Influence of co-authorship networks in the research impact: Ego network analyses from Microsoft Academic Search

Journal of Informetrics

Volumn 8, Issue 3, 2014, Pages 728-737

  Ortega, José Luis ^a  

^a INSTITUTO DE HISTORIA   (Spain)

Author keywords

Academic search engines; Bibliometrics; Co authorship; Ego networks; Research impact

Indexed keywords

SEARCH ENGINES;

ACADEMIC SEARCH; BIBLIOMETRICS; COAUTHORSHIP; EGO NETWORKS; RESEARCH IMPACTS;

RESEARCH;

EID: 84904464868     PISSN: 17511577     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.joi.2014.07.001     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Abbasi A., Chung K., Hossain L. Egocentric analysis of co-authorship network structure, position and performance. Information Processing and Management 2012, 48(4):671-679.
2. Abbasi A., Wigand R.T., Hossain L. Measuring social capital through network analysis and its influence on individual performance. Library and Information Science Research 2014, 10.1016/j.lisr.2013.08.001.
3. Barabâsi A.L., Jeong H., Néda Z., Ravasz E., Schubert A., Vicsek T. Evolution of the social network of scientific collaborations. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications 2002, 311(3):590-614.
4. Basu A., Aggarwal R. International collaboration in science in India and its impact on institutional performance. Scientometrics 2001, 52(3):379-394.
5. Bavelas A. Communication patterns in task-oriented groups. Journal of Acoustical Society of America 1950, 22(6):725-730.
6. Börner K., Dall'Asta L., Ke W., Vespignani A. Studying the emerging global brain: Analyzing and visualizing the impact of co-authorship teams. Complexity 2005, 10(4):57-67.
7. Braun T., Glänzel W. International collaboration: Will it be keeping alive east European research?. Scientometrics 1996, 36:147-254.
8. Eaton J.P., Ward J.C., Kumar A., Reingen P.H. Social-structural foundations of publication productivity in the Journal of Consumer Research. Journal of Consumer Research 2002, 11:199-220.
9. Freeman L.C. "Centrality in networks: I. conceptual clarification". Social Networks 1979, Vol. 1:215-239.
10. Freeman L.C. "The gatekeeper, pair-dependency, and structural centrality". Quality and Quantity 1980, Vol. 14:585-592.
11. Garfield E., Welljams-Dorof A. Language use in international research: A citation analysis. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 1990, 511(1):10-24.
12. Gingras Y., Archambault É. Canadian collaboration networks: A comparative analysis of the natural sciences, social sciences and the humanities. Scientometrics 2006, 68(3):519-533.
13. Goodman L.A. Snowball sampling. Annals of Mathematical Statistics 1961, 32(1):148-170.
14. Granovetter M.S. The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology 1973, 78(6):1360-1380.
15. Hand A. Microsoft Academic Search. Technical Services Quarterly 2012, 29(3):251-252. http://academic.research.microsoft.com/.
16. Herbertz H. Does it pay to cooperate? A bibliometric case study in molecular biology. Scientometrics 1995, 33(1):117-122.
17. Hotelling H. Analysis of a complex of statistical variables into Principal Components. Journal of Educational Psychology 1933, 24:417-520.
18. Hu X., Rousseau R., Chen J. Structural indicators in citation networks. Scientometrics 2012, 91(2):451-460.
19. Jacsó P. The pros and cons of Microsoft Academic Search from a bibliometric perspective. Online Information Review 2011, 35(6):983-997.
20. Katz J.S., Hicks D. How much is a collaboration worth? A calibrated bibliometric model. Scientometrics 1997, 40(3):541-554.
21. Katz J.S., Martin B.R. What is research collaboration?. Research Policy 1997, 26(1):1-18.
22. Kousha K., Thelwall M. Google Scholar citations and Google Web-URL citations: A multi-discipline exploratory analysis. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 2007, 58(7):1055-1065.
23. Latour B., Woolgar S. Laboratory life: The construction of scientific facts 1986, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
24. Lee S., Bozeman B. The impact of research collaboration on scientific productivity. Social Studies of Science 2005, 35(5):673-702.
25. Leimu R., Koricheva J. Does scientific collaboration increase the impact of ecological articles?. BioScience 2005, 55(5):438-443.
26. Leydesdorff L., Wagner C. International collaboration in science and the formation of a core group. Journal of Informetrics 2008, 2(4):317-325.
27. McCarty C., Jawitz J.W., Hopkins A., Goldman A. Predicting author h-index using characteristics of the co-author network. Scientometrics 2013, 96(2):1-17.
28. Melin G. Pragmatism and self-organization: Research collaboration on the individual level. Research Policy 2000, 29(1):31-40.
29. Microsoft Academic categories in Microsoft Academic Search 2011, http://social.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/mas/thread/bf20d54a-ede2-48a9-8bbb-f6c1c1f30429 Accessed 31.03.14.
30. Microsoft Microsoft Academic Window Azure Marketplace 2014, http://datamarket.azure.com/dataset/mrc/microsoftacademic Accessed: 31.03.14.
31. Moody J. The structure of a social science collaboration network: Disciplinary cohesion from 1963 to 1999. American Sociological Review 2004, 69(2):213-238.
32. Narin F., Whitlow E.S. Measurement of scientific cooperation and co-authorship in EC-related areas of science. EC-Report EUR 12900 1990, Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxemburg.
33. Newman M.E.J. The structure of scientific collaboration networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science of the United States of America 2001, 98(2):404-409.
34. Newman M.E. Coauthorship networks and patterns of scientific collaboration. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 2004, 101(Suppl. 1):5200-5205.
35. Ortega J.L. Academic search engines: A quantitative outlook 2014, Chandos Publishing, Witney, UK, ISBN: 1843347911.
36. Ortega J.L., Aguillo I.F. Microsoft Academic Search and Google Scholar citations: Comparative analysis of author profiles. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 2014, 65(6):1149-1156.
37. Stefaniak B. International co-operation in science and in social sciences as reflected in multinational papers indexed in SCI and SSCI. Scientometrics 2001, 52(2):193-210.
38. Vaughan L., Shaw D. Web citation data for impact assessment: A comparison of four science disciplines. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 2005, 56(10):1075-1087.
39. Vieira E.S., Gomes J.A. Citations to scientific articles: Its distribution and dependence on the article features. Journal of Informetrics 2010, 4(1):1-13.
40. Yan E., Ding Y. Applying centrality measures to impact analysis: A coauthorship network analysis. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 2009, 60(10):2107-2118.