Academic collaboration rates and citation associations vary substantially between countries and fields

The exploration in the size of scientific collaboration team using kernel density estimation

Purpose

Scientific collaboration is becoming a common pattern in the social organization of knowledge production. The paper tries to figure out the relationship between scientific collaboration team size and scientific output.

Design/methodology/approach

Based on ESI database from year 2009–2019, the paper describes changes of collaboration team size from one author to more than 10 authors in 22 disciplines. Kernel density estimation and multidimensional kernel density estimation method are used to calculate optimal collaboration team size and appropriate collaboration team size in 22 disciplines. As bandwidth is one of the major issues in construction of kernel density estimation, the paper uses five different algorithms to calculate bandwidth. The method with the lowest mean absolute percentage error is chosen. Robustness test is conducted based on different sets of data.

Findings

The results show that scientific collaboration becomes more widely and deeply. As time goes by, collaboration team size is becoming larger and larger. Natural science disciplines have larger collaboration team size and faster growth rate than social science disciplines. Considering both qualitative and quantitative measures, the paper proves the universality of optimal and appropriate scientific collaboration team size among 22 disciplines and calculates the specific number.

Originality/value

The paper tries to investigate the law of scientific collaboration team size variation and provide a full picture of evolution of collaboration team size among 22 disciplines in 10 years. The paper first applies distribution method to figure out the relationship between scientific collaboration team size and scientific output and provides optimal collaboration team size and appropriate collaboration team size.

Research Topic Specialization of Universities in Information Science and Library Science and Its Impact on Inter-University Collaboration

Universities significantly empower the development of science and technology, and inter-university research collaborations have been one of the major approaches. Considering each university has its expertise regarding research topics in a given discipline, the present paper examines the specialization of university research and its impact on inter-university collaborations. Based on a keyword network constructed via research articles in Information Science and Library Science, 10 research topics are identified. Accordingly, the research topic diversity of a university and the research topic similarity between two universities are quantified. The universities with diverse research topics are found to be more collaborative. A further collaboration network analysis based on the Quadradic Assignment Procedure reveals the important role of research topic similarity on the closeness and impact of collaborations. The different research topic specializations largely prevent close collaborations between two universities, but on the other hand, have the potential to form a complementary combination of knowledge leading to more impactful research output. The analysis and results highlight the important role of research topic specialization and provide insights for the university- or department-level strategy for research collaborations.

On the possibilities of presenting the research performance of an institute over a long period of time: the case of the Institute of Information Science at the University of Graz in Austria

In this paper, we demonstrate how the research performance of a university institute (department) over a long period of time can be presented and evaluated. Using the example of an information science institute at a German-speaking university, namely the (former) Institute of Information Science at the University of Graz in Austria, we present the research performance of this institute over the entire duration of its existence (33 years) in different ways. In order to be able to contextualize its performance, we compare it with that of some related institutions from all over the world. Due to the high effort involved in collecting data and the lack of data availability, the comparison must be limited to a period of a few years and—with regard to the institutions from non-German-speaking countries—to the Web of Science as data source. In this international comparison, the institute in the focus of the study shows relatively poor results. As can be seen, the choice of the data source has a major influence on the evaluation results. Especially for institutes from non-English-speaking countries with publications in their respective national languages, an exclusive use of international databases, such as Web of Science or Scopus, cannot fully consider the whole research performance. The use of personal publication lists or local research databases seems almost indispensable in these cases. A major novelty of this article is the handling of a very long evaluation period and the discussion of different ways of subdividing it. With regard to the presentation of the results, in the case of a long observation period, not only should annual and overall results be presented, but also multi-year comparisons be performed. In this way, year-by-year fluctuations can be smoothed out, and longer-term developments can be well represented.

Cyber-bullying research in Kenya: a meta-analysis

Purpose

Cyber-bullying is a form of harassment that is perpetrated using electronic media. The practice has become increasingly common especially with the growing ubiquity of social media platforms. Most cyber-bullying cases inevitably occur on Facebook because it is the most preferred social media platform. However, little is known about cyber-bullying research in Kenya. This paper aims to analyse the quantity, quality, visibility and authorship trends of scholarly publications on cyber-bullying from and/or about Kenya.

Design/methodology/approach

This study was conducted as a systematic literature review. A meta-analysis approach was used. Bibliometrics approaches were used to conduct the analysis. Data on the publications was collected from Google Scholar using Harzing's “Publish or Perish” software and then analysed and presented using Microsoft Excel, Notepad and VOSviewer.

Findings

The study yielded 359 research publications on cyber-bullying in Kenya. There was a gradual increment in the number of publications, peaking in 2018. Nearly half of the publications have not been cited indicating low uptake of research on cyber-bullying in Kenya. It also emerged that most of the research has been published on subscription channels thereby restricting their visibility, access and use. Minimal collaboration in research on cyber-bullying in Kenya was also observed since 67.4% of the publications were written by a single (one) author. The authors conclude that the quantity, quality and visibility of research on cyber-bullying in Kenya is low.

Originality/value

This is an empirical study. The findings can be used to promote and mainstream research on cyber-bullying in Kenya.

Research Co-authorship 1900–2020: Continuous, universal, and ongoing expansion

Research co-authorship is useful to combine different skillsets, especially for applied problems. Whilst it has increased over the last century, it is unclear whether this increase is universal across academic fields and which fields co-author the most and least. In response, this article assesses changes in the rate of journal article co-authorship 1900–2020 for all 27 Scopus broad fields and all 332 Scopus narrow fields. Whilst all broad fields have experienced reasonably continuous growth in co-authorship, in 2020 there were substantial disciplinary differences, from Arts and Humanities (1.3 authors) to Immunology and Microbiology (6 authors). All 332 Scopus narrow fields also experienced an increase in the average number of authors. Immunology and Classics are extreme Scopus narrow fields, as exemplified by 9.6 authors per Journal for ImmunoTherapy of Cancer article, whilst 93% of Trends in Classics articles were solo in 2020. The reason for this large difference seems to be the need for multiple complementary methods in Immunology, making it fundamentally a team science. Finally, the reasonably steady and universal increases in academic coauthorship over 121 years show no sign of slowing, suggesting that ever expanding teams are a central part of current professional science.

Internationalists and locals: international research collaboration in a resource-poor system

The principal distinction drawn in this study is between research “internationalists” and “locals.” The former are scientists involved in international research collaboration while the latter group are not. These two distinct types of scientist compete for academic prestige, research funding, and international recognition. International research collaboration proves to be a powerful stratifying force. As a clearly defined subgroup, internationalists are a different academic species, accounting for 51.4% of Polish scientists; predominantly male and older, they have longer academic experience and higher academic degrees and occupy higher academic positions. Across all academic clusters, internationalists consistently produce more than 90% of internationally co-authored publications, representing 2320% of locals’ productivity for peer-reviewed articles and 1600% for peer-reviewed article equivalents. Internationalists tend to spend less time than locals on teaching-related activities, more time on research, and more time on administrative duties. Based on a large-scale academic survey (N = 3704), some new predictors of international research collaboration were identified by multivariate analyses. The findings have global policy implications for resource-poor science systems “playing catch-up” in terms of academic careers, productivity patterns, and research internationalization policies.