A regression analysis of researchers' social network metrics on their citation performance in a college of engineering

Journal of Informetrics

Volumn 8, Issue 3, 2014, Pages 667-682

  Cimenler, Oguz ^a   Reeves, Kingsley A ^a   Skvoretz, John ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA   (United States)

Author keywords

Citation based research performance; Collaborative networks; Poisson regression; Self reported data; Social network analysis

Indexed keywords

EIGENVALUES AND EIGENFUNCTIONS; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; SOCIAL NETWORKING (ONLINE);

CO-AUTHORSHIP NETWORKS; COLLABORATIVE NETWORK; EIGENVECTOR CENTRALITIES; LOCAL NEIGHBORHOODS; POISSON REGRESSION; REDUNDANT CONNECTIONS; RESEARCH PERFORMANCE; SELF-REPORTED DATA;

RESEARCH;

EID: 84903468212     PISSN: 17511577     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.joi.2014.06.004     Document Type: Article

References (84)

1. Abbasi A., Altmann J., Hossain L. Identifying the effects of co-authorship networks on the performance of scholars: A correlation and regression analysis of performance measures and social network analysis measures. Journal of Informetrics 2011, 5(4):594-607.
2. Aksnes D.W. Characteristics of highly cited papers. Research Evaluation 2003, 12(3):159-170.
3. Baccini A., Barabesi L., Marcheselli M., Pratelli L. Statistical inference on the h-index with an application to top-scientist performance. Journal of Informetrics 2012, 6(4):721-728.
4. Balconi M., Breschi S., Lissoni F. Networks of inventors and the role of academia: An exploration of Italian patent data. Research Policy 2004, 33(1):127.
5. Baldwin T.T., Bedell M.D., Johnson J.L. The social fabric of a team-based MBA program: Network effects on student satisfaction and performance. Academy of Management Journal 1997, 40(6):1369-1397.
6. Barabasi A.L., Jeong H., Neda Z., Ravasz E., Schubert A., Vicsek T. Evolution of the social network of scientific collaborations. Physics A 2002, 311(3-4):590-614.
7. Beaver D.D. Reflections on scientific collaboration (and its study): Past, present, and future. Scientometrics 2001, 52(3):365-377.
8. Bonacich P. Factoring and weighting approaches to status scores and clique identification. Journal of Mathematical Sociology 1972, 2(1):113-120.
9. Borgatti S.P. Structural holes: Unpacking Burt's redundancy measures. Connections 1997, 20(1):35-38.
10. Borgatti S.P. Centrality and network flow. Social Networks 2005, 27(1):55-71.
11. Borgatti S.P., Everett M.G. Network analysis of 2-mode data. Social Networks 1997, 19(3):243-269.
12. Borgatti S.P., Everett M.G., Freeman L.C. Ucinet for windows: Software for social network analysis 2002, Analytic Technologies, Harvard, MA.
13. Borgman C.L., Furner J. Scholarly communication and bibliometrics. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology 2002, 36:3-72.
14. Bornmann L., Daniel H. What do we know about the h index?. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 2007, 58(9):1381-1385.
15. Bornmann L., Daniel H.D. The state of h index research is the h index the ideal way to measure research performance?. EMBO Reports 2009, 10(1):2-6.
16. Bornmann L., Mutz R., Daniel H. Are there better indices for evaluation purposes than the h index? A comparison of nine different variants of the h index using data from biomedicine. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 2008, 59(5):830-837.
17. Bozeman B., Corley E. Scientists' collaboration strategies: Implications for scientific and technical human capital. Research Policy 2004, 33(4):599-616.
18. Breschi S., Lissoni F. Knowledge networks from patent data 2004, 613-643. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht. H.F. Moed, W. Glanzel, U. Schmoch (Eds.).
19. Breschi S., Lissoni F. Mobility of skilled workers and co-invention networks: An anatomy of localized knowledge flows. Journal of Economic Geography 2009, 9(4):439-468.
20. Bukvova H. Studying research collaboration: A literature review. Working Papers on Information Systems 2010, 10(3):1-17.
21. Burt R.S. Structural holes: The social structure of competition 1992, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass.
22. Cameron A.C., Trivedi P.K. Regression analysis of count data 1998, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
23. Costas R., Bordons M. The h-index: Advantages, limitations and its relation with other bibliometric indicators at the micro level. Journal of Informetrics 2007, 1(3):193-203.
