Collaborating With People Like Me: Ethnic co-authorship within the US

Freeman, Richard B.; Huang, Wei

doi:10.3386/w19905

Cited by 73 publications

(76 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…One recent and compelling scientific example is a 2013 study showing that sex diversity had a positive effect on the quality of science produced by collaborative working groups of academic scientists (13). Similarly, papers coauthored by ethnically diverse contributors lead to greater contributions to science as measured by impact factor and citations (14).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

National Institutes of Health addresses the science of diversity

Valantine

Collins

2015

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

294

246

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The US biomedical research workforce does not currently mirror the nation's population demographically, despite numerous attempts to increase diversity. This imbalance is limiting the promise of our biomedical enterprise for building knowledge and improving the nation's health. Beyond ensuring fairness in scientific workforce representation, recruiting and retaining a diverse set of minds and approaches is vital to harnessing the complete intellectual capital of the nation. The complexity inherent in diversifying the research workforce underscores the need for a rigorous scientific approach, consistent with the ways we address the challenges of science discovery and translation to human health. Herein, we identify four cross-cutting diversity challenges ripe for scientific exploration and opportunity: research evidence for diversity's impact on the quality and outputs of science; evidence-based approaches to recruitment and training; individual and institutional barriers to workforce diversity; and a national strategy for eliminating barriers to career transition, with scientifically based approaches for scaling and dissemination. Evidence-based data for each of these challenges should provide an integrated, stepwise approach to programs that enhance diversity rapidly within the biomedical research workforce.diversity | scientific workforce | underrepresentation in science | culture | biomedical research

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

National Institutes of Health addresses the science of diversity

Valantine

Collins

2015

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

294

246

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The evaluation showed this similarity-based method to be feasible. Similar studies include that of Freeman and Huang (2014) for homophily on authors' ethnicity and Boschini and Sj€ ogren (2007) for authors' sex. In this paper, we analyze the homophily effect based on the collaboration graph, where all the coauthors are examined to show how the homophily mechanism influences the evolution of collaboration network.…”

Section: Homophily In Scientific Collaborationmentioning

confidence: 90%

“…Such a mechanism will force scholars to form more homogeneous collaboration with respect to the authors' characteristics. Homophily has been observed among a broad range of collaborations (Boschini & Sj€ ogren, 2007;Freeman & Huang, 2014;Sie, Drachsler, Bitter-Rijpkema, & Sloep, 2012).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Previous studies have shown the mechanisms of homophily, transitivity, and preferential attachment (e.g., Barab asi et al, 2002;Boschini & Sj€ ogren, 2007;Franceschet, 2011;Freeman & Huang, 2014;Moody, 2004;Newman, 2001a) could all influence the decisions of scientific collaboration. Yet these features were generally introduced as static indicators, and were examined in isolation.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Understanding scientific collaboration: Homophily, transitivity, and preferential attachment

Zhang

Ding

et al. 2017

Asso for Info Science & Tech

108

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Scientific collaboration is essential in solving problems and breeding innovation. Coauthor network analysis has been utilized to study scholars' collaborations for a long time, but these studies have not simultaneously taken different collaboration features into consideration. In this paper, we present a systematic approach to analyze the differences in possibilities that two authors will cooperate as seen from the effects of homophily, transitivity, and preferential attachment. Exponential random graph models (ERGMs) are applied in this research. We find that different types of publications one author has written play diverse roles in his/her collaborations. An author's tendency to form new collaborations with her/his coauthors' collaborators is strong, where the more coauthors one author had before, the more new collaborators he/she will attract. We demonstrate that considering the authors' attributes and homophily effects as well as the transitivity and preferential attachment effects of the coauthorship network in which they are embedded helps us gain a comprehensive understanding of scientific collaboration.

show abstract

“…Much literature points to the power of diversity when it comes creative teams (Page 2008). Perhaps surprisingly, mere cultural or ethnic diversity of coworkers has been shown to correlate to creativity in fashion teams (Godart et al 2015) and the impact of scientific papers (Freeman and Huang 2014). Importantly, group diversity can work out different ways (Hülsheger et al 2009) and may only have clear positive effects if the people involved actually value such diversity (Homan et al 2015).…”

Section: Collect Diverse Experiencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Teaching originality? Common habits behind creative production in science and arts

Scheffer¹,

Baas²,

Bjordam³

2017

E&S

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. Originality is a prerequisite for world-changing science and arts alike, but it cannot be taught. Or can it? Here, we show that a set of habits that are-surprisingly-shared among successful artists and scientists may catalyze creative output. We reveal three groups of such habits, each corresponding to a cluster of personality traits, shown to be shared by creative artists and scientists. The first habit group "embrace the unexpected" corresponds to the character trait "openness to new experiences" and encompasses tendencies to go ahead without a plan, collect diverse experiences, and take risks. The second group "create conditions for creation" links to the personality trait "autonomous" and encompasses simple habits such as making empty time and carrying a notebook. The third class of habits "break away from dogma" links to the shared personality trait "norm doubting" and stands for a strong drive to escape from established systems and also occasionally destroy part of one's own work to break tunnel vision and start anew. Although personality traits are hard to change, the habits we found hint at techniques or skills that may be taught.

show abstract

Collaborating With People Like Me: Ethnic co-authorship within the US

Cited by 73 publications

References 21 publications

National Institutes of Health addresses the science of diversity

National Institutes of Health addresses the science of diversity

Understanding scientific collaboration: Homophily, transitivity, and preferential attachment

Teaching originality? Common habits behind creative production in science and arts

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About