Explore the vast range of titles available.

We investigated the effect of international collaboration (in the form of international co-authorship) on the impact of publications of young universities (<50 years old), and compared to that of renowned old universities (>100 years old). The following impact indicators are used in this study, they are: (1) the 5-year citations per paper (CPP) data, (2) the international co-authorship rate, (3) the CPP differential between publications with and without international co-authorships, and (4) the difference between the percentage of international co-authored publications falling in the global top 10 % highly cited publications and the percentage of overall publications falling in the global top 10 % highly cited publications (Δ%Top10%). The increment of 5-year (2010–2014) field weighted citation impact (FWCI) of internationally co-authored papers over the 5-year overall FWCI of the institutions in SciVal® is used as another indicator to eliminate the effect of discipline difference in citation rate. The results show that, for most top institutions, the difference between the citations per paper (CPP) for their publications with and without international co-authorship is positive, with increase of up to 5.0 citations per paper over the period 1996–2003. Yet, for some Asian institutions, by attracting a lot of researchers with international background and making these collaborating “external” authors as internal researchers, these institutions have created a special kind of international collaboration that are not expressed in co-authorship, and the CPP gaps between publications with and without international co-authorship are relatively small (around 0–1 citations per paper increment) for these institutions. The top old institutions have higher CPP than young institutions, and higher annual research expenditures; while young universities have a higher relative CPP increment for the current 5-year period over the previous 5-year period. The Δ%Top10% for international co-authored publications is generally higher than that for all journal publications of the same institution. With the increase of international co-authorship ratio, the mean geographical collaboration distance (MGCD, an indication of increased international co-authorship) of one institution based on the Leiden Ranking data also increases, and young institutions have relatively higher CPP increment over MGCD increment. International co-authorship has a positive contribution to the FWCI of the institution, yet there are untapped potential to enhance the collaboration among young institutions.

This article examines the rise in co-authorship in the Social Sciences over a 34-year period. It investigates the development in co-authorship in different research fields and discusses how the methodological differences in these research fields together with changes in academia affect the tendency to co-author articles. The study is based on bibliographic data about 4.5 million peer review articles published in the period 1980–2013 and indexed in the 56 subject categories of the Web of Science’s Social Science Citation Index. The results show a rise in the average number of authors, share of co-authored and international co-authored articles in the majority of the subject categories. However, the results also show that there are great disciplinary differences to the extent of the rises in co-authorship. The subject categories with a great share of international co-authored articles have generally experienced an increase in co-authorship, but increasing international collaboration is not the only factor influencing the rise in co-authorship. Hence, the most substantial rises have occurred in subject categories, where the research often is based on the use of experiments, large data set, statistical methods and/or team-production models.

In recent decades, internationalization of research activities has increased, as demonstrated by the phenomena of international scientific collaboration and international mobility of researchers. This paper investigates whether the international scientific collaboration is explained by researchers’ motivation as well as their international migration. Using metadata from papers published in Nature and Science from 1989 to 2009, count data estimation was conducted. The results illustrate those researchers’ international migration and motivation, shown by both synergy and difference effects between countries, explain international collaboration. This implies that international co-authorship in recent decades has been based on researchers’ motivation as well as their networking. The positive result for synergy effects also means that pairs of countries with rich research environments tended to have more international collaboration, which may lead to the convergence of qualified research output in advanced scientific countries. Our findings also support the conclusion that researchers move to countries with better research environments, but networks created through international collaboration are not a factor in international migration. The relationship between international mobility and collaboration is confirmed as going in one direction, from mobility to collaboration.

In this paper we analyze the evolution of China’s growing importance in international scientific collaboration over the past 15 years. Using co-authored publications indexed in Clarivate Analytics’s Web of Science Core Collection we develop novel weighted and unweighted centrality measures to quantify China’s emerging role in the global scientific research network. We analyze the networks formed by international co-authorship in three 5-year periods: 2001–2005, 2006–2010, and 2011–2015. This analysis highlights China’s sharp increase in prominence in international scientific collaborations. The analysis of China’s co-authored, highly cited papers also illustrates China’s rising importance in scientific research and collaboration from a different perspective. The impact of multilaterally co-authored papers to the centrality measure is also analyzed both theoretically and empirically. The results show that multilateral collaboration is also a key factor that influences the centrality of a country beyond simply the scale of international co-authorship. We further contextualize our work in a discussion of international scientific collaboration as both a key driver of China’s economy and its emerging perception as a first-world innovator and intellectual power. Finally, we suggest directions for further research including more granular analysis by academic discipline and an alternative investigation based on the fractional counting method.

