Blockmodeling of co-authorship networks in library and information science in Argentina: A case study

Scientometrics

Volumn 93, Issue 3, 2012, Pages 699-717

  Chinchilla Rodríguez, Zaida ^a,b   Ferligoj, Anuska ^c   Miguel, Sandra ^b,d   Kronegger, Luka ^c   de Moya Anegón, Félix ^a,b  

^a Institute of Public Goods and Policies   (Spain)

^b SCImago Research Group   (Slovenia)

^c UNIVERSITY OF LJUBLJANA   (Slovenia)

^d Universidad Nacional de la Plata   (Argentina)

Author keywords

Bibliometrics; Blockmodeling; Scientific collaboration; Social network analysis

Indexed keywords

EID: 84869178808     PISSN: 01389130     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11192-012-0794-6     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Barabási, A. L., & Albert, R. (1999). Emergence of scaling in random networks. Science, 286, 509-512.
2. Barabási, A. L., Jeong, H., Néda, Z., Ravasz, E., Schubert, A., & Vicsek, T. (2002). Evolution of the social network of scientific collaborations. Physica A, 311, 590-614.
3. Bartneck, C., & Hu, J. (2010). The fruits of collaboration in a multidisciplinary field. Scientometrics, 85, 41-52.
4. Batagelj, V., & Mrvar, A. (2003). Analysis and visualization of large networks. In M. Jünger & P. Mutzel (Eds.), Graph drawing software (pp. 77-103). Berlin: Springer.
5. Beaver, D. (2001). Reflections on scientific collaboration (and its study): past, present, and future. Scientometrics, 52, 365-377.
6. Beaver, D. (2004). Does collaborative research have greater epistemic authority? Scientometrics, 60(3), 399-408.
7. Borgatti, S. P., & Everett, M. G. (1999). Models of core/periphery structures. Soc Netw, 21, 375-395.
8. Borner, K., Dall'Asta, L., Ke, W., & Vespignani, A. (2005). Studying the emerging global brain: analyzing and visualizing the impact of co-authorship teams. Complexity, 10(4), 57-67.
9. Bozeman, B., & Lee, S. (2005). The impact of research collaboration on scientific productivity. Soc Stud Sci, 35(5), 673-702.
10. Braam, R., & van den Besselaar, P. (2010). Life cycles of research groups: the case of CWTS. Res Eval, 19(3), 173-184.
11. Braun, T., Glänzel, W., & Shubert, A. (2001). Publication and collaboration patterns of the authors of neuroscience journals. Scientometrics, 51, 499-510.
12. Caníbano, C., & Bozeman, B. (2009). Curriculum vitae method in science policy and research evaluation: the state-of-the-art. Res Eval, 18(2), 86-94.
13. Chinchilla-Rodríguez, Z., Benavent-Pérez, M., Miguel, S., Moya-Anegón, F. (2012). International collaboration in medical research in Latin America and the Caribbean (2003-2007). J Am Soc Inform Sci (in press).
14. Chinchilla-Rodríguez, Z., Vargas-Quesada, B., Hassan-Montero, Y., González-Molina, A., & Moya-Anegón, F. (2010). New approach to the visualization of international scientific collaboration. Inform Visualization, 9(4), 277-287.
15. Doreian, P., Batagelj, V., & Ferligoj, A. (2005). Generalized blockmodeling. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
16. Ferligoj, A., Doreian, P., & Batagelj, V. (2011). Positions and roles. In J. Scott & P. Carrington (Eds.), Sage handbook of social network analysis (pp. 434-446). Newbury Park: Sage Publications.
17. Ferligoj, A., & Kronegger, L. (2009). Clustering of attribute and/or relational data. Metodoloski zvezki (Adv Methodol Stat), 6(2), 135-153.
18. Hurd, J. M. (2000). The transformation of scientific communication: a model for 2020. J Am Soc Inform Sci, 51(14), 1279-1283.
19. Katz, J. S., & Martin, B. R. (1997). What is research collaboration? Res Policy, 26, 1-18.
20. Kronegger, L., Ferligoj, A., & Doreian, P. (2011). On the dynamics of national scientific systems. Qual Quant, 45(5), 989-1015.
