Abstract
Here, the pattern of co-authorship among ecologists was evaluated using a network approach that was built using four time periods (1977–1986, 1987–1996, 1997–2006, and 2007–2016). Furthermore, four potential explanations (geographic distance, word similarity, reputation asymmetry, and country development) for this pattern were evaluated. Distance and reputation asymmetry effects on collaboration have decreased in recent decades, whereas word similarity was a good predictor in recent decades. Of interest, country development was not a good predictor of co-authorship among ecologists.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Barabási, A., & Albert, R. (1999). Emergence of scaling in random networks. Science, 286(5439), 509–512. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.286.5439.509.
Borrett, S. R., Moody, J., & Edelmann, A. (2014). The rise of network ecology: Maps of the topic diversity and scientific collaboration. Ecological Modelling, 293, 111–127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2014.02.019.
Brown, J. H., & Maurer, B. A. (1989). Macroecology: The division of food and space among species on continents. Science, 243(4895), 1145–1150. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309133308094425.
Callon, M., Courtial, J.-P., Turner, W. A., & Bauin, S. (1983). From translations to problematic networks: An introduction to co-word analysis. Social Science Information, 22(2), 191–235. https://doi.org/10.1177/053901883022002003.
Clauset, A., Newman, M. E. J., & Moore, C. (2004). Finding community structure in very large networks. Physical Review E, 70(6), 66111. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.70.066111.
Csardi, G., & Nepusz, T. (2006). The igraph software package for complex network research. InterJournal, Complex Systems, 1695(5), 1–9.
Day, R. (1989). The origins of the scientific paper: The IMRaD format. American Medical Writers Association Journal, 4(2), 16–18.
de Solla Price, D. J. (1965). Networks of scientific papers. Science, 149(3683), 510–515. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.149.3683.510.
Feinerer, I., & Hornik, K. (2017). tm: Text mining package. R package version 0.7-1. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=tm. Accessed 30 May 2017.
Freeman, L. C. (1996). Some antecedents of social network analysis. Connections, 19(1), 39–42.
Fruchterman, T. M. J., & Reingold, E. M. (1991). Graph drawing by force-directed placement. Software: Practice and Experience, 21(11), 1129–1164. https://doi.org/10.1002/spe.4380211102.
Hijmans, R. J. (2016). raster: Geographic data analysis and modeling. R package version 2.5-8. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=raster. Accessed 30 May 2017.
Holmgren, M., & Schnitzer, S. A. (2004). Science on the rise in developing countries. PLoS Biology, 2(1), 10–13. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.0020001.
Jamali, H. R., & Nikzad, M. (2011). Article title type and its relation with the number of downloads and citations. Scientometrics, 88(2), 653–661. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-011-0412-z.
Kahle, D., & Wickham, H. (2013) ggmap: Spatial visualization with ggplot2. The R Journal, 5(1):144–161. http://journal.r-project.org/archive/2013-1/kahle-wickham.pdf.
Liben-Nowell, D., Novak, J., Kumar, R., Raghavan, P., & Tomkins, A. (2005). Geographic routing in social networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 102(33), 11623–11628. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0503018102.
Logan, J. M. (2016). Historical changes in co-author numbers in ecology. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 14(6), 297–299. https://doi.org/10.1002/fee.1301.
McDowell, J. M., & Melvin, M. (1983). The determinants of co-authorship: An analysis of the economics literature. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 65(1), 155–160.
Merton, R. K. (1968). The Matthew effect in science: The reward and communication systems of science are considered. Science, 159(3810), 56–63. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.159.3810.56.
Moody, J. (2004) The structure of a social science collaboration network: Disciplinary cohesio from 1963 to 1999. American Journal of Sociology 69(2):213–238. http://www.jstor.org/stable/3593085.
Neff, M. W., & Corley, E. A. (2009). 35 years and 160,000 articles: A bibliometric exploration of the evolution of ecology. Scientometrics, 80(3), 657–682. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-008-2099-3.
Newman, M. E. J. (2004). Coauthorship networks and patterns of scientific collaboration. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 101(Supplement 1), 5200–5205. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0307545100.
Pan, R. K., Kaski, K., & Fortunato, S. (2012). World citation and collaboration networks: Uncovering the role of geography in science. Scientific Reports, 2, 902. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep00902.
Plavén-Sigray, P., Matheson, G. J., Schiffler, B. C., & Thompson, W. H. (2017). The readability of scientific texts is decreasing over time. eLife. https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.27725.
Ponds, R., van Oort, F., & Frenken, K. (2007). The geographical and institutional proximity of research collaboration. Papers in Regional Science, 86(3), 423–443. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1435-5957.2007.00126.x.
R Development Core Team. (2017). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. https://www.R-project.org/. Accessed 30 May 2017.
Thomson Reuters. (2016). 2015 Journal Citation Reports® Science Edition. http://jcr.incites.thomsonreuters.com/. Accessed 30 May 2017.
Tregenza, T. (2002). Gender bias in the refereeing process? Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 17(8), 349–350. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-5347(02)02545-4.
United Nations Development Programme. (2016). Human development report 2016: Human development for everyone. Washington, DC: Communications Development Incorporated.
Wagner, C. S., & Leydesdorff, L. (2005). Network structure, self-organization, and the growth of international collaboration in science. Research Policy, 34(10), 1608–1618. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2005.08.002.
Wuchty, S., Jones, B. F., & Uzzi, B. (2007). The increasing dominance of teams in production of knowledge. Science, 316(5827), 1036–1039. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1136099.
Acknowledgements
I received a scholarship from the Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES). I am grateful for all comments made on the manuscript during the peer-review process.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Electronic supplementary material
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Medina, A.M. Why do ecologists search for co-authorships? Patterns of co-authorship networks in ecology (1977–2016). Scientometrics 116, 1853–1865 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2835-2
Received:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2835-2