24. Cronin B., Meho L. Using the h-index to rank influential information scientists. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 2006, 57(9):1275-1278.
25. Cummings J.N., Kiesler S. Collaborative research across disciplinary and organizational boundaries. Social Studies of Science 2005, 35(5):703-722.
26. De Solla Price D.J., Beaver D.D. Collaboration in an invisible college. American Psychologist 1966, 21(11):1011-1018.
27. Defazio D., Lockett A., Wright M. Funding incentives, collaborative dynamics and scientific productivity: Evidence from the EU framework program?. Research Policy 2009, 38(2):293-305.
28. Dillman D.A. Mail and internet surveys: The tailored design method 2007, Wiley, Hoboken, NJ. 2nd ed.
29. Duque R.B., Ynalvez M., Sooryamoorthy R., Mbatia P., Dzorgbo D.S., Shrum W. Collaboration paradox: Scientific productivity, the internet, and problems of research in developing areas. Social Studies of Science 2005, 35(5):755-785.
30. Edge D. Quantitative measures of communication in science: A critical review. History of Science 1979, 17(2):102-134.
31. Fox M.F. Publication productivity among scientists. Social Studies of Science 1983, 13(2):285-305.
32. Freeman C., Soete L. Developing science, technology and innovation indicators: What we can learn from the past. Research Policy 2009, 38(4):583-589.
33. Friedkin N.E. University social structure and social networks among scientists. American Journal of Sociology 1978, 83(6):1444-1465.
34. Girvan M., Newman M.E. Community structure in social and biological networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 2002, 99(12):7821-7826.
35. Glänzel W. Co-authorship patterns and trends in the sciences (1980-1998): A bibliometric study with implications for database indexing and search strategies. Library Trends 2002, 50(3):461-473.
36. Glänzel W., Schubert A. Analyzing scientific networks through co-authorship 2004, 257-276. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht. H.F. Moed, W. Glanzel, U. Schmoch (Eds.).
37. Granovetter M.S. The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology 1973, 78(6):1360-1380.
38. Hagstrom W.O. The scientific community 1975, Southern Illinois University Press, Carbondale.
39. Hale K. Collaboration in academic R&D: A decade of growth in pass-through funding. NSF 2012, 12-325.
40. Hanneman R., Riddle M. Introduction to social network methods 2005, Riverside, University of California.
41. Hansen D.L., Schneiderman B., Smith M.A. Analyzing social media networks with NodeXL: Insights from a connected world 2011, Morgan Kaufmann, Burlington, MA.
42. Hara N., Solomon P., Kim S., Sonnenwald D.H. 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 2003, 54(10):952-965.
43. Hilbe J.M. Negative binominal regression 2011, Cambridge University Press, New York. 2nd ed.
44. Hirsch J.E. An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 2005, 102(46):16569-16572.
45. Hirsch J.E. Does the h-index have predictive power?. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 2007, 104(149):19193-19198.
46. Hou H., Kretschmer H., Zeyuan L. The structure of scientific collaboration networks in scientometrics. Scientometrics 2008, 75(2):189-202.
47. Jiang Y. Locating active actors in the scientific collaboration communities based on interaction topology analyses. Scientometrics 2008, 74(3):471-485.
48. Katz J.S., Martin B.R. What is research collaboration?. Research Policy 1997, 26(1):1-18.
49. Kraut R., Egido C. Patterns of contact and communication in scientific research collaboration. Proceedings of the 1988 ACM conference on computer-supported cooperative work 1988, 1-12.
50. Kretschmer H. Author productivity and geodesic distance in bibliographic co-authorship networks, and visibility on the web. Scientometrics 2004, 60(4):409-420.
51. LaFollette M.C. Stealing into print: Fraud, plagiarism, and misconduct in scientific publishing 1992, University of California Press, Berkeley.
52. Laudel G. What do we measure by co-authorships?. Research Evaluation 2002, 11(1):3-15.
53. Lee S., Bozeman B. The impact of research collaboration on scientific productivity. Social Studies of Science 2005, 35(5):673-702.
54. Marsden P.V., Campbell K.E. Measuring tie strength. Social Forces 1984, 63(2):482-501.
55. McCarty C., Jawitz J.W., Hopkins A., Goldman A. Predicting author h-index using characteristics of the co-author network. Scientometrics 2013, 96(2):467-483.
56. Mehra A., Dixon A.L., Brass D.J., Robertson B. The social network ties of group leaders: Implications for group performance and leader reputation. Organization Science 2006, 17(1):64-79.