21. Kronegger, L., Mali, F., Ferligoj, A., & Doreian, P. (2012). Collaboration structures in Slovenian scientific communities. Scientometrics, 90, 631-647.
22. Lancho-Barrantes, B. S., Guerrero-Bote, V. P., Chinchilla-Rodríguez, Z., & Moya-Anegón, F. (2012). Citation flows in the zones of influence of scientific collaborations. J Am Soc Inform Sci Technol, 63(3), 481-489.
23. Laudel, G. (2002). What do we measure by co-authorship? Res Eval, 11(1), 3-15.
24. Leydesdorff, L., & Vaughan, L. (2006). Co-occurrence matrices and their applications in information science: extending ACA to the web environment. J Am Soc Inform Sci Technol, 57(12), 1616-1628.
25. Mali, F., Kronegger, L., & Ferligoj, A. (2010). Co-authorship trends and collaboration patterns in the Slovenian sociological community. Corvinus J Sociol Soc Policy, 1(2), 29-50.
26. Melin, G. (2000). Pragmatism and self-organization: research collaboration at the individual level. Res Policy, 29(1), 31-40.
27. Miguel, S. (2009). Oportunidades y desafíos actuales de la investigación en Bibliotecología y Ciencia de la Información. El caso del Departamento de Bibliotecología de la Universidad Nacional de La Plata, Argentina. Información, Cultura y Sociedad, (21), 51-67. http://www.scielo.org.ar/pdf/ics/n21/n21a04.pdf.
28. Miguel, S., Chinchilla-Rodríguez, Z., González, C., Moya-Anegón, F. Analysis and visualization of the dynamics of research groups through a comparative input/output perspective. Information Research (in press).
29. Moed, H. F. (2008). UK research assessment exercises: informed judgments on research quality or quantity? Scientometrics, 74, 141-149.
30. Moody, J. (2004). The structure of a social science collaboration network: disciplinary cohesion from 1963 to 1999. Am Sociol Rev, 69(2), 213-238.
31. Newman, M. E. J. (2001). The structure of scientific collaboration networks. Proc Nat Acad Sci US, 98(2), 404-409.
32. Newman, M. E. J. (2004). Coauthorship networks and patterns of scientific collaboration. Proc Nat Acad Sci USA, 98 (Suppl. 2), 16, 404-409.
33. 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.
34. Onofrio, M. G. (2009). The public CV database of Argentine researchers and the 'CV-minimum' Latin-American model of standardization of CV information for R&D evaluation and policy-making. Res Eval, 18(2), 95-103.
35. Perianes-Rodríguez, A., Chinchilla-Rodríguez, Z., Vargas-Quesada, B., Olmeda-Gómez, C., & Moya-Anegón, F. (2009). Synthetic hybrid indicators based on scientific collaboration to quantify and evaluate individual research results. J Informetr, 3(2), 91-101.
36. Persson, O., Glänzel, W., & Danell, R. (2004). Inflationary bibliometric values: the role of scientific collaboration and the need for relative indicators in evaluative studies. Scientometrics, 60(3), 421-432.
37. Price, D. (1963). Little science, big science. New York: Columbia University Press.
38. Price, D., & Beaver, D. (1966). Collaboration in an invisible college. Am Psychol, 21, 1011-1018.
39. Price, D. J. S., Gürsey, S. (1976). Studies in scientometrics. Part 1. Transience and continuance in scientific authorship. International Forum on Information and Documentation No. 1, pp. 17-24.
40. Shaw, D., & Vaughan, L. (2008). Publication and citation patterns among LIS faculty: profiling a "typical professor". Libr Inform Sci Res, 30(1), 47-55.
41. Sonnenwald, D. (2007). Scientific collaborations. Annu Rev Inform Sci Technol, 41, 643-681.
42. Wagner, C. S., & Leydesdorff, L. (2005). Network structure, self-organization, and the growth of international collaboration in science. Res Policy, 34, 1608-1618.
43. Watts, D. J., & Strogatz, S. H. (1998). Collective dynamics of 'small-world' networks. Nature, 393, 440-442.
44. White, H. D. (2003). Author cocitation analysis and pearson's r. J Am Soc Inform Sci Technol, 54(13), 1250-1259.