The Increasing Dominance of Teams in Production of Knowledge

Wuchty, Stefan; Jones, Benjamin F.; Uzzi, Brian

doi:10.1126/science.1136099

Cited by 2,716 publications

(2,118 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

1,889

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Background S everal studies [1][2][3][4] have documented that, since the mid-1950s, the natural, behavioral, and social sciences have made a pronounced shift from individually oriented research toward team-based scientific initiatives. This trend toward greater teamwork in science is paralleled by a growing emphasis on crossdisciplinary approaches to research and training.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Measuring Collaboration and Transdisciplinary Integration in Team Science

Mâsse

Moser

Stokols

et al. 2008

American Journal of Preventive Medicine

149

129

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose:As the science of team science evolves, the development of measures that assess important processes related to working in transdisciplinary teams is critical. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to present the psychometric properties of scales measuring collaborative processes and transdisciplinary integration. Methods:Two hundred-sixteen researchers and research staff participating in the Transdisciplinary Tobacco Use Research Centers (TTURC) Initiative completed the TTURC researcher survey. Confirmatory-factor analyses were used to verify the hypothesized factor structures. Descriptive data pertinent to these scales and their associations with other constructs were included to further examine the properties of the scales. Results:Overall, the hypothesized-factor structures, with some minor modifications, were validated. A total of four scales were developed, three to assess collaborative processes (satisfaction with the collaboration, impact of collaboration, trust and respect) and one to assess transdisciplinary integration. All scales were found to have adequate internal consistency (i.e., Cronbach ␣'s were all Ͼ0.70); were correlated with intermediate markers of collaborations (e.g., the collaboration and transdisciplinary-integration scales were positively associated with the perception of a center's making good progress in creating new methods, new science and models, and new interventions); and showed some ability to detect group differences.Conclusions: This paper provides valid tools that can be utilized to examine the underlying processes of team science-an important step toward advancing the science of team science.(Am J Prev Med 2008;35(2S):S151-S160)

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Measuring Collaboration and Transdisciplinary Integration in Team Science

Mâsse

Moser

Stokols

et al. 2008

American Journal of Preventive Medicine

149

129

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Wuchty et al (2007) reported that coauthored social science articles increased from 17.5% to 51.5% between 1955 and 2000, an increase that was observed in all 54 subfields (see also Zuckerman & Merton, 1972). In addition, the mean number of authors per article nearly doubled, increasing from 1.4 to 2.5.…”

Section: Collaboration and Coauthorshipmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…In the main, it describes a shift from an individual to a teamwork model of science over the past century, that is, from small science to big science, especially after World War II (Price, 1963). Wuchty, Jones, and Uzzi (2007), for instance, reported that the percentage of coauthored articles in science and engineering increased from 53% to 82% between 1955 and 2000, an increase that occurred in 170 of 171 subfields (99.4%). In addition, the mean number of authors per article nearly doubled, increasing from 1.9 to 3.5.…”

Section: Collaboration and Coauthorshipmentioning

confidence: 99%

A quantitative analysis and natural history of B. F. Skinner’s coauthoring practices

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper describes and analyzes B. F. Skinner's coauthoring practices. After identifying his 35 coauthored publications and 27 coauthors, we analyze his coauthored works by their form (e.g., journal articles) and kind (e.g., empirical); identify the journals in which he published and their type (e.g., data-type); describe his overall and local rates of publishing with his coauthors (e.g., noting breaks in the latter); and compare his coauthoring practices with his single-authoring practices (e.g., form, kind, journal type) and with those in the scientometric literature (e.g., majority of coauthored publications are empirical). We address these findings in the context of describing the natural history of Skinner's coauthoring practices. Finally, we describe some limitations in our methods and offer suggestions for future research.

show abstract

“…Intriguing work on publication co-authorship has suggested that there have been fundamental changes in the size and nature of collaboration (Jones, 2009; Wuchty et al, 2007). Linked UMETRICS data enable us to look at project level collaborations.…”

Section: Using the Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

New linked data on research investments: Scientific workforce, productivity, and public value

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Longitudinal micro-data derived from transaction level information about wage and vendor payments made by federal grants on multiple U.S. campuses are being developed in a partnership involving researchers, university administrators, representatives of federal agencies, and others. This paper describes the UMETRICS data initiative that has been implemented under the auspices of the Committee on Institutional Cooperation. The resulting data set reflects an emerging conceptual framework for analyzing the process, products, and impact of research. It grows from and engages the work of a diverse and vibrant community. This paper situates the UMETRICS effort in the context of research evaluation and ongoing data infrastructure efforts in order to highlight its novel and valuable features. Refocusing data construction in this field around individuals, networks, and teams offers dramatic possibilities for data linkage, the evaluation of research investments, and the development of rigorous conceptual and empirical models. Two preliminary analyses of the scientific workforce and network approaches to characterizing scientific teams ground a discussion of future directions and a call for increased community engagement.

show abstract

The Increasing Dominance of Teams in Production of Knowledge

Abstract: The Increasing Dominance of Teams in Production www.sciencemag.org (this information is current as of November 24, 2009 ):The following resources related to this article are available online at

Cited by 2,716 publications

References 13 publications

Measuring Collaboration and Transdisciplinary Integration in Team Science

Measuring Collaboration and Transdisciplinary Integration in Team Science

A quantitative analysis and natural history of B. F. Skinner’s coauthoring practices

New linked data on research investments: Scientific workforce, productivity, and public value

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About