China’s international research collaboration: evidence from a panel gravity model

Zhang, Cui; Guo, Jing

doi:10.1007/s11192-017-2513-9

Cited by 21 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The regression results show high capability distance distracts the international collaborations in fusion reaction related clusters: plasma, device, and diagnostics. This tendency contrasts with that of other science fields favoring collaborators that have complementary comparative advantages [38][39][40][41][42]. Real collaborations in nuclear fusion governed by this pattern are worth studying.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 94%

Measuring national capability over big science’s multidisciplinarity: A case study of nuclear fusion research

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the era of big science, countries allocate big research and development budgets to large scientific facilities that boost collaboration and research capability. A nuclear fusion device called the “tokamak” is a source of great interest for many countries because it ideally generates sustainable energy expected to solve the energy crisis in the future. Here, to explore the scientific effects of tokamaks, we map a country’s research capability in nuclear fusion research with normalized revealed comparative advantage on five topical clusters—material, plasma, device, diagnostics, and simulation—detected through a dynamic topic model. Our approach captures not only the growth of China, India, and the Republic of Korea but also the decline of Canada, Japan, Sweden, and the Netherlands. Time points of their rise and fall are related to tokamak operation, highlighting the importance of large facilities in big science. The gravity model points out that two countries collaborate less in device, diagnostics, and plasma research if they have comparative advantages in different topics. This relation is a unique feature of nuclear fusion compared to other science fields. Our results can be used and extended when building national policies for big science.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 94%

Measuring national capability over big science’s multidisciplinarity: A case study of nuclear fusion research

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Boschma (2005) identifies five notions of proximity (geographical, cognitive, institutional, organizational, and social) on research collaboration and interactive learning. Following Boschma (2005), a broad set of literature employs the gravity model and finds that geographical proximity and the other proximities are hinder determinants to the formation of research collaboration (Fernandez et al, 2016;Zhang & Guo, 2017). In the gravity model, the estimation equation is as follows where I ab denotes the collaboration intensity, measured by the number of co-publications, Pubmass a and Pubmass b denote the number of previous publications of institutions a and b , respectively.…”

Section: Measurement Of Research Leadership Flowmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Institution refers to common habits, cultural norms. Institutional proximity can be measured by a dummy variable, which takes 1 if two institutions are from the same country (Fernandez et al, 2016) or linguistic area (Gui et al, 2018;Zhang & Guo, 2017), and 0 otherwise. s k denotes other dimensions of proximity, including cognitive, social and economic proximity.…”

Section: Measurement Of Research Leadership Flowmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Characterizing research leadership on geographically weighted collaboration network

Zhang

2021

Scientometrics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research collaborations, especially long-distance and international collaborations, have become increasingly prevalent worldwide. Recent studies highlighted the significant role of research leadership in collaborations. However, existing measures of the research leadership do not take into account the intensity of leadership in the co-authorship network. More importantly, the spatial features, which influence the collaboration patterns and research outcomes, have not been incorporated in measuring the research leadership. To fill the gap, we construct an institution-level weighted co-authorship network that integrates two types of weight on the edges: the intensity of collaborations and the spatial score (the geographical distance adjusted by the cross-linguistic-border nature). Based on this network, we propose a novel metric, namely the spatial research leadership rank, to identify the leading institutions while considering both the collaboration intensity and the spatial features. The leadership of an institution is measured by the following three criteria: (a) the institution frequently plays the corresponding rule in papers with other institutions; (b) the institution frequently plays the corresponding rule in longer distance and even cross-linguistic-border collaborations; (c) the participating institutions led by the institution have high leadership status themselves. Harnessing a dataset of 323,146 journal publications in pharmaceutical sciences during 2010-2018, we perform a comprehensive analysis of the geographical distribution and dynamic patterns of research leadership flows at the institution level. The results demonstrate that the SpatialLeaderRank outperforms baseline metrics in predicting the scholarly impact of institutions. And the result remains robust in the field of Information Science and Library Science.

show abstract

“…International research collaboration has also contributed greatly to the rapid growth of scientific research in China [2,8]. A growing number of empirical studies have shown that the growing quantity and impact of China's scientific knowledge creation can be attributed to international research collaboration [1,6,[8][9][10][11][12]. There is also a thread of collaborative research with the aim of conducting comparative studies by using the same frameworks or tools [13].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Chinese Universities’ Cross-Border Research Collaboration in the Social Sciences and Its Impact

Liu

Song

et al. 2021

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper examined the coauthorship patterns in Chinese researchers’ cross-border research collaboration in the social sciences based on articles and reviews indexed in the Scopus database (2010–2019). We explored the evolution of coauthorship patterns by year, research field, country/region, and research institution; additionally, the quality of the coauthored publications was examined using four levels of paper quality (Q1–4), citations per paper, and FWCI. We found that collaboration between Chinese and international scholars is very common, and more than 40% of all papers published by Chinese scholars from 2010 to 2019 involved cross-border collaboration. The growth in collaboration was very steady over the past 10 years, increasing by an average of 41% per year. United States scholars are the most common research collaboration partners for Chinese scholars in the social sciences, followed by those in Hong Kong, the United Kingdom, Australia, and Canada. The field of psychology seeks the most collaboration, followed by economics and finance, business and management, and social issues. The percentage of Q1 papers increased from 36% in 2010 to 66% in 2019. Thus, in the past 10 years, Chinese scholars’ cross-border collaboration has grown extensively in terms of both quantity and impact.

show abstract

China’s international research collaboration: evidence from a panel gravity model

Cited by 21 publications

References 19 publications

Measuring national capability over big science’s multidisciplinarity: A case study of nuclear fusion research

Measuring national capability over big science’s multidisciplinarity: A case study of nuclear fusion research

Characterizing research leadership on geographically weighted collaboration network

Chinese Universities’ Cross-Border Research Collaboration in the Social Sciences and Its Impact

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About