|
|
|
| An Analysis of the Evolution of Research Collaboration According to the Academic Careers of Distinguished Researchers in Chemistry |
| Ou Guiyan1,2, Yue Mingliang3, Wu Jiang1,2, Ma Tingcan3,4,5 |
1.Center for Studies of Information Resources, Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072
2.School of Information Management, Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072
3.Wuhan Documentation and Information Center, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Wuhan 430071
4.Department of Library, Information and Archives Management, School of Economics and Management, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100190
5.Hubei Key Laboratory of Big Data in Science and Technology, Wuhan 430071 |
|
|
|
|
Abstract With the increasing breadth and depth of interdisciplinarity, research collaboration has become a major trend in scientific research, particularly in the form of co-authored papers. Effective scientific collaborations facilitate the flow of funds and increase research output, thus promoting effective academic careers. In this paper, 235 researchers sponsored by the National Science Fund for Distinguished Young Scholars in the field of chemistry from 2001 to 2010 are used as the sample, and their basic information and work experience are obtained through the resume analysis method. Based on the SCI co-authored papers, we analyzed the evolution of collaboration patterns and roles of these Distinguished Young Scholars at three key points in their academic career in order to provide some insights into their growth pattern. The findings show that researchers with a higher academic level and more research resources and academic contacts were associated with strengthened cooperation between Distinguished Young Scholars from other universities (institutions) in China. The cooperative role is also significantly transformed as their academic experience and prestige increase, as seen in those who had an executive role before being promoted to a senior title, then to the leading role as a mentor. The contribution of scientific research cooperation gradually increases and then tends to balance out.
|
|
Received: 02 November 2020
|
|
|
|
1 Abt H A. The future of single-authored papers[J]. Scientometrics, 2007, 73(3): 353-358.
2 AdamsJ, PendleburyD, PotterR, 等. 多作者署名与研究分析[J]. 科学观察, 2020, 15(4): 49-64.
3 Lee S, Bozeman B. The impact of research collaboration on scientific productivity[J]. Social Studies of Science, 2005, 35(5): 673-702.
4 Henriksen D. What factors are associated with increasing co-authorship in the social sciences? A case study of Danish economics and political science[J]. Scientometrics, 2018, 114(3): 1395-1421.
5 Leahey E. From sole investigator to team scientist: trends in the practice and study of research collaboration[J]. Annual Review of Sociology, 2016, 42(1): 81-100.
6 Wijesinghe S N R, Mura P, Bouchon F. Tourism knowledge and neocolonialism - a systematic critical review of the literature[J]. Current Issues in Tourism, 2019, 22(11): 1263-1279.
7 Traoré N, Landry R. On the determinants of scientists' collaboration[J]. Science Communication, 1997, 19(2): 124-140.
8 Jeong S, Choi J Y, Kim J. The determinants of research collaboration modes: exploring the effects of research and researcher characteristics on co-authorship[J]. Scientometrics, 2011, 89(3): 967-983.
9 Casey T, Mahroum S, Ducatel K, et al. The mobility of academic researchers. Academic careers & recruitment in ICT and biotechnology[OL]. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/38288143_ The_Mobility_of_Academic_Researchers_Academic_Careers_ Recruitment_in_ICT_and_Biotechnology.
10 贺超城, 吴江, 魏子瑶, 等. 科研合作中机构间科研主导力及邻近性机理——以中国生物医学领域为例[J]. 情报学报, 2020, 39(2): 148-157.
11 Abramo G, D'Angelo C A, Murgia G. Gender differences in research collaboration[J]. Journal of Informetrics, 2013, 7(4): 811-822.
12 Zuckerman H. Nobel laureates in science: patterns of productivity, collaboration, and authorship[J]. American Sociological Review, 1967, 32(3): 391-403.
13 Abramo G, D'Angelo C A, Murgia G. Variation in research collaboration patterns across academic ranks[J]. Scientometrics, 2014, 98(3): 2275-2294.
14 Chan H F, ?nder A S, Torgler B. Do Nobel laureates change their patterns of collaboration following prize reception?[J]. Scientometrics, 2015, 105(3): 2215-2235.
15 Liu X J, Yu M X, Chen D Z, et al. Tracking research performance before and after receiving the Cheung Kong Scholars award: a case study of recipients in 2005[J]. Research Evaluation, 2018, 27(4): 367-379.
16 Mishra V, Smyth R. Are more senior academics really more research productive than junior academics? Evidence from Australian law schools[J]. Scientometrics, 2013, 96(2): 411-425.
17 马缨. 行政职务对我国科研人员论文发表的影响[J]. 科学学研究, 2017, 35(11): 1614-1622.
18 Macharzina K, Wolf J, Rohn A. Quantitative evaluation of German research output in business administration: 1992-2001[J]. MIR: Management International Review, 2004, 44(3): 335-359.
