Scientific collaboration in China as reflected in co-authorship

Wang, Yan; Wu, Yulin; Pan, Yuntao; Ma, Zheng; Rousseau, Ronald

doi:10.1007/s11192-005-0013-9

Cited by 67 publications

(43 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Investigating collaborative articles does not fully capture the dynamic process of working together (Katz & Martin, 1997;Cronin, Shaw, & La Barre, 2003;Wang, Wu, Pan, et al, 2005) in that working together does not automatically result in collaborative publications. In addition, the link between citation and "quality," however conceived, is not clear-cut.…”

Section: Related Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Citation levels and collaboration within library and information science

Levitt

Thelwall

2008

J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Collaboration is a major research policy objective, but does it deliver higher quality research? This study uses citation analysis to examine the Web of Science (WoS) Information Science & Library Science subject category (IS&LS) to ascertain whether, in general, more highly cited articles are more highly collaborative than other articles. It consists of two investigations. The first investigation is a longitudinal comparison of the degree and proportion of collaboration in five strata of citation; it found that collaboration in the highest four citation strata (all in the most highly cited 22%) increased in unison over time, whereas collaboration in the lowest citation strata (uncited articles) remained low and stable. Given that over 40% of the articles were un-cited, it seems important to take into account the differences found between un-cited articles and relatively highly cited articles when investigating collaboration in IS&LS. The second investigation compares collaboration for 35 influential information scientists; it found that their more highly cited articles on average were not more highly collaborative than their less highly cited articles. In summary, although collaborative research is conducive to high citation in general, collaboration has apparently not tended to be essential to the success of current and former elite information scientists.

show abstract

Section: Related Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Citation levels and collaboration within library and information science

Levitt

Thelwall

2008

J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Publications co-authored by authors in different countries, where researchers belong to different research institutes, departments and countries (CN), (Wang et al 2005). …”

Section: Collaborative Network Of Authorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Scientific collaboration of Library & Information Science research in China (2012-2013)

Jabeen

Imran

Badar

et al. 2017

MJLIS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Despite the difficulty in accessing data, multiple scientometric studies across various academic disciplines have been carried out in China (see for example, Zhang & Zhang, 1997;Wang et al, 2005;Ruan, 2012). A handful of researchers have applied the principles and methods of scientometrics to CIS.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

A survey of Chinese interpreting studies: who influences who …and why?

Pekelis

2015

PeerJ Computer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper describes how scholars in Chinese Interpreting Studies (CIS) interact with each other and form discrete circles of influence. It also discusses what it means to be an influential scholar in the community, and the relationship between an author's choice of research topic and his academic influence. The study examines an all-but-exhaustive collection of 59,303 citations from 1,289 MA theses, 32 doctoral dissertations and 2,909 research papers, combining traditional citation analysis with the newer Social Network Analysis to paint a panorama of CIS. It concludes that the community cannot be broadly divided into Liberal Arts and Empirical Science camps; rather, it comprises several distinct communities with various defining features. The analysis also reveals that the top Western influencers have an array of academic backgrounds and research interests across many different disciplines, whereas their Chinese counterparts are predominantly focused on Interpreting Studies. Last but not least, there is found to be a positive correlation between choosing non-mainstream research topics and having a high level of academic influence in the community.

show abstract

Scientific collaboration in China as reflected in co-authorship

Cited by 67 publications

References 26 publications

Citation levels and collaboration within library and information science

Citation levels and collaboration within library and information science

Scientific collaboration of Library & Information Science research in China (2012-2013)

A survey of Chinese interpreting studies: who influences who …and why?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About