Key factors and considerations in the assessment of international collaboration: a case study for Austria and six countries

Gorraiz, Juan; Reimann, Ralph; Gumpenberger, Christian

doi:10.1007/s11192-011-0579-3

Cited by 27 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…2. This finding is consistent with previous research conducted on Austria and other six countries (Gorraiz et al 2012), where domestic publications were less cited than bilateral ones, while the latter were, in turn, less cited than multilateral ones.…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 93%

“…International collaboration can be particularly advantageous for less advanced countries, because they obtain access to facilities, funding, equipment and networks. Nonetheless, working with foreign partners is also beneficial for highly industrialised countries (Glänzel et al 1999;Gorraiz et al 2012). The fact that most countries may gain from international collaboration in terms of impact was also pointed out by Adams et al (2007), in a study focused on the scientific output of the UK and its main partners.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 87%

“…Multilateral international collaboration is more often the result of ''top-down'' initiatives such as those funded under the European Commission Framework Programmes (Mattsson et al 2010). Bilateral collaboration is more likely to be funded by national sources on the basis of bilateral agreements and promoted by scientists themselves (Gorraiz et al 2012). Moreover, contacts established through bilateral collaboration schemes can serve as a stepping stone for wider future collaborations.…”

Section: Policy Implicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The influence of R&D intensity of countries on the impact of international collaborative research: evidence from Spain

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A positive influence of international collaboration on the impact of research has been extensively described. This paper delves further into this issue and studies to what extent the type of collaborating country-high, medium or low R&D intensive countryand which country is the leader in the research may influence the impact of the final scientific output. Among 9,961 papers co-authored by scientists from Spain and from another country (bilateral collaboration) during 2008-2009, papers with high R&D intensive countries predominated (60 %) and received the highest number of citations. This holds true in eight out of nine fields, being Social Sciences the one which benefited the most from partnerships with high R&D intensive countries. Mathematics emerges as a special case where other factors such as the partner's specialisation in the field may have a greater influence on research impact than the level of investment in R&D of the collaborating country. No significant influence of the type of country leading the research on the impact of the final papers is observed in most fields. Research policy implications are finally discussed.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 93%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 87%

Section: Policy Implicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The influence of R&D intensity of countries on the impact of international collaborative research: evidence from Spain

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Conversely, Bartneck and Hu (2010) argued that there was no advantage for collaboration in terms of citation frequency. Gorraiz, Reimann, and Gumpenberger (2012) stand with Bartneck and Hu (2010), pointing out that citations only have a weak correlation with the number of affiliations or authors.…”

Section: Introduction and Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Country of Authorship and Collaboration Affect Citations of Articles by South and East Asian Authors in Agronomy Journals: A Case Study of China, Japan, and India

Xia

Zhi-gang

et al. 2014

Serials Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A total of 7,707 agronomy papers (2006 to 2011) by Chinese, Indian, and Japanese authors were identified in the Web of Science (WoS) database. The impact factors (IFs) of papers and the uncited paper rate (UPR) in a particular journal with a given country's authorship was calculated as IFs calculated in Journal Citation Reports. For India, the impact factors of articles authored within one country (within-country impact factor) were significantly lower than the overall IF. The impact factors of collaborative articles (collaborative impact factor) and within-country impact factors for the three countries differed significantly. The uncited rates of collaborative papers (uncited collaborative paper rate) and uncited rates of papers authored within one country (uncited within-country paper rate) of China and Japan were significantly different. However, for India, the uncited collaborative paper rate was significantly lower than the uncited within-country paper rate; collaboration (mostly with developed countries) exerted a negative effect.

show abstract

“…Beyond doubt, influence on research impact certainly depends on the type of collaboration (Sooryamoorthy 2009), however, not all types of collaboration have the same effect on research impact in terms of citations (Bordons et al 1996;Lee et al 2001;Persson et al 2004;Gazni and Didegah 2011;Gorraiz et al 2011).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The different flavors of research collaboration: a case study of their influence on university excellence in four world regions

et al. 2012

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study on research collaboration (RC) is an attempt to estimate the degree of internationalization of academic institutions and regions. Furthermore potential influences of RC on excellence initiatives of modern universities are investigated relying on source data obtained from SCImago Institutions Rankings. A positive correlation exists between the degree of collaboration and the normalized impact. However, in contrast to output the normalized impact increase progression is non-linear and fluctuating. Differences occur regarding output volume and normalized impact at geographical region level for the leading universities. Different patterns of the Brute force distribution for each collaboration type were also observed at region level as well as at subject area level. A continuously reduced percentage of the domestic (non-collaboration) academic output is a world trend, whereas a steady increase of ''international ? national'' collaboration is observed globally, however, less distinctive in Asia than in the other regions. The impact of Latin American papers originating from domestic production as well as from national collaboration remains considerably below world average values.

show abstract

Key factors and considerations in the assessment of international collaboration: a case study for Austria and six countries

Cited by 27 publications

References 16 publications

The influence of R&D intensity of countries on the impact of international collaborative research: evidence from Spain

The influence of R&D intensity of countries on the impact of international collaborative research: evidence from Spain

Country of Authorship and Collaboration Affect Citations of Articles by South and East Asian Authors in Agronomy Journals: A Case Study of China, Japan, and India

The different flavors of research collaboration: a case study of their influence on university excellence in four world regions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About