Frequency and structure of long distance scholarly collaborations in a physics community

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology

Volumn 58, Issue 10, 2007, Pages 1497-1502

  Lorigo, Lori ^a   Pellacini, Fabio ^b  

^a Social Dynamics Laboratory   (United States)

^b Dartmouth Department of Computer Science_Dartmouth College   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER-SUPPORTED COLLABORATIVE WORK (CSCW) TECHNOLOGIES; DISTANCE COLLABORATIONS; PUBLICATION RECORDS; REMOTE COLLABORATION TRENDS;

COMPUTER SUPPORTED COOPERATIVE WORK; DATA VISUALIZATION; DISTANCE EDUCATION; RECORDS MANAGEMENT; STATISTICS;

DATA STRUCTURES;

EID: 34547566873     PISSN: 15322882     EISSN: 15322890     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/asi.20638     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Barabasi, A. (2002). Linked: The new science of networks. New York: Perseus Publishing.
2. Beaver, D.D. (2001). Reflections on scientific collaboration. Scientometrics, 52(3), 365-377.
3. Beaver, D.D. (2004). Does collaborative research have greater epistemic authority? Scientometrics, 60(3), 399-408.
4. Beaver, D.D., & Rosen, R. (1978). Studies in scientific collaboration, Part I. The professional origins of scientific co-authorship. Scientometrics, 1(1), 65-84.
5. Birnholtz, J.P. (2006). What does it mean to be an author? The intersection of credit, contribution, and collaboration in science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 57(13), 1748-1770.
6. Börner, K., Penumarthy, S., Meiss, M., & Ke, W. (2006). Mapping the diffusion of scholarly knowledge among major U.S. research institutions. Scientometrics, 68(3), 415-426.
7. Brush, A.B., Wang, X., Turner, T.C., & Smith, M.A. (2005). Assessing differential usage of usenet social accounting meta-data. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '05) (pp. 889-898). New York: ACM Press.
8. Chen, C. (2005). The centrality of pivotal points in the evolution of scientific networks. In Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces (pp. 98-105). New York: ACM Press.
9. Cronin, B., Shaw, D., & La Barre, K. (2003). Visible, less visible, and invisible work: Patterns of collaboration in 20th century chemistry. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 55(2), 160-168.
10. Forrester, D., Koourov, S.G., Navabi, A., Wampler, K., & Yee, G. (2005). Graphael: A system for generalized force-directed layouts. Retrieved October 15, 2005, from http://graphael.cs.arizona.edu/graphael/
11. Freeman, L.C (1997). A set of measures of centrality based upon betweeness. Sociometry, 40, 35-41.
12. Giles, C., & Councill, I. (2004). Who gets acknowledged: Measuring scientific contributions through automatic acknowledgment indexing. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 101(51), 17599-17604.
13. Ginsparg, P. (1994). First steps toward electronic research communication. Computers in Physics, 8(4), 390-396.
14. Ginsparg, P. (2000). Creating a global knowledge network. BMC News and Views 2000, 1, Article 9. Retrieved December 1, 2006, from http://www. biomedcentral.com/1471-8219/1/9.
15. Grossman, J., & Ion, P. (1995). On a portion of the well-known collaboration graph. Congressus Numerantium, 108, 129-131.
16. Grudin, J. (1994). Computer-supported cooperative work: History and focus. Computer, 27(5), 19-26.
17. Hara, N., Solomon, P., Kim, S.L., & Sonnenwald, D.H. (2003). An emerging view of scientific collaboration: Scientists' perspectives on collaboration and factors that impact collaboration. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 54(10), 952-965.
18. Haythornthwaite, C., & Wellman, B. (1998). Work, friendship, and media use for information exchange in a networked organization. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 49(12), 1101-1114.
19. Horn, D.B., Finholt, TA., Birnholtz, J.P., Motwani, D., & Jayaraman, S. (2004). Six degrees of Jonathan Grudin: A social network analysis of the evolution and impact of CSCW research. In Proceedings of the 2004 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, CSCW '04 (pp. 582-591). New York: ACM Press.
20. Katz, J.S., & Martin, B.R. (1997). What is research collaboration? Research Policy, 26, 1-18.
21. Kraut, R., Galegher, J., & Egido, C. (1988). Relationships and tasks in scientific research collaborations. Human-Computer Interaction, 3, 31-58.
22. Laband, D.N., & Tollison, R.D. (2000). Intellectual collaboration. Journal of Political Economy, 108(3), 632-662.
23. Liu, X., Bollen, J., Nelson, M., & Van de Sompel, H. (2005). Co-authorship networks in the digital library research community. Information Processing and Management: An International Journal, 41(6), 1462-1480.
24. Luukkonen, T., Persson, O., & Sivertsen, G. (1992). Understanding patterns of international scientific collaboration. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 17(1), 101-126.
25. Moody, J. (2004). The structure of a social science collaboration network: Disciplinary, cohesion from 1963 to 1999. American Sociological Review, 69, 213-238.
26. Morris, S.A., Yen, G., Wu, Z., & Asnake, B. (2003). Timeline visualization of research fronts. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 55(5), 413-422.
27. National Science Board, National Science Foundation (NSF). (2006). Science and engineering indicators-2006. Retrieved October 1, 2006, from http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/seind06.
28. Newman, M. (2001). The structure of scientific collaboration networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, 98, 404-409.
29. Newman, M. (2004a). Coauthorship networks and patterns of scientific collaboration. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, 101, 5200-5205.
30. Newman, M.E.J. (2004b). Who is the best connected scientist? A study of scientific coauthorship networks. In E. Ben-Naim, H. Frauenfelder, & Z. Toroczkai (Eds.), Complex networks (pp. 337-370). Berlin: Springer.
31. Over, R. (1982). Collaborative research and publication in psychology. American Psychologist, 37, 996-1001.
32. Pajek. (n.d.). Program for large network analysis. Retrieved August 20, 2005, from http://vlado.fmf.unilj.si/pub/networks/pajek/.
33. Price, D.J.deS., & Beaver, D. (1966). Collaboration in an invisible college. American Psychologist, 21, 1011-1018.
34. Segal, B. (1995). A short history of internet protocols at CERN, CERN PDP-NS, April 2005. Retrieved September 1, 2006, from http://wwwpdp.web.cern.ch/ wwwpdp/ns/ben/TCPHIST.html
35. SLAC-SPIRES. Retrieved October 1, 2005, from http://www.slac.stanford. edu/spires/
36. von Hippel, E. (1989). New product ideas from 'lead users'. Research Management, 32(3), 24-27.
37. Wagner, C., & Leydesdorff, L. (2005). Mapping global science using international co-authorships: A comparison of 1990 and 2000. International Journal of Technology and Globalization, 1(2), 185-208.
38. Wagner, C.S. (2005). Six case studies of international collaboration in science. Scientometrics, 62(1), 3-26.
39. Wray, K. (2002), The epistemic significance of collaborative research. Philosophy of Science, 69, 150-168.