Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Collaboration patterns of Taiwanese scientific publications in various research areas

  • Published:
Scientometrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper employs bibliometric methods to observe collaboration patterns of scientific publications in biotechnology, information and computer technology, future energy, and nanotechnology among different institutions in Taiwan. The results show primary domestic and international collaborative patterns, the effect of collaborative papers on the world-wide average, collaborative networks, and the distribution of institutions on global map. The findings suggest that domestic collaboration in each area is higher in proportion than international collaboration. Biotechnology leads in both domestic and international collaborative percentage. Among cooperative benchmarking countries, the US and China are the main partners. Collaboration among research institutes and universities is the most frequent collaborative pattern in each area except biotechnology, which tends to occur between hospitals and universities. On average, international collaborative papers tend to have greater effect, except in nanotechnology. Academia Sinica collaborated frequently with foreign institutes in each research field. A further analysis on how each collaborative group forms is recommended, especially collaboration among the Triple-Helix relationships.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Chinchilla-Rodriguez, Z., Moya-Anegon, F., Vargas-Quesada, B., Corera-Alvarez, B., & Hassan-Montero, Y. (2008). Inter-institutional scientific collaboration: An approach from social network analysis. In Prime-Latin America Conference, Mexico.

  • Glanzel, W., & Schubert, A. (2004). Analyzing scientific collaboration through co-authorship. In H. Kretschmer, et al. (Eds.), International workshop on webometrics, informetrics and scientometrics (WIS 2004) (pp. 99–109). Roorkee, Uttranchal: IIT.

    Google Scholar 

  • Katz, J. S., & Martin, B. B. (1997). What is research collaboration? Research Policy, 26, 1–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luukkonen, T., Persson, O., & Sivertsen, G. (1992). Understanding patterns of international scientific collaboration. Science, Technology and Human Values, 17(1), 101–126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Narin, F., & Whitlow, E. S. (1990). Measurement of scientific cooperation and co-authorship in EC-related areas of science. EC-Report EUR 12900.

  • NordForsk. (2010). Bibliometric research performance indicators for the Nordic countries. Oslo, Norway: NordForsk.

    Google Scholar 

  • Petersen, L. S., & Larsen, H. (2007). Riso energy report 6: Future options for energy technologies. Roskilde, West Zealand: Riso National Laboratory.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, J. (2000). Theoretical consideration of collaboration in scientific research. In S. Hauger & C. McEnaney (Eds.), Strategies for competitiveness in academic research (pp. 151–177). American Association for the Advancement of Science. Retrieved Sep 1, 2011, from http://www.aaas.org/spp/rcp.

  • Sandstrom, A., & Norgren, L. (2003). Swedish Biotechnology—scientific publications, patenting and industrial development. Stockholm: VINNOVA Analysis VA. Retrieved May 1, 2011, from http://www.vinnova.se/upload/EPiStorePDF/va-03-02.pdf.

  • Science and Technology Policy Research and Information Center. (2008). Global nanotechnology development and planning (STPI-ROB-97-03). Taipei: STPI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stokols, D., Hall, K. L., Taylor, B. K., & Moser, R. P. (2008). The science of team science—overview of the field and introduction to the supplement. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 35(2), S77–S89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Looy, B., du Plessis, M., & Magerman, T. (2006). Data production methods for hamonized patent statistics: Patentee sector allocation. KUL Working Paper No. MSI 0606.

  • Wagner, C. (2006). International collaboration in science and technology: promises and pitfalls. In L. Box & R. Engelhard (Eds.), Science and technology policy for development, dialogues at the interface. London: Anthem Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wuchy, S., Jones, B. F., & Uzzi, B. (2007). The increasing dominance of team in production of knowledge. Science, 316(5827), 1036–1039.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Science and Technology Policy Research and Information Center, National Applied Research Laboratories, 14 F, No. 106, Sec. 2, He-Ping E. Rd., Taipei, 10636, Taiwan

    Hsuan-I Liu, Bi-Chun Chang & Kuan-Chia Chen

Authors
  1. Hsuan-I Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Bi-Chun Chang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Kuan-Chia Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hsuan-I Liu.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Liu, HI., Chang, BC. & Chen, KC. Collaboration patterns of Taiwanese scientific publications in various research areas. Scientometrics 92, 145–155 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-012-0719-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-012-0719-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation