What do we measure by co-authorships?

Research Evaluation

Volumn 11, Issue 1, 2002, Pages 3-15

  Laudel, Grit ^a  

^a AUSTRALIAN NATIONAL UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0347305787     PISSN: 09582029     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3152/147154402781776961     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. D de B Beaver and R Rosen (1979a), 'Studies in scientific collaboration, part III, professionalization and the natural history of modern scientific co-authorship', Scientometrics, 1, pages 231-245.
2. D de B Beaver and R Rosen (1979b), 'Studies in scientific collaboration, part II, scientific co-authorship, research productivity and visibility in the French scientific elite, 1799-1830', Scientometrics, 1, pages 133-149.
3. D de B Beaver and R Rosen (1979c), 'Studies in scientific collaboration, part I, the professional origins of scientific co-authorship', Scientometrics, 1. pages 65-84.
4. M Biagioli (1999), 'Aprorias of scientific authorship: credit and responsibility in contemporary biomedicine', in M Biagioli (editor), Science Studies Reader (Routledge, New York), pages 12-30.
5. M Bordons, I Gomez, M T Fernandez, M A Zulueta and A Mendez (1996), 'Local, domestic and international scientific collaboration in biomedical research', Scientometrics, 37, pages 279-295.
6. D E Chubin (1975), Trusted assessorship in science: a relation in need of data', Social Studies of Science, 5, pages 362-368.
7. H M Collins (1982), 'Tacit knowledge and scientific networks', in B Barnes and D Edge (editors), Science in Context: Readings in the Sociology of Science (Open University Press, Milton Keynes), pages 44-64.
8. B Cronin (2001), 'Acknowledgement trends in the research literature of information science', Journal of Documentation, 57, pages 427-433.
9. B Cronin and K Overfelt (1994), 'The scholar's courtesy: A survey of acknowledgement behaviour', Journal of Documentation, 50, pages 165-196.
10. D Edge (1979), 'Quantitative measures of communication in science: a critical review', History of Science, 17, pages 102-134.
11. J Gläser (2001), 'Scientific specialties as the (currently missing) link between scientometrics and the sociology of science', in Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Scientometrics and lnformetrics, Sydney, Australia, 1, pages 191-210.
12. J Gläser and G Laudel (2002), Experteninterviews und qualitative Inhaltsanalyse als Instrumente rekonstruierender Untersuchungen (Leske & Budrich, Opladen) (in press).
13. M D Gordon (1980), 'A critical reassessment of inferred relations between multiple authorship, scientific collaboration, the production of papers and their acceptance for publications', Scientometrics, 2, pages 193-201.
14. M A Harsanyi (1993), 'Multiple authors, multiple problems - bibliometrics and the study of scholarly collaboration: a literature review'. Library Information Science Research, 15, pages 325-354.
15. A G Heffner (1981), 'Funded research, multiple authorship, and subauthorship collaboration in four disciplines', Scientometrics, 3(1), pages 5-12.
16. S Hinze (1999), 'Collaboration and cross-disdplinarity in autoimmune diseases', Scientometrics, 46, pages 457-471.
17. ICMJE (International Committee of Medical Journal Editors) (1997), 'Uniform requirements for manuscripts submitted to biomedical journals', Annals of Internal Medicine, 126, pages 36-47.
18. J S Katz and D Hicks (1997), 'How much is a collaboration worth? A calibrated bibliometric model', Scientometrics, 40, pages 541-554.
19. J S Katz and B R Martin (1997), 'What is research collaboration?', Research Policy, 26, pages 1-18.
20. W Krohn and G Küppers (1990), 'Science as a self-organizing system: outline of a theoretical mode', in W Krohn, G Küppers and H Nowotny (editors), Sociology of the Sciences: A Yearbook, Vol. 14 (Kluwer, Dordrecht), pages 208-222.
21. G Laudel (1999), Interdisziplinäre Forschungskooperation: Erfolgsbedingungen der Institution >Sonderforschungsbereich< (Edition Sigma, Berlin).
22. G Laudel (2001a), 'What do we measure by co-authorships?' Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Scientometrics and Informetrics, Sydney, Australia, 1, pages 369-384.
23. G Laudel (2001b), 'Collaboration, creativity and rewards: why and how scientists collaborate', International Journal of Technology Management, special issue on researcher careers, 22.
24. P Mählck and O Persson (2000), 'Socio-bibliometric mapping of intra-departmental networks', Scientometrics, 49, pages 81-91.
25. S M Maini and B Nordbeck (1973), 'Critical moments, the creative process and research motivation', International Social Science Journal, 25, pages 191-204.
26. G Melin (2000), 'Pragmatism and self-organization: research collaboration on the individual level', Research Policy, 29, pages 31-40.
27. G Melin and O Persson (1996), 'Studying research collaboration using co-authorships', Scientometrics, 36, pages 363-377.
28. N C Mullins (1973), Theory and Theory Groups in Contemporary American Sociology (Harper and Row, New York).
29. N Patel (1973), 'Collaboration in the professional growth of American sociology', Social Science Information, 6, pages 77-92.
30. H P F Peters and A F J van Raan (1991), 'Structuring scientific activities by co-author analysis: an exercise on a university faculty level', Scientometrics, 20, pages 235-255.
31. D Pontille (2000), The author effect in science: between authorship, ownership and contributorship'. Paper presented at the 4S/EASST Conference, Worlds in Transition: Technoscience, Citizenship and Culture in the 21st Century, Wien, September 27-30.
32. J M Russell (1998), 'Publishing patterns of Mexican scientists: differences between national and international papers', Scientometrics, 41, pages 113-124.
33. T D Stokes and J A Hartley (1989), 'Coauthorship, social structure and influence within specialties'. Social Studies of Science, 19, pages 101-125.
34. K Subramanyam (1983), 'Bibliometric studies of research collaboration', Journal of Information Science, 6, pages 33-38.
35. A F J van Raan (1998a), 'The influence of international collaboration on the impact of research results: some simple mathematical considerations concerning the role of self-citations', Scientometrics 42(3), pages 423-428
36. A F J van Raan (1998b), 'In matters of quantitative studies of science the fault of theorists is offering too little and asking too much', Scientometrics, 43, pages 129-139.