179,336 research outputs found
Quantitative assessment of collaboration
No full textSite de l'éditeur : http://www.iisi.de/international-reports-on-socio-informatics-irsi/This paper presents a short literature review of a research trend that endeavors to model collaboration by quantifying each group member‟s contribution. In such a view, equity is considered as the ideal collaborative situation. We review some foundational elements of this approach, some methodological aspects, describe a case study applying such concepts and analyses, and present examples of design implications for Computer-Supported Cooperative Work
The Structure of Scientific Collaboration Networks in Scientometrics
No full textThe structure of scientific collaboration networks in scientometrics was investigated at the level of individuals by using bibliographic data of all papers published in the international journal Scientometrics retrieved from the Science Citation Index (SCI) during 1978 to 2004. Combined analysis of social network analysis (SNA), co-occurrence analysis, cluster analysis and frequency analysis of words was explored to reveal: (1) The microstructure of the collaboration network on scientists’ aspects of scientometrics; (2) The major collaborative fields of the collaborative sub-networks; (3) The collaborative center of the collaboration network in scientometrics
Collaboration in Iranian Scientific Publications
No full textThis study looks at international collaboration in Iranian scientific publications through the ISI Science Citation Index® (SCI) for the years 1995-1999, inclusive. These results are compared to and contrasted with the earlier findings for the periods covering 1985-1994 (Osareh & Wilson 2000). The results of Iran's increasing productivity over a 15-year period are presented. Iran doubled its output in the first two five-year periods and increased 2.8-fold from the second to the third five-year period. The rise in Iran's scientific publication output is due mainly to factors such as the ending of the war, better economic conditions, recent changes in the Iranian government's policy, basic changes in the political environment brought about by the Reformers, expansion of the Iranian presses for national publications, and the recent return of a large number of students trained overseas through government scholarships. External changes also account for the increased productivity, e.g., the acceptance of three Iranian source journals by the SCI, increased access to international databases through the Internet and better electronic communication facilities for international collaboration. One of the most important and significant factors that caused this dramatic rise seems to be the government's research policies in the last few years. Since 1999, the Iran Science, Research and Technology Ministry, has encouraged researchers to publish their non-Farsi language articles in highly ranked international scientific journals, for example, by giving prizes to researchers who publish their articles in ISI-ranked journals
The methodological status of co-authorship networks
No full textA powerful strategy within the study of collaboration
in science is to posit that co-authorship patterns
represent social networks.
It is prerequisite to an application of Social
Network Analysis (SNA) to define the network
entities. A network analysis of the inter-institutional
collaboration in COLLNET on the basis
of co-authorships was conducted. The study reveals
that it is crucial whether the co-authorship
itself is seen as an author's relational property or
as a social event that brings the authors together.
The former possibility is represented by a onemode
network in which each author can be related
to each other author. Quite distinct from
that are two-mode networks, the latter approach.
They consist of two single data sets in which relations
are only possible between different sets.
Different modes of representations require
different network approaches. One is that co-authorship
networks are seen as one-mode networks,
which has the advantage of the application
of a variety of measures. In contrast, twomode
networks, the other option, cannot be analysed
by standard techniques but its distinctive
features demand a new conceptualisation of
measures. In conclusion, the two-mode perspective
is more promising because it allows a dual
perspective on collaboration in science which includes
researchers as well as their scientific output
Co-authorship Network of Scientometrics Research Collaboration
No full textThis paper examines the co-authorship network in the field of scientometrics using social network analysis techniques with the aim of developing an understanding of research collaboration in this scientific community. Using co-authorship data from 3125 articles published in the journal Scientometrics with a time span of more than three decades (1980-2012), we construct an evolving co-authorship network and calculate three centrality measures (closeness, betweenness, and degree) for 3024 authors, 1207 institutions, 68 countries and 22 academic fields in this network. This paper also discusses the usability of centrality measures in author ranking, and suggests that centrality measures can be useful indicators for impact analysis. Findings revealed that scientometrics was not dominated by a couple of key researchers as quite a significant number of popular researchers were identified. The United States occupies the topmost position in all measures except for degree centrality. The most active, central and collaborative academic discipline in scientometrics is Information & Library Science
Scientometric portrait of Nobel laureate Leland H. Hartwell
No full textLeland H. Hartwell was honoured with the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine (2001) at his 62 years age and at 41 years of research publishing career. The first contribution of the author was in 1961 at the age of 22. The number of his contributions in a year peaked in 1997 when it touched 8. He had 108 publications during 1961 – 2001 in domains: Molecular Biology of Cell Cycle Regulation (43), Genetics of Cell Division (48), Genomic Re-arrangement and DNA Repair (9), Molecular Genetics of Yeast Cell Fission (5), and Drug Target Interaction (3) which were analysed for authorship pattern with his 101 collaborators. Most active researchers having number of publications with Leland H. Hartwell were : Weinert, T. A. (10), Garvik, B. M. (8), McLaughlin, C. S. (8), Jenness, D. D. (5). His productivity coefficient was 0.76 which clearly indicates that his productivity increased after 50 percentile age. Highest collaboration coefficient (1) for Leland H. Hartwell was found during 1963-1965, 1968-1969, 1977, 1981-1983, 1985-1990, 1996 and 1998-2001. Journals have been the most preferred channel of communication where, as many as 96 papers out of 108 have been published. The core journals publishing his papers were: Cell (14), Genetics (12), Mol. Cell Biol. (8), J. Bactariol. (7), J. Cell Biol. ( 7), Science (7) J. Mol. Biol.(6), Exp. Cell Res. (5), and Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci.(5). Publication density is 2.63 and Publication concentration is 14.63. Most prolific keywords in titles of publications were: Saccharomyces cerevisiae , Yeast , Cell division cycle , RAD9, DNA Damage , Genes , Cell cycle, Genetic control , Check point (s) , Cell division , Mutant of Yeast
Relationship among research collaboration, number of documents and number of citations. A case study in Spanish computer science production in 2000-2009.
