Skip to main content
Log in

Scientific collaboration of post-Soviet countries: the effects of different network normalizations

  • Published:
Scientometrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The goal of the paper is to identify groups/clusters of countries with similar scientific collaboration “profiles” inside the group and to other groups of countries. The collaboration is described by co-authorship of a publication network that can be analyzed on the original co-authorship network. However, the network is dominated by large values in rows and columns of the most scientifically productive countries, which highly correlates with their sizes. This problem is especially relevant for countries with a big diversity such as post-Soviet countries. Normalization of the collaboration network allows making the countries’ collaboration comparable; therefore the question about its applicability and sensitivity to the collaboration structure is relevant. We analyze co-authorship networks of post-Soviet countries for the period 1993–2018. We use three types of network normalizations to make publication output of the countries comparable, namely affinity normalization, Jaccard normalization, and activity normalization. They provide different views on the scientific collaboration structure of the countries. We reveal the effect of the country size is the strongest when using the affinity normalization and it seems there is no countries ‘size effect for the activity normalization. Affinity normalizations reveal a big imbalance of collaboration between post-Soviet countries caused by their sizes. Russia has a great impact due to its size. Jaccard normalization reveals countries` collaboration is influenced by their neighborhood or by the size of national sciences. Activity normalization detects the research potential of a particular country. We also observe during the past twenty-five years the scientific collaboration has significantly changed, and the previously dominant position of Russia is decreasing. New groups of intense scientific collaboration have formed, affected by geographical neighborhood.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Estonia, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Lithuania, Moldova, Russia, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, Uzbekistan.

  2. https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/former-ussr-countries.

References

  • Allik, J. (2003). The quality of science in Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania after the first decade of independence. Trames, 7(1), 40–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Balassa, B. (1965). Trade liberalisation and revealed comparative advantage. The Manchester School, 33, 99–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Batagelj, V. (2020). On fractional approach to analysis of linked networks. Scientometrics, 123(2), 621–633.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Batagelj, V. (2021). Analysis of the Southern women network using fractional approach. Social Networks, 68, 229–236.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Batagelj, V., & Bren, M. (1995). Comparing resemblance measures. Journal of Classification, 12(1), 73–90.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Batagelj, V., Doreian, P., Ferligoj, A., & Kejžar, N. (2014). Understanding large temporal networks and spatial networks: Exploration, pattern searching. Wiley.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Batagelj, V., & Ferligoj, D. P. (1992). Direct and indirect methods for structural equivalence. Social Networks, 14(1–2), 63–90.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Batagelj, V., & Mrvar, A. (2003). Density based approaches to network analysis; Analysis of Reuters terror news network. Workshop on link analysis for detecting complex behavior (LinkKDD2003). Retrieved August 27, 2003, from http://www.cs.cmu.edu/dunja/LinkKDD2003/papers/Batagelj.pdf

  • Borgatti, S. P., & Halgin, D. S. (2011). Analyzing affiliation networks. In J. Scott & P. J. Carrington (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of social network analysis (pp. 417–433). Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chankseliani, M., Lovakov, A., & Pislyakov, V. (2021). A big picture: Bibliometric study of academic publications from post-Soviet countries. Scientometrics, 126(10), 8701–8730.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cho, H., & Yu, Y. (2018). Link prediction for interdisciplinary collaboration via co-authorship network. Social Network Analysis and Mining, 8(1), 1–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doreian, P., Batagelj, V., & Ferligoj, A. (2005). Generalized blockmodeling. Cambridge University Press.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Ferligoj, A., Kronegger, L., Mali, F., Snijders, T. A., & Doreian, P. (2015). Scientific collaboration dynamics in a national scientific system. Scientometrics, 104(3), 985–1012.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gazni, A., Sugimoto, C. R., & Didegah, F. (2012). Mapping world scientific collaboration: Authors, institutions, and countries. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 63(2), 323–335.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glänzel, W., & Schubert, A. (2004). Analysing scientific networks through co-authorship. In Handbook of quantitative science and technology research (pp. 257–276). Springer.

  • Graham, L. B. (1993). Science in Russia and the Soviet Union: A short history. Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gui, Q., Liu, C., & Du, D. (2019). Globalization of science and international scientific collaboration: A network perspective. Geoforum, 105, 1–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hubert, L., & Arabie, P. (1985). Comparing partitions. Journal of Classification, 2, 193–218.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Jaccard, P. (1908). Nouvelles recherches sur la distribution florale. Bulletin De La Societe Vaudoise Des Sciences Naturelles, 44, 223–270.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kozak, M., Bornmann, L., & Leydesdorff, L. (2015). How have the Eastern European countries of the former Warsaw Pact developed since 1990? A bibliometric study. Scientometrics, 102(2), 1101–1117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krementsov, N. (1996). Stalinist science. Princeton University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kuraev, A. (2014). Internationalization of higher education in Russia: collapse or perpetuation of the Soviet system? A historical and conceptual study. Boston College.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leydesdorff, L. (2008). On the normalization and visualization of author co-citation data: Salton’s Cosine versus the Jaccard index. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(1), 77–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luukkonen, T., Tijssen, R., Persson, O., & Sivertsen, G. (1993). The measurement of international scientific collaboration. Scientometrics, 28(1), 15–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matveeva, N., Sterligov, I., & Lovakov, A. (2022). International scientific collaboration of post-Soviet countries: A bibliometric analysis. Scientometrics, 127(3), 1583–1607.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moed, H. F., Markusova, V., & Akoev, M. (2018). Trends in Russian research output indexed in Scopus and Web of Science. Scientometrics, 116, 1153–1180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mongeon, P., & Paul-Hus, A. (2016). The journal coverage of Web of Science and Scopus: A comparative analysis. Scientometrics, 106(1), 213–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rabkin, Y. M., & Mirskaya, E. Z. (1993). Science and scientists in the post-Soviet disunion. Social Science Information, 32(4), 553–579.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rand, W. M. (1971). Objective criteria for the evaluation of clustering methods. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 66, 846–850.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van der Wal, J. E., Thorogood, R., & Horrocks, N. P. (2021). Collaboration enhances career progression in academic science, especially for female researchers. Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 288(1958), 20210219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vollrath, T. L. (1991). A theoretical evaluation of alternative trade intensity measures of revealed comparative advantage. Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv, 127, 265–280.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wagner, C. S., & Leydesdorff, L. (2005). Mapping the network of global science: Comparing international co-authorships from 1990 to 2000. International Journal of Technology and Globalisation, 1(2), 185–208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yamashita, Y., & Okubo, Y. (2006). Patterns of scientific collaboration between Japan and France: Inter-sectoral analysis using Probabilistic Partnership Index (PPI). Scientometrics, 68(2), 303–324.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yegorov, I. (2009). Post-Soviet science: Difficulties in the transformation of the R&D systems in Russia and Ukraine. Research Policy, 38(4), 600–609.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zitt, M., Bassecoulard, E., & Okubo, Y. (2000). Shadows of the past in international cooperation: Collaboration profiles of the top five producers of science. Scientometrics, 47(3), 627–657.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

All computations were performed using the program for large network analysis and visualization Pajek and the statistical programming system R. This work is supported by the Russian Science Foundation (Grant 20-18-00140), by the Slovenian Research Agency (Research Programs P1-0294 and P5-0168, and Research Projects J1-2481 and J5-2557), and prepared within the framework of the HSE University Basic Research Program.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nataliya Matveeva.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

We have no conflicts of interest to disclose.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Matveeva, N., Batagelj, V. & Ferligoj, A. Scientific collaboration of post-Soviet countries: the effects of different network normalizations. Scientometrics 128, 4219–4242 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-023-04752-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-023-04752-z

Keywords

Mathematics Subject Classification

JEL Classification

Navigation