Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Assessing social capital in academic research teams: a measurement instrument proposal

  • Published:
Scientometrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The increasing importance of multidisciplinarity and scientific collaboration makes it necessary to explore the configuration and structure of relationships within researchers’ teams. The academic social capital construct can be particularly useful to conceptualize these internal ties. Nevertheless, the majority of studies in the academic context have measured social capital through social network techniques, drawing on quantitative counts of encounters to measure relationships. This approach fails to measure more qualitative and behavioural dimensions of social capital, which also need to be accounted for to fully understand relational dynamics within research teams. Considering this, the paper aims to propose and validate an instrument to measure academic social capital that combines the two approaches. First, based on the consensus opinion of an expert panel (Delphi method), a questionnaire comprising 20 items was designed and implemented. The scale was complemented with sociometric questions for assessing position and interconnectivity within the network. Second, an exploratory factor analysis technique was applied. The designed instrument was specified as a second-order model with three first-order factors (relational dimension, cognitive dimension and structural dimension) and a second-order factor (social capital). The confirmatory factorial analysis verified that the proposed model fit the sample data, showing that it could be used to reliably measure academic social capital.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abbasi, A., Altmann, J., & Hossain, L. (2011). 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, 5(4), 594–607.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Abt, H. A. (2007). The future of single-authored papers. Scientometrics, 73(3), 353–358.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Adler, P. S., & Kwon, S. (2002). Prospects for a new concept. The Academy of Management Review, 27(1), 17–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ahuja, G. (2000). Collaboration networks, structural holes, and innovation: a longitudinal study. Administrative Science Quarterly, 45(3), 425–455.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, M. (2008). Social networks and the cognitive motivation to realize network opportunities: a study of managers’ information gathering behaviors. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 29, 51–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andrews, R. (2010). Organizational social capital, structure and performance. Human Relations, 63, 583–608.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Badar, K., Hite, J. M., & Ashraf, N. (2015). Knowledge network centrality, formal rank and research performance: Evidence for curvilinear and interaction effects. Scientometrics, 105(3), 1553–1576.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Badar, K., Hite, J. M., & Badir, Y. F. (2014). The moderating roles of academic age and institutional sector on the relationship between co-authorship network centrality and academic research performance. Aslib Journal of Information Management, 66(1), 38–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ben, B. (2016). How intra-organizational social capital influences employee performance. Journal of Management Development, 35(9), 1119–1133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bentler, P. M. (2006). EQS 6 Structural Equations Program Manual. Encino, CA: Multivariate Software Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bourdieu, P. (1985). The forms of capital. In J. G. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of theory and research for the sociology of education (pp. 241–258). New York, NY: Greenwood Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bozeman, B., & Corley, E. (2004). Scientists’ collaboration strategies: Implications for scientific and technical human capital. Research policy, 33(4), 599–616.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bozeman, B., Fay, D., & Slade, C. P. (2013). Research collaboration in universities and academic entrepreneurship: The-state-of-the-art. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 38(1), 1–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, T. A. (2006). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burt, R. (1992). Structural Holes: The social structure of competition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Casciaro, T., & Lobo, M. (2015). Affective primacy in intraorganizational task networks. Organization Science, 26(2), 373–389.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Catell, R. B. (1966). The 16 personality factor questionaire. Champaign, IL: Institute for Personality an Ability Testing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, M.-H., Chang, Y.-C., & Hung, S.-C. (2008). Social capital and creativity in R&D project teams. R&D Management, 38, 21–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Choi, Y. (2015). The impact of social capital on employees’ knowledge-sharing behavior: An empirical analysis of U.S. Federal Agencies. Public performance & Management Review, 39, 381–405.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chow, W. S., & Chan, L. S. (2008). Social network, social trust and shared goals in organizational knowledge sharing. Information & Management, 45, 458–465.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chua, A. (2002). The influence of social interaction on knowledge creation. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 3(4), 375–392.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clopton, A. (2011). Social capital and team performance. Team Performance Management, 17(7/8), 369–381.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coccia, M., & Bozeman, B. (2016). Allometric models to measure and analyze the evolution of international research collaboration. Scientometrics, 108, 1065–1084.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. (1991). Size, age and productivity of scientific and technical research groups. Scientometrics, 20(3), 395–416.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coleman, J. (1988). Social capital in the create of human capital. American Journal of Sociology, 94, 95–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coleman, J. (1990). Foundations of social capital. Cambridge: Belknap.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cummings, J., & Kiesler, S. (2005). Collaborative research across disciplinary and organizational boundaries. Social Studies of Science, 35(5), 703–722.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cummings, J., & Kiesler, S. (2014). Organization theory and the changing nature of science. Journal of Organization Design, 3(3), 1–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Curseu, P. L., Raab, J., Han, J., & Loenen, A. (2012). Educational diversity and group effectiveness: A social network perspective. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 27(6), 576–594.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dahlander, L., & Mcfarland, D. (2013). Ties that last: Tie formation and persistence in research collaborations over time. Administrative Science Quarterly, 58(1), 69–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dooley, L., & Kirk, D. (2007). University–industry collaboration. European. Journal of Innovation Management, 10(3), 316–332.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dziuban, C. D., & Shirkey, E. C. (1974). When is a correlation matrix appropriate for factor analysis? Some decision rules. Psychological Bulletin, 81(6), 358–361.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. (1999). The future location of research and technology transfer. Journal of Technology Transfer, 24, 111–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Falk-Krzesinski, H. J., Contractor, N., Fiore, S. M., Hall, K. L., Kane, C., & Keyton J. et al. (2011). Mapping a research agenda for the science of team science. Research Evaluation, 20(2), 145–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fonti, F., & Maoret, M. (2016). The direct and indirect effects of core and peripheral social capital on organizational performance. Strategic Management Journal, 37, 1765–1786.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gonzalez-Brambila, C. (2014). Social capital in academia. Scientometrics, 101, 1609–1625.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gonzalez-Brambila, C., Veloso, F., & Krackhardt, D. (2013). The impact of network embeddedness on research output. Research Policy, 42, 1555–1567.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Granovetter, M. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78(6), 1360–1380.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hau, Y., Kim, B., Lee, H., & Kim, Y.-G. (2013). The effects of individual motivations and social capital on employees’ tacit and explicit knowledge sharing intentions. International Journal of Information Management, 33, 356–366.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoekman, J., Frenken, K., & Tijssen, R. (2010). Research collaboration at a distance: Changing spatial patterns of scientific collaboration within Europe. Research Policy, 39, 662–673.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hooper, D., Coughlan, J., & Muller, M. (2008). Structural equation modelling: guidelines for determining model fit. Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, 6(1), 53–60.