The number of co-authors has in the social sciences has been rising over the last decades, but a deeper understanding of why this rise is occurring is lacking. Previous studies of co-authorship in the social sciences often refer to the physical or life sciences or anecdotal evidence to explain these changes. This article examines the relationship between changes in co-authorship and research in Danish Economics and Political Science to gain greater insights into whether there are changes in the research or in researchers’ behavior. The analysis shows that articles with empirical research, quantitative research and/or survey are more likely to have a higher number of coauthors than articles based on theoretical, interview, and qualitative research. Furthermore, international and interinstitutional Danish articles tend to have more coauthors than interinstitutional articles. The analysis also reveals that the average number of authors increases for articles with all types of research and research approaches. This indicates that the collaboration behavior of the researchers is changing.

Co-authored research articles in the disciplinarily heterogeneous field of higher education have dramatically increased in this century. As in other fields, rising international co-authorships reflect evolving international collaboration networks. We examine higher education research over two decades, applying automated bibliometric topic identification and social network analysis of 9067 papers in 13 core higher education journals (1998–2018). Remarkable expansion in the volume of papers and co-authorships has, surprisingly, not resulted in a more diverse network. Rather, existing co-authorship patterns are strengthened, with the dominance of scholars from a few Anglophone countries largely maintained. Researchers globally seek to co-author with leading scholars in these countries, especially the US, UK, and Australia—at least when publishing in the leading general higher education journals based there. Further, the two-mode social network analysis of countries and topics suggests that while Anglophone countries have led the development of higher education research, China and Germany, as leading research-producing countries, are increasingly influential within this world-spanning network. Topically, the vast majority of co-authored papers in higher education research focuses on individual-level phenomena, with organizational and system or country-level analysis constituting (much) smaller proportions, despite policymakers’ emphasis on cross-national comparisons and the growing importance of university actorhood. We discuss implications thereof for the future of the multidisciplinary field of higher education.

This study explores academic research on technology transfer (TT) and the related themes. The TT field has attracted considerable scholarly attention in recent years and has grown rapidly, resulting in a large body of knowledge. Using a bibliometric approach, this study reviews related research issues as well as their influence and connections and provides directions for future research. It uses Clarivate Analytics’ Web of Science database that includes 3218 bibliographic references. Several bibliometric analysis techniques and a subsequent review of the content of the most relevant documents are adopted. The performance analysis provided an updated overview of the evolution of the TT literature from 1969 to 2018 and quantitatively identified the most active and influential journals, articles, authors, and organizations. The co-authorship network analysis allowed us to identify and visualize the structure of relations between authors as well as determine the collaboration patterns among them. On the basis of the information supplied by the co-authorship network, the main literature was reviewed to identify the current status and research trends related to TT, identifying five main research streams and related topics. The implications of the study’s findings and directions for future TT research are finally discussed to enhance our understanding of TT agents and issues and support further research in this field.

Link prediction in online social networks is used to determine new interactions among its members which are likely to occur in the future. Link prediction in the co-authorship network has been regarded as one of the main targets in link prediction researches so far. Researchers have focused on analyzing and proposing solutions to give efficient recommendation for authors who can work together in a science project. In order to give precise prediction of links between two ubiquitous authors in a co-authorship network, it is preferable to design a similarity metric between them and then utilizing it to determine the most possible co-author(s). However, the relevant researches did not regard the integration of paper’s content in the metric itself. This is important when considering the collaboration between scientists since it is possible that authors having same research interests are more likely to have a joint paper than those in different researches. In this paper, we propose a new metric for link prediction in the co-authorship network based on the content similarity named as LDAcosin. Mathematical notions of the link prediction in the co-authorship network and a link prediction algorithm based on topic modeling are proposed. The new metric is experimentally validated on the public bibliographic collection.

This paper builds on previous work by reviewing the key literature relating to the rise in co-authorship in economics and by presenting further new evidence on several features of co-authorship in articles in economic journals. The empirical analysis draws on around 175,000 articles in the top 255 journals, over the period 1996–2014. The rises in quarto-plus and cross-country co-authored papers are striking, as are the differences in citations per article and citations per author. There is evidence of an alphabetical ordering of authors as the standard in co-authored papers in top journals with no downward trend evident over time. A correlation between co-authorship and career stage is observed with young authors publishing significantly more solo-authored articles.

Scientific co-authorship of African researchers has become a fashionable topic in the recent scientometric literature. Researchers are investigating the effects, modes, dynamics and motives of collaboration in a continental research system which is in an embryonic stage and in different stages of development from country to country. In this article we attempt to provide some additional evidence by examining both patterns of collaboration at country and continental levels and the scientific disciplines emphasised. Our findings indicate that the continent’s research emphasises medical and natural resources disciplines to the detriment of disciplines supporting knowledge based economies and societies. Furthermore, we identify that the collaborative patterns in Africa are substantial higher than in the rest of the world. A number of questions related to research collaboration and its effects are raised.