19 王曰芬, 杨雪, 余厚强, 等. 人工智能科研团队的合作模式及其对比研究[J]. 图书情报工作, 2020, 64(20): 14-22.
20 蒋倩雯. 基于社会网络分析的我国区域科研合作模式及其演化规律研究[D]. 蚌埠: 安徽财经大学, 2020.
21 Bozeman B, Gaughan M. How do men and women differ in research collaborations? An analysis of the collaborative motives and strategies of academic researchers[J]. Research Policy, 2011, 40(10): 1393-1402.
22 Benckendorff P, Zehrer A. Career and collaboration patterns in tourism research[J]. Current Issues in Tourism, 2016, 19(14): 1386-1404.
23 Wang W, Yu S, Bekele T M, et al. Scientific collaboration patterns vary with scholars' academic ages[J]. Scientometrics, 2017, 112(1): 329-343.
24 Zhang B, Wang X H. Empirical study on influence of university-industry collaboration on research performance and moderating effect of social capital: evidence from engineering academics in China[J]. Scientometrics, 2017, 113(1): 257-277.
25 Gazni A, Sugimoto C R, Didegah F. Mapping world scientific collaboration: authors, institutions, and countries[J]. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 2012, 63(2): 323-335.
26 Finardi U, Buratti A. Scientific collaboration framework of BRICS countries: an analysis of international coauthorship[J]. Scientometrics, 2016, 109(1): 433-446.
27 Zhao Y, Li D, Han M J, et al. Characteristics of research collaboration in biotechnology in China: evidence from publications indexed in the SCIE[J]. Scientometrics, 2016, 107(3): 1373-1387.
28 张琳, 孙蓓蓓, 黄颖. 跨学科合作模式下的交叉科学测度研究——以ESI社会科学领域高被引学者为例[J]. 情报学报, 2018, 37(3): 231-242.
29 Riesenberg D, Lundberg G D. The order of authorship: who's on first?[J]. JAMA, 1990, 264(14): 1857-1857.
30 Yank V, Rennie D. Disclosure of researcher contributions: a study of original research articles in The Lancet[J]. Annals of Internal Medicine, 1999, 130(8): 661-670.
31 Wren J D, Kozak K Z, Johnson K R, et al. The write position[J]. EMBO Reports, 2007, 8(11): 988-991.
32 Drenth J P H. Multiple authorship: the contribution of senior authors[J]. JAMA, 1998, 280(3): 219-221.
33 Mattsson P, Sundberg C J, Laget P. Is correspondence reflected in the author position? A bibliometric study of the relation between corresponding author and byline position[J]. Scientometrics, 2011, 87(1): 99-105.
34 Larivière V, Desrochers N, Macaluso B, et al. Contributorship and division of labor in knowledge production[J]. Social Studies of Science, 2016, 46(3): 417-435.
35 左菊. 科研合著中署名顺序与作者贡献研究[D]. 重庆: 西南大学, 2014.
36 What is a corresponding author?[EB/OL]. [2021-01-23]. https://scientific-publishing.webshop.elsevier.com/publication-recognition/what-corresponding-author/.
37 汪士. 杰出科学家行政任职研究[D]. 合肥: 中国科学技术大学, 2012.
38 徐飞, 汪士. 杰出科学家行政任职对科研创新的影响——以诺贝尔奖获得者与中国科学院院士比较为例[J]. 科学学研究, 2010, 28(7): 981-985.
39 Lou W, Zhao Y H, Chen Y C, et al. Research or management? An investigation of the impact of leadership roles on the research performance of academic administrators[J]. Scientometrics, 2018, 117(1): 191-209.
40 Beaver D. Reflections on scientific collaboration (and its study): past, present, and future[J]. Scientometrics, 2001, 52(3): 365-377.
41 Bozeman B, Corley E. Scientists' collaboration strategies: implications for scientific and technical human capital[J]. Research Policy, 2004, 33(4): 599-616.
42 Díaz-Faes A A, Costas R, Galindo M P, et al. Unravelling the performance of individual scholars: use of canonical Biplot analysis to explore the performance of scientists by academic rank and scientific field[J]. Journal of Informetrics, 2015, 9(4): 722-733.
43 Hemlin S, Gustafsson M. Research production in the arts and humanities: a questionnaire study of factors influencing research performance[J]. Scientometrics, 1996, 37(3): 417-432.
44 Martin B R, Skea J E F. Academic research performance indicators: an assessment of the possibilities[M]. University of Sussex, 1992.
45 Tscharntke T, Hochberg M E, Rand T A, et al. Author sequence and credit for contributions in multiauthored publications[J]. PLoS Biology, 2007, 5(1): e18. |
|
|
|
