Collaboration Effect by Co-Authorship on Academic Citation and Social Attention of Research
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
3. Results
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A
Access Type | Number of Authors | Articles | Times Cited | Social Attention Score | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Number N | Prevalence | Mean | Mean per Author | Marginal Contribution | Mean | Mean per Author | Marginal Contribution | ||
OA Gold | 1 | 4796 | 32.4% | 1.7 | 1.7 | - | 1.1 | 1.1 | - |
2 | 4227 | 28.5% | 2.8 | 1.4 | 71% | 2.1 | 1.0 | 98% | |
3 | 3335 | 22.5% | 3.4 | 1.1 | 20% | 3.4 | 1.1 | 63% | |
4 | 1342 | 9.1% | 4.9 | 1.2 | 44% | 2.8 | 0.7 | −18% | |
5 | 532 | 3.6% | 6.9 | 1.4 | 42% | 7.3 | 1.5 | 163% | |
6 | 254 | 1.7% | 7.0 | 1.2 | 1% | 4.7 | 0.8 | −35% | |
7 * | 132 | 0.9% | 12.1 | 1.7 | 72% | 23.3 | 3.3 | 394% | |
8 * | 68 | 0.5% | 11.4 | 1.4 | −6% | 26.2 | 3.3 | 13% | |
9 * | 34 | 0.2% | 8.2 | 0.9 | −28% | 9.3 | 1.0 | −65% | |
≥10 * | 102 | 0.7% | 17.8 | - | 117% | 28.2 | - | 205% | |
Total | 14,822 | ||||||||
OA Hybrid | 1 | 932 | 29.1% | 4.0 | 4.0 | - | 6.2 | 6.2 | - |
2 | 899 | 28.1% | 8.2 | 4.1 | 104% | 8.9 | 4.4 | 42% | |
3 | 740 | 23.1% | 13.4 | 4.5 | 63% | 10.1 | 3.4 | 14% | |
4 | 305 | 9.5% | 15.9 | 4.0 | 19% | 10.1 | 2.5 | 0% | |
5 | 134 | 4.2% | 20.6 | 4.1 | 30% | 21.3 | 4.3 | 111% | |
6 | 69 | 2.2% | 25.0 | 4.2 | 21% | 20.5 | 3.4 | −4% | |
7 | 42 | 1.3% | 28.8 | 4.1 | 15% | 21.3 | 3.0 | 4% | |
8 | 33 | 1.0% | 61.1 | 7.6 | 112% | 55.9 | 7.0 | 162% | |
9 * | 8 | 0.2% | 28.5 | 3.2 | −53% | 16.1 | 1.8 | −71% | |
≥10 | 39 | 1.2% | 43.1 | - | 51% | 34.4 | - | 113% | |
Total | 3201 | ||||||||
OA Green | 1 | 1634 | 19.9% | 9.0 | 9.0 | - | 6.3 | 6.3 | - |
2 | 2835 | 34.6% | 11.1 | 5.6 | 24% | 7.0 | 3.5 | 11% | |
3 | 2303 | 28.1% | 13.9 | 4.6 | 25% | 8.2 | 2.7 | 17% | |
4 | 862 | 10.5% | 20.1 | 5.0 | 44% | 7.6 | 1.9 | −6% | |
5 | 286 | 3.5% | 19.1 | 3.8 | −5% | 16.6 | 3.3 | 118% | |
6 | 104 | 1.3% | 23.9 | 4.0 | 25% | 8.2 | 1.4 | −51% | |
7 * | 67 | 0.8% | 25.4 | 3.6 | 7% | 9.1 | 1.3 | 10% | |
8 * | 40 | 0.5% | 17.9 | 2.2 | −30% | 17.6 | 2.2 | 94% | |
9 * | 13 | 0.2% | 26.8 | 3.0 | 50% | 10.5 | 1.2 | −40% | |
≥10 * | 49 | 0.6% | 54.3 | - | 102% | 67.2 | - | 538% | |
Total | 8193 | ||||||||
OA Bronze | 1 | 1641 | 20.0% | 2.6 | 2.6 | - | 4.9 | 4.9 | - |
2 | 1526 | 18.6% | 4.5 | 2.3 | 75% | 8.2 | 4.1 | 66% | |
3 | 1482 | 18.1% | 5.0 | 1.7 | 10% | 7.3 | 2.4 | −11% | |