    Google Scholar 

  • Horwitz, S., & Horwitz, I. (2007). The effects of team diversity on team outcomes: A meta-analytic review of team demography. Journal of Management, 33, 987–1015.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hu, L., & Bentler, P. (1999). Cut off criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modelling, 6(1), 1–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hu, L., & Randel, A. (2014). Knowledge sharing in teams: Social capital, extrinsic incentives, and team innovation. Group and Organization Management, 39(2), 213–243.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huysman, M., & Wulf, V. (2006). IT to support knowledge sharing in communities, toward a social capital analysis. Journal of information technology, 21, 40–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jansen, D., Von Goertz, R., & Heidler, R. (2010). Knowledge production and the structure of collaboration networks in two scientific fields. Scientometrics, 83(1), 219–241.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaiser, H. (1974). An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika, 39(1), 31–36.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Landeta, J. (2006). Current validity of the Delphi method in social sciences. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 73, 467–482.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, S., & Bozeman, B. (2005). The impact of research collaboration on scientific productivity. Social studies of science, 35(5), 673–702.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewicki, R. J., & Bunker, B. B. (1996). Developing and maintaining trust in work relationships. Trust in organizations: Frontiers of theory and research, 114, 139.

    Google Scholar 

  • Li, E., Liao, C., & Yen, H. (2013). Co-authorship networks and research impact: A social capital perspective. Reseacrh Policy, 42, 1515–1530.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lin, N. (2001). Social capital: A theory of social structure and action. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Martín-Sempere, M., Garzón-García, B., & Rey-Rocha, J. (2008). Team consolidation, social integration and scientists’ research performance: An empirical study in the Biology and Biomedicine field. Scientometrics, 76(3), 457–482.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nahapiet, J., & Ghoshal, S. (1998). Social capital, intellectual capital, and the organizational advantage. Academy of Management Review, 23(2), 242–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Okoli, C., & Pawlowski, S. (2004). The Delphi method as a research tool: An example, design considerations and applications. Information & Management, 42, 15–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Payne, G., Moore, C., Griffis, S., & Autry, C. (2011). Multilevel challenges and opportunities in social capital research. Journal of Management, 37(2), 491–520.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perianes-Rodriguez, A., & Olmeda-Gómez, C. (2010). Detecting, identifying and visualizing research groups in co-authorship networks. Scientometrics, 82, 307–319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perry-Smith, J., & Vincent, L. H. (2008). The benefits and liabilities of multidisciplinary commercialization teams: how professional composition and social networks influence team processes. In G. D. Libecap & M. C. Thursby (Eds.), Technological innovation: generating economic results. Advances in the study of entrepreneurship, innovation & economic growth (Vol. 18, pp. 35–60). Oxford: Elsevier JAI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phelps, C., Heidl, R., & Wadhwa, A. (2012). Knowledge, networks, and knowledge networks: A review and research agenda. Journal of Management, 38(4), 1115–1166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Porac, J., Wade, J., Fischer, H., Brown, J., Kanfer, A., & Bowker, G. (2004). Human capital heterogeneity, collaborative relationships, and publication patterns in a multidisciplinary scientific alliance: A comparative case study of two scientific teams. Research Policy, 33, 661–678.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reagans, R., & McEvily, B. (2003). Network structure and knowledge transfer: The effects of cohesion and range. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48, 240–267.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reagans, R., & Zuckerman, E. (2001). Networks, diversity, and productivity: The social capital of corporate R&D teams. Organization Science, 12(4), 502.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Renzl, B. (2008). Trust in management and knowledge sharing: The mediating effects of fear and knowledge documentation. Omega, 36, 206–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rey-Rocha, J., Martín-Sempere, M. J., & Garzón, B. (2002). Research productivity of scientists in consolidated vs. non-consolidated teams: The case of Spanish university geologists. Scientometrics, 55(1), 137–156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rey-Rocha, J., Garzón-García, B., & Martín-Sempere, M. J. (2006). Scientists’ performance and consolidation of research teams in Biology and Biomedicine at the Spanish Council for Scientific Research. Scientometrics, 69(2), 183–212.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rice, E., & Yoshioka-Maxwell, A. (2015). Social network analysis as a toolkit for the science of social work. Journal of the Society for Social Work and Research, 6(3), 369–383.