No full textThis paper analyzes the relationship among research collaboration, number of documents and number of citations of computer science research activity. It analyzes the number of documents and citations and how they vary by number of authors. They are also analyzed (according to author set cardinality) under different circumstances, that is, when documents are written in different types of collaboration, when documents are published in different document types, when documents are published in different computer science subdisciplines, and, finally, when documents are published by journals with different impact factor quartiles. To investigate the above relationships, this paper analyzes the publications listed in the Web of Science and produced by active Spanish university professors between 2000 and 2009, working in the computer science field. Analyzing all documents, we show that the highest percentage of documents are published by three authors, whereas single-authored documents account for the lowest percentage. By number of citations, there is no positive association between the author cardinality and citation impact. Statistical tests show that documents written by two authors receive more citations per document and year than documents published by more authors. In contrast, results do not show statistically significant differences between documents published by two authors and one author. The research findings suggest that international collaboration results on average in publications with higher citation rates than national and institutional collaborations. We also find differences regarding citation rates between journals and conferences, across different computer science subdisciplines and journal quartiles as expected. Finally, our impression is that the collaborative level (number of authors per document) will increase in the coming years, and documents published by three or four authors will be the trend in computer science literature
Documentation report of 10 business collaboration events: Business collaboration event Arnhem
No full textThis report is part of an Intelligent Energy Europe project, entitled “COHERENO - Collaboration for housing nearly zero-energy renovation” (www.cohereno.eu). The main objective of this project is to strengthen the collaboration of enterprises in innovative business schemes to develop nearly Zero Energy Building (nZEB) renovation in owner occupied single-family homes.OTBArchitecture and The Built Environmen
DiNa Framework and Prototype to Support Collaboration in the Wild
No full textMuch of the available collaboration support tools focus on sharing of documents and managing projects that require planned activities. These tools fall short in meeting principle of least effort or taking into account of the reality of complex work patterns. We propose DiNa framework and system architecture for a topic centric as opposed to document-centric collaboration system using readily available devices. DiNa aims to complement existing approaches. Our primary goal is to seek answers for how these devices can better support collaboration without overloading the workflow. After a literature review and roleplaying exercises, the prototypes we developed demonstrate new interaction techniques for defining topics and address them in collaborators’ own terms. It uses different visualizations of the artefacts and their association with the topics, among which is a scalable timeline interface accessible from different platforms, to make the artefacts collected more meaningful in a given context. In this paper we present our recent prototype as a proof-of-concept and its initial evaluations followed by the lessons learnt from our studies on supporting collaboration in the wild. The evaluation outcome is suggestions for improving DiNa-based systems for effective collaboration
Inter-institutional scientific collaboration: an approach from social network
No full textThis paper presents a tool that can be used to characterize, analyze and interpret the
patterns of collaboration among institutions by means of the visual display of scientific
information. These graphic representations allow for a combined analysis of a given
institution in the system of relations (network), and of the particular attributes of that
institution (indicators). The tool affords the possibility of regenerating the network to
make any number of aggregates appear or disappear, thus allowing one to focus on
institutional sectors, geographic regions, etc. It also allows for analysis of sectorial
interaction, institutional backing of research, and the influence of geographic proximity,
linguistic affinity, or regional politics. This is indeed a versatile analytical tool, and it is
bound to prove its potential for evaluating patterns of collaborative research, development
and innovation
- …