4 | 1119 | 13.6% | 3.3 | 0.8 | −34% | 3.4 | 0.9 | −53% | |
5 | 856 | 10.4% | 1.3 | 0.3 | −59% | 1.2 | 0.2 | −65% | |
6 | 599 | 7.3% | 1.6 | 0.3 | 20% | 1.4 | 0.2 | 18% | |
7 | 361 | 4.4% | 1.5 | 0.2 | −8% | 0.8 | 0.1 | −45% | |
8 | 256 | 3.1% | 1.0 | 0.1 | −31% | 3.0 | 0.4 | 285% | |
9 | 110 | 1.3% | 1.2 | 0.1 | 14% | 1.6 | 0.2 | −48% | |
≥10 | 260 | 3.2% | 3.1 | - | 169% | 1.8 | - | 14% | |
Total | 8210 | ||||||||
Closed | 1 | 8069 | 35.0% | 3.6 | 3.6 | - | 2.5 | 2.5 | - |
2 | 6776 | 29.4% | 7.9 | 3.9 | 120% | 3.6 | 1.8 | 47% | |
3 | 4606 | 20.0% | 10.3 | 3.4 | 31% | 4.1 | 1.4 | 14% | |
4 | 2048 | 8.9% | 13.0 | 3.2 | 26% | 5.3 | 1.3 | 29% | |
5 | 807 | 3.5% | 16.1 | 3.2 | 24% | 4.3 | 0.9 | −18% | |
6 | 351 | 1.5% | 17.6 | 2.9 | 9% | 6.6 | 1.1 | 53% | |
7 * | 165 | 0.7% | 21.9 | 3.1 | 24% | 2.8 | 0.4 | −58% | |
8 * | 99 | 0.4% | 20.3 | 2.5 | −7% | 9.6 | 1.2 | 241% | |
9 * | 34 | 0.1% | 13.4 | 1.5 | −34% | 3.6 | 0.4 | −63% | |
≥10 * | 76 | 0.3% | 23.6 | - | 76% | 19.6 | - | 452% | |
Total | 23,031 |
Access Type | Number of Authors | Articles | Times Cited | Social Attention Score | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Number N | Prevalence | Mean | Mean per Author | Marginal Contribution | Mean | Mean per Author | Marginal Contribution | ||
OA Gold | 1 | 10,710 | 76.2% | 0.4 | 0.4 | - | 0.6 | 0.6 | - |
2 | 1956 | 13.9% | 0.8 | 0.4 | 108% | 1.0 | 0.5 | 56% | |
3 * | 714 | 5.1% | 2.0 | 0.7 | 141% | 8.5 | 2.8 | 775% | |
4 * | 323 | 2.3% | 1.7 | 0.4 | −11% | 4.0 | 1.0 | −53% | |
5 * | 167 | 1.2% | 4.1 | 0.8 | 139% | 12.0 | 2.4 | 199% | |
6 * | 79 | 0.6% | 5.9 | 1.0 | 43% | 33.8 | 5.6 | 183% | |
7 * | 41 | 0.3% | 9.5 | 1.4 | 61% | 32.4 | 4.6 | −4% | |
8 * | 27 | 0.2% | 12.0 | 1.5 | 26% | 94.4 | 11.8 | 191% | |
9 * | 15 | 0.1% | 9.2 | 1.0 | −23% | 25.7 | 2.9 | −73% | |
≥10 * | 17 | 0.1% | 20.9 | - | 127% | 211.8 | - | 725% | |
Total | 14,049 | ||||||||
OA Hybrid | 1 | 1703 | 67.7% | 1.0 | 1.0 | - | 2.0 | 2.0 | - |
2 | 411 | 16.3% | 2.5 | 1.3 | 159% | 5.8 | 2.9 | 191% | |
3 | 132 | 5.3% | 3.9 | 1.3 | 56% | 15.9 | 5.3 | 174% | |
4 | 127 | 5.1% | 6.6 | 1.7 | 69% | 26.5 | 6.6 | 66% | |
5 | 51 | 2.0% | 11.0 | 2.2 | 66% | 82.1 | 16.4 | 209% | |
6 | 29 | 1.2% | 7.4 | 1.2 | −33% | 12.9 | 2.2 | −84% | |
7 * | 24 | 1.0% | 15.0 | 2.1 | 104% | 37.3 | 5.3 | 189% | |
8 * | 21 | 0.8% | 8.3 | 1.0 | −44% | 10.8 | 1.4 | −71% | |
9 * | 4 | 0.2% | 9.5 | 1.1 | 14% | 54.5 | 6.1 | 405% | |
≥10 * | 12 | 0.5% | 24.1 | - | 153% | 100.1 | - | 84% | |
Total | 2514 | ||||||||
