3), pages 1461-1485, September.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    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. Rafols, Ismael & Leydesdorff, Loet & O’Hare, Alice & Nightingale, Paul & Stirling, Andy, 2012. "How journal rankings can suppress interdisciplinary research: A comparison between Innovation Studies and Business & Management," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(7), pages 1262-1282.
    7. van Rijnsoever, Frank J. & Hessels, Laurens K., 2011. "Factors associated with disciplinary and interdisciplinary research collaboration," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(3), pages 463-472, April.
    8. Carlos Olmeda-Gómez & Maria-Antonia Ovalle-Perandones & Antonio Perianes-Rodríguez, 2017. "Co-word analysis and thematic landscapes in Spanish information science literature, 1985–2014," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 113(1), pages 195-217, October.
    9. Eduardo A. Haddad & Jesus P. Mena-Chalco, Otávio J.G. Sidone, 2016. "Produção Científica e Redes de Colaboração dos Docentes Vinculados aos Programas de Pós-graduação em Economia no Brasil," Working Papers, Department of Economics 2016_10, University of São Paulo (FEA-USP).
    10. Shiji Chen & Yanhui Song & Fei Shu & Vincent Larivière, 2022. "Interdisciplinarity and impact: the effects of the citation time window," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(5), pages 2621-2642, May.
    11. Wagner, Caroline S. & Roessner, J. David & Bobb, Kamau & Klein, Julie Thompson & Boyack, Kevin W. & Keyton, Joann & Rafols, Ismael & Börner, Katy, 2011. "Approaches to understanding and measuring interdisciplinary scientific research (IDR): A review of the literature," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 5(1), pages 14-26.
    12. 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.
    13. Ricardo Arencibia-Jorge & Rosa Lidia Vega-Almeida & José Luis Jiménez-Andrade & Humberto Carrillo-Calvet, 2022. "Evolutionary stages and multidisciplinary nature of artificial intelligence research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(9), pages 5139-5158, September.
    14. Alfonso Ávila-Robinson & Cristian Mejia & Shintaro Sengoku, 2021. "Are bibliometric measures consistent with scientists’ perceptions? The case of interdisciplinarity in research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(9), pages 7477-7502, September.
    15. Li, Eldon Y. & Liao, Chien Hsiang & Yen, Hsiuju Rebecca, 2013. "Co-authorship networks and research impact: A social capital perspective," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(9), pages 1515-1530.
    16. Chen, Shiji & Qiu, Junping & Arsenault, Clément & Larivière, Vincent, 2021. "Exploring the interdisciplinarity patterns of highly cited papers," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 15(1).
    17. Yan, Erjia & Ding, Ying & Cronin, Blaise & Leydesdorff, Loet, 2013. "A bird's-eye view of scientific trading: Dependency relations among fields of science," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 7(2), pages 249-264.
    18. Mehmet Ali Koseoglu, 2016. "Mapping the institutional collaboration network of strategic management research: 1980–2014," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(1), pages 203-226, October.
    19. Michael Gowanlock & Rich Gazan, 2013. "Assessing researcher interdisciplinarity: a case study of the University of Hawaii NASA Astrobiology Institute," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 94(1), pages 133-161, January.
    20. 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.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Information science; Brazilian science; Research activity; Researchers profile; Knowledge organization;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • I2 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education
    • I20 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - General

    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:95:y:2013:i:2:d:10.1007_s11192-012-0882-7. 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.