57. Mehra A., Kilduff M., Brass D.J. The social networks of high and low self-monitors: Implications for workplace performance. Administrative Science Quarterly 2001, 46(1):121-146.
58. Melin G. Pragmatism and self-organization: Research collaboration on the individual level. Research Policy 2000, 29(1):31-40.
59. Melin G., Persson O. Studying research collaboration using co-authorships. Scientometrics 1996, 36(3):363-377.
60. Meyer M., Bhattacharya S. Commonalities and differences between scholarly and technical collaboration: An exploration of co-invention and co-authorship analyses. Scientometrics 2004, 61(3):443-456.
61. Moed H.F., Glänzel W., Schmoch U. Handbook of quantitative science and technology research: The use of publication and patent statistics in studies of S&T systems 2004, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht.
62. National Science Board Research & development, innovation, and the science and engineering workforce: A companion to science and engineering indicators 2012 (Technical No. NSB-12-03) 2012, National Science Foundation, Arlington, VA.
63. Newman M.E.J. The structure of scientific collaboration networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 2001, 98(2):404-409.
64. Newman M.E.J. Scientific collaboration networks. I. Network construction and fundamental results. Physical Review E 2001, 64:016132.
65. Newman M.E.J. Scientific collaboration networks. II. Shortest paths, weighted networks, and centrality. Physical Review E 2001, 64:016132.
66. Olson G.M., Olson J.S. Distance matters. Human-Computer Interaction 2000, 15(2):139-178.
67. Pepe A. The relationship between acquaintanceship and co-authorship in scientific collaboration networks. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 2011, 62(11):2121-2132.
68. Rigby J. Comparing the scientific quality achieved by funding instruments for single grant holders and for collaborative networks within a research system: Some observations. Scientometrics 2009, 78(1):145-164.
69. Rodríguez G. Lecture notes on generalized linear models 2013 2007, http://data.princeton.edu/wws509/notes/.
70. Sabidussi G. The centrality index of a graph. Psychometrika 1966, 31(4):581-603.
71. Schleyer T., Spallek H., Butler B.S., Subramanian S., Weiss D., Poythress M.L., et al. Facebook for scientists: Requirements and services for optimizing how scientific collaborations are established. Journal of Medical Internet Search 2008, 10(3):46-59.
72. Sonnenwald D.H. Scientific collaboration. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology 2007, 41(1):643-681.
73. Sooryamoorthy R., Shrum W. Does the internet promote collaboration and productivity? Evidence from the scientific community in South Africa. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 2007, 12(2):733-751.
74. Sparrowe R.T., Liden R.C., Wayne S.J., Kraimer M.L. Social networks and the performance of individuals and groups. Academy of Management Journal 2001, 44(2):316-325.
75. Stokes T.D., Hartley J.A. Coauthorship, social structure and influence within specialties. Social Studies of Science 1989, 19(1):101-125.
76. Tabachnick B.G., Fidell L.S. Using multivariate statistics 2007, Pearson/Allyn & Bacon, Boston. 5th ed.
77. Tijssen R.J.W. Measuring and evaluating science-technology connections and interactions: Towards international statistics 2004, 695-715. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht. H.F. Moed, W. Glanzel, U. Schmoch (Eds.).
78. Introduction to SAS UCLA. Statistical consulting group 2007, Retrieved from. http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/sas/notes2/.
79. Van Rijnsoever F.J., Hessels L.K., Vandeberg R. A resource-based view on the interactions of university researchers. Research Policy 2008, 37(8):1255-1266.
80. Vasileiadou E. Stabilisation operationalised: Using time series analysis to understand the dynamics of research collaboration. Journal of Informetrics 2009, 3(1):36-48.
81. Wasserman S., Faust K. Social network analysis: Methods and applications 1994, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, New York.
82. Watts D.J., Strogatz S.H. Collective dynamics of 'small-world' networks. Nature 1998, 393(6684):440-442.
83. Wuchty S., Jones B.F., Uzzi B. The increasing dominance of teams in production of knowledge. Science (Washington, DC) 2007, 316(5827):1036-1039.
84. Ynalvez M.A., Shrum W.M. Professional networks, scientific collaboration, and publication productivity in resource-constrained research institutions in a developing country. Research Policy 2011, 40(2):204-216.