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rodriguez, J., & Gonzalez-Brambila, C. N. (2016). The effects of external collaboration on research output in engineering. Scientometrics, 109, 661–675.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rowley, T., Behrens, D., & Krackhardt, D. (2000). Redundant governance structures: An analysis of structural and relational embeddeness in the steel and semiconductor industries. Strategic Management Journal, 21, 369–386.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sooryamoorthy, R. (2009). Do types of collaboration change citation? Collaboration and citation patterns of South African science publications. Scientometrics, 81(1), 177–193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tang, G., Chen, Y., Jiang, Y., Paillé, P., & Jia, J. (2018). Green human resource management practices: Scale development and validity. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 56, 31–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tsai, F.-S., Baugh, G. S., Fang, S.-C., & Lin, J. L. (2014). Contingent contingency: Knowledge heterogeneity and new product development performance revisited. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 31, 149–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tsai, W., & Ghoshal, S. (1998). Social capital and value creation: The role of intrafirm networks. Academy of Management Journal, 41(4), 464.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turkey, D. (2009). Measuring corporate social responsibility: A scale development study. Journal of Business Ethics, 84, 411–427.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Uzzi, B. (1996). Embeddedness and economic performance: The network effect. American Sociological Review, 61, 674–698.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vabø, A., & Alvsvåg, A., Kyvik, S., & Reymert, I., (2016). The establishment of formal research groups in higher education institutions. Nordic Journal of Studies in Educational Policy, 2016(2–3), 33896.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van den Hoff, B., & Huysman, M. (2009). Managing knowledge sharing: Emergent and engineering approaches. Information & Management, 46, 1–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Knippenberg, D., De Dreu, C. K. W., & Homan, A. C. (2004). Work group diversity and group performance: An integrative model and research agenda. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 1008–1022.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wagner, C. L., & Fernandez-Gimenez, M. E. (2009). Effects of community-based collaborative group characteristics on social capital. Environmental management, 44(4), 632–645.

    Google Scholar 

  • Xiao, Z., & Tsui, A. (2007). When brokers may not work: The cultural contingency of social capital in chinese high-tech firms. Administrative Science Quartely, 52, 1–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yen, Y., Tseng, J., & Wang, H. (2015). The effect of internal social capital on knowledge sharing. Knowledge Management Research & Practice, 3(2), 214–224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yiu, D., & Lau, C.-M. (2008). Corporate entrepreneurship resources capital configuration in emerging market firms. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 32, 37–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yong, K., Sauer, S., & Mannix, E. (2014). Conflict and creativity in interdisciplinary teams. Small Group Research, 45(3), 266–289.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zheng, W. (2010). A social capital perspective of innovation from individuals to nations: Where is empirical literature directing us? International Journal of Management Reviews, 12, 151–183.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Authors are ordered alphabetically. This study has benefited from financing from the Research Project ECO2014-56580-R of the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitively, the Research Projects P12-SEJ-1810; P12-ASEJ-1618 from the Andalusian Government (Spain) and PR2016-018 (Research Projects University of Cadiz).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Business Management, University of Cadiz, C/Enrique Villegas Vélez, 2, 11002, Cádiz, Spain

    Fernando Martín-Alcázar, Marta Ruiz-Martínez & Gonzalo Sánchez-Gardey

Authors
  1. Fernando Martín-Alcázar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Marta Ruiz-Martínez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Gonzalo Sánchez-Gardey
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marta Ruiz-Martínez.

Appendix: Questionnaire of social capital

Appendix: Questionnaire of social capital

The aim of our research is to build a scale for measuring social capital. We request that you give us your opinion on a series of questions related to your activity as a researcher belonged to a research team. It will take no more than 5 min. All the data you provide us will be treated in an aggregated and anonymous way, with strictly academic objectives, so your answers will be completely confidential.

figure a

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Martín-Alcázar, F., Ruiz-Martínez, M. & Sánchez-Gardey, G. Assessing social capital in academic research teams: a measurement instrument proposal. Scientometrics 121, 917–935 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-019-03212-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-019-03212-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation