Collaboration in sensor network research: An in-depth longitudinal analysis of assortative mixing patterns

Scientometrics

Volumn 84, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 687-701

  Pepe, Alberto ^a   Rodriguez, Marko A ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b CENTER FOR NONLINEAR STUDIES   (United States)

Author keywords

Discrete assortativity; Homophily; Mixing patterns; Network evolution; Scientific collaboration networks; Sensor network and wireless research

Indexed keywords

EID: 77954956366     PISSN: 01389130     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11192-009-0147-2     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Acedo, F., Barroso, C., Casanueva, C., & Galan, L. (2006). Co-authorship in management and organizational studies: An empirical and network analysis. Journal of Management Studies, 43(5), 957-983.
2. Barabási, A. L., Jeong, H., Neda, Z., Ravasz, E., Schubert, A., & Vicsek, T. (2002). Evolution of the social network of scientific collaborations. Physica A, 311(3-4), 590-614.
3. 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), 1758-1770.
4. Bonaccorsi, A., & Daraio, C. (2003). Age effects in scientific productivity. Scientometrics, 58(1), 49-90.
5. Braun, T., Glanzel, W., & Schubert, A. (2001). Publication and cooperation patterns of the authors of neuroscience journals. Scientometrics, 51(12), 499-510.
6. Catanzaro, M., Caldarelli, G., & Pietronero, L. (2004). Social network growth with assortative mixing. Physica A Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, 338, 119-124.
7. Cronin, B. (2005). The hand of science. Lanham: Scarecrow Press.
8. Fenner, T., Levene, M., & Loizou, G. (2007). A model for collaboration networks giving rise to a power-law distribution with an exponential cutoff. Social Networks, 29(1), 70-80.
9. Grossman, J. W., & Ion, P. D. F. (1995). On a portion of the well-known collaboration graph. Congressus Numerantium, 108, 129-131.
10. Havemann, F., Heinz, M., & Kretschmer, H. (2006). Collaboration and distances between German immunological institutes-a trend analysis. Journal of Biomedical Discovery and Collaboration 1(1), 6.
11. Hollis, A. (2001). Co-authorship and the output of academic economists. Labour Economics, 8(28), 503-530.
12. Kretschmer, H., & Kretschmer, T. (2007). Lotka's distribution and distribution of co-author pairs' frequencies. Journal of Informetrics, 1(4), 308-337.
13. Liberman, S., & Wolf, K. B. (1998). Bonding number in scientific disciplines. Social Networks, 20(3), 239-246.
14. Lievrouw, L. A., Rogers, E. M., Lowe, C. U., & Nadel, E. (1987). Triangulation as a research strategy for identifying invisible colleges among biomedical scientists. Social Networks, 9, 217-248.
15. Liu, X., Bollen, J., Nelson, M. L., & van de Sompel, H. (2005). Co-authorship networks in the digital library research community. Information Processing & Management, 41(6), 1462-1480.
16. Lorigo, L., & Pellacini, F. (2007). Frequency and structure of long distance scholarly collaborations in a physics community. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 58(10), 1497-1502.
17. McPherson, M., Smith-Lovin, L., & Cook, J. M. (2001). Birds of a feather: Homophily in social networks. Annual Review of Sociology, 27, 415-444.
18. Mele, S., Dallman, D., Vigen, J., & Yeomans, J. (2006). Quantitative analysis of the publishing landscape in high-energy physics. Journal of High Energy Physics, 12, 1-23.
19. Moody, J. (2004). The structure of a social science collaboration network: Disciplinary cohesion from 1963 to 1999. American Sociological Review, 69(26), 213-238.
20. Newman, M. E. J. (2001). Scientific collaboration networks. II. Shortest paths, weighted networks, and centrality. Physical Review E, 64, 016132.
21. Newman, M. E. J. (2002). Assortative mixing in networks. Physical Review Letters, 89(20).
22. Newman, M. E. J. (2003a). Mixing patterns in networks. Physical Review E, 67(2), 026126.
23. Newman, M. E. J. (2003b). The structure and function of complex networks. SIAM Review, 45, 167.
24. Newman, M. E. J. (2004a). Who is the best connected scientist? A study of scientific coauthorship networks. In: Ben-Naim, E., Frauenfelder, H., & Toroczkai, Z. (eds) Complex networks (pp. 337-370). Berlin: Springer.
25. Newman, M. E. J. (2004b). Coauthorship networks and patterns of scientific collaboration. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 101(Suppl 1), 5200-5205.
26. Rodriguez, M. A., & Pepe, A. (2008). On the relationship between the structural and socioacademic communities of a coauthorship network. Journal of Informetrics, 2(3), 195-201.
27. Schummer, J. (2004). Multidisciplinarity, interdisciplinarity, and patterns of research collaboration in nanoscience and nanotechnology. Scientometrics, 59(3), 425-465.
28. Tarnow, E. (2002). Coauthorship in physics. Science and Engineering Ethics, 8(2), 175-190.
29. Tomassini, M., Luthi, L., Giacobini, M., & Langdon, W. B. (2007). The structure of the genetic programming collaboration network. Genetic Programming and Evolvable Machines, 8(1), 97-103.
30. Traweek, S. (1992). Beamtimes and lifetimes: The world of high energy physicists. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
31. Wagner, C. S., & Leydesdorff, L. (2005). Network structure, self-organization, and the growth of international collaboration in science. Research Policy, 34(10), 1608-1618.
32. Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1994). Social network analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
33. Watts, D. J., & Strogatz, S. H. (1998). Collective dynamics of 'small-world' networks. Nature, 393(6684), 440-442.