Scientific elites versus other scientists: who are better at taking advantage of the research collaboration network?

Liu, Yun; Zhang, Mengya; Zhang, Gupeng; You, Xiongxiong

doi:10.1007/s11192-022-04362-1

Cited by 9 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 72 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This finding is consistent with previous research that emphasizes the importance of influential collaborators in boosting researchers' success (Amjad et al 2017;Qi et al 2017). Successful organization members are naturally interconnected, as discussed in Liu et al (2022). The current ACM Fellow selection mechanism requires nomination by existing Fellows, highlighting the importance of networking within the organization.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

“…Given the diversity and complexity of disciplines within the field, the impact of scientific research cooperation may vary significantly. In addition, the relationships that promote the success of scientists include close relationships such as teacher-student relationship and colleague relationship (Liu et al 2022;Yuret 2022), as well as "inheritance relationships" resulting from socially recognized high-level awards and honors (Wagner et al 2015). The study will expand the data set to larger scope and conduct more exploration on the relationship between the perspective of specific collaboration and success, to obtain more specific and detailed research results.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A study on the election factors of ACM Fellow based on the co-authorship relationship

Zhou,

Li,

(Corresponding Author)

et al. 2023

MJLIS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Most of past researches on successful scientist groups focused on the winners of international top-renowned awards. ACM Fellow as an academic honor of Computing Machinery field was rarely investigated. This article focuses on the research of the relationship between Fellows’ success and their co-authorship characteristics with previous Fellows. We selected a list of ACM Advanced Member Grades from 2015 to 2020 in 4 sub-domains as the empirical object, then set relevant indicators to indicate the cooperative relationship to analyze the relationship between their cooperation with previous Fellows and whether they can successfully be awarded as Fellows according to the correlation analysis and binary logistic regression method. The results show that the existence of a cooperative relationship with the previous Fellow is indeed beneficial to the Fellow candidate's selection. The more previous Fellows a candidate works with, the better chance they have of being elected as a Fellow, but the co-growth fellows are the main factor. Moreover, during the cooperation period, the total amount of the candidates’ own publications and the more their own contributions in the cooperation, the more conducive to success. Our results reflect a possible closing of the Fellowship circle, but also correct for biases about honorary award opportunism.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A study on the election factors of ACM Fellow based on the co-authorship relationship

Zhou,

Li,

(Corresponding Author)

et al. 2023

MJLIS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For purposes of this discussion, suppose that we have a set of networks with 16 nodes where each node has a merit score (here, the node ID is equal to its score). Suppose nodes are divided into four classes: low-score nodes (nodes 1-4), medium-low-score nodes (nodes 5-8), medium-highscore nodes (nodes 9-12) and high-score nodes (nodes [13][14][15][16].…”

Section: Properties Of Sta Metricmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A fair amount of work has examined collaboration networks with respect to stratification and equality. Most of these studies use centrality metrics to show the correlation between an individual’s position within the collaboration network and their success; and the ramifications of such correlation to stratification and inequality [ 12 , 13 ]. None of them have studied the evolution of co-authorship networks with respect to long-term stratification and the success of researchers.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This work demonstrated that certain nodes in favoured locations that are densely connected cause inequality or stratification. Abbasi et al and Liu et al study co-authorship networks and show the research performance of researchers in terms of their h- index [ 12 , 13 ]. McCarty et al [ 33 ] show the importance of the positions of researchers in a co-authorship network by predicting the h- index of authors in the future from their current position.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Social stratification in networks: insights from co-authorship networks

Jalali

Introne

Soundarajan

2023

J. R. Soc. Interface.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It has been observed that real-world social networks often exhibit stratification along economic or other lines, with consequences for class mobility and access to opportunities. With the rise in human interaction data and extensive use of online social networks, the structure of social networks (representing connections between individuals) can be used for measuring stratification. However, although stratification has been studied extensively in the social sciences, there is no single, generally applicable metric for measuring the level of stratification in a network. In this work, we first propose the novel Stratification Assortativity (StA) metric, which measures the extent to which a network is stratified into different tiers. Then, we use the StA metric to perform an in-depth analysis of the stratification of five co-authorship networks. We examine the evolution of these networks over 50 years and show that these fields demonstrate an increasing level of stratification over time, and, correspondingly, the trajectory of a researcher’s career is increasingly correlated with her entry point into the network.

show abstract

Are we doing enough to understand our relationship with the environment? A bibliometric analysis of the instruments that evaluate pro‐environmental behavior

Sánchez Flores,

Olivares,

Vinueza Chérrez

et al. 2024

Sustainable Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article provides information on the evolution of research using instruments to assess pro‐environmental behavior (PEB), based on a bibliometric analysis of academic publications from 2011 to 2023. The study shows that research has rapidly increased in recent years, with 538 articles published in 257 high‐impact journals across various areas of knowledge. The literature mainly comes from the United States, followed by Europe and Asia. The most often addressed topics were green behavior, sustainability, climate change, and biodiversity conservation. Attitudes were the most addressed goal, but there is a growing interest in evaluating PEB from different perspectives. Surveys were the most widely used instrument to assess PEB, but it is important to consider alternative instruments such as interviews and focus groups. The study highlights the need for more research on evaluating PEB and emphasizes that the instruments used should undergo validation and reliability processes to ensure accuracy.

show abstract

Scientific elites versus other scientists: who are better at taking advantage of the research collaboration network?

Cited by 9 publications

References 72 publications

A study on the election factors of ACM Fellow based on the co-authorship relationship

A study on the election factors of ACM Fellow based on the co-authorship relationship

Social stratification in networks: insights from co-authorship networks

Are we doing enough to understand our relationship with the environment? A bibliometric analysis of the instruments that evaluate pro‐environmental behavior

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About