OA Green | 1 | 2348 | 64.0% | 1.4 | 1.4 | - | 3.9 | 3.9 | - |
2 | 450 | 12.3% | 4.2 | 2.1 | 194% | 5.4 | 2.7 | 39% | |
3 | 242 | 6.6% | 5.8 | 1.9 | 38% | 12.9 | 4.3 | 138% | |
4 | 323 | 8.8% | 8.4 | 2.1 | 46% | 10.5 | 2.6 | −19% | |
5 | 97 | 2.6% | 8.4 | 1.7 | 0% | 12.7 | 2.5 | 21% | |
6 | 70 | 1.9% | 10.2 | 1.7 | 22% | 56.9 | 9.5 | 347% | |
7 | 56 | 1.5% | 10.4 | 1.5 | 1% | 16.2 | 2.3 | −72% | |
8 * | 32 | 0.9% | 7.9 | 1.0 | −24% | 26.8 | 3.3 | 66% | |
9 * | 22 | 0.6% | 11.1 | 1.2 | 40% | 11.1 | 1.2 | −59% | |
≥10 * | 29 | 0.8% | 9.1 | - | −18% | 9.1 | - | −18% | |
Total | 3669 | ||||||||
OA Bronze | 1 | 3411 | 74.6% | 0.7 | 0.7 | - | 2.0 | 2.0 | - |
2 | 688 | 15.0% | 2.0 | 1.0 | 179% | 6.0 | 3.0 | 209% | |
3 | 246 | 5.4% | 3.2 | 1.1 | 55% | 7.9 | 2.6 | 30% | |
4 | 115 | 2.5% | 3.8 | 0.9 | 20% | 7.3 | 1.8 | −7% | |
5 | 51 | 1.1% | 4.8 | 1.0 | 26% | 15.2 | 3.0 | 108% | |
6 * | 26 | 0.6% | 7.8 | 1.3 | 63% | 64.0 | 10.7 | 320% | |
7 * | 14 | 0.3% | 7.1 | 1.0 | −9% | 23.6 | 3.4 | −63% | |
8 * | 14 | 0.3% | 13.4 | 1.7 | 89% | 58.8 | 7.3 | 149% | |
9 * | 6 | 0.1% | 40.0 | 4.4 | 200% | 171.3 | 19.0 | 191% | |
≥10 * | 3 | 0.1% | 12.0 | - | −70% | 61.7 | - | −64% | |
Total | 4574 | ||||||||
Closed | 1 | 30,282 | 85.5% | 0.5 | 0.5 | - | 1.2 | 1.2 | - |
2 | 2483 | 7.0% | 2.5 | 1.2 | 370% | 3.5 | 1.8 | 200% | |
3 | 1065 | 3.0% | 3.6 | 1.2 | 43% | 4.0 | 1.3 | 13% | |
4 | 614 | 1.7% | 5.0 | 1.2 | 39% | 7.7 | 1.9 | 93% | |
5 | 406 | 1.1% | 5.6 | 1.1 | 12% | 6.3 | 1.3 | −19% | |
6 * | 244 | 0.7% | 6.6 | 1.1 | 18% | 17.0 | 2.8 | 172% | |
7 * | 141 | 0.4% | 7.7 | 1.1 | 17% | 7.6 | 1.1 | −56% | |
8 * | 92 | 0.3% | 8.9 | 1.1 | 16% | 4.5 | 0.6 | −40% | |
9 * | 62 | 0.2% | 8.6 | 1.0 | −3% | 20.2 | 2.2 | 345% | |
≥10 * | 38 | 0.1% | 6.5 | - | −24% | 8.4 | - | −59% | |
Total | 35,427 |
Access Type | Number of Authors | Articles | Times Cited | Social Attention Score | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Number N | Prevalence | Mean | Mean per Author | Marginal Contribution | Mean | Mean per Author | Marginal Contribution | ||
OA Gold | 1 | 4532 | 16.3% | 3.8 | 3.8 | - | 0.7 | 0.7 | - |
2 | 7200 | 25.9% | 5.2 | 2.6 | 39% | 1.4 | 0.7 | 92% | |
3 | 6947 | 25.0% | 6.8 | 2.3 | 29% | 1.2 | 0.4 | −14% | |
4 | 4405 | 15.8% | 7.9 | 2.0 | 17% | 0.4 | 0.1 | −64% | |
5 | 2342 | 8.4% | 8.7 | 1.7 | 10% | 1.5 | 0.3 | 258% | |
6 | 1179 | 4.2% | 9.7 | 1.6 | 12% | 1.3 | 0.2 | −18% | |
7 | 528 | 1.9% | 10.9 | 1.6 | 12% | 3.0 | 0.4 | 137% | |
8 | 290 | 1.0% | 10.1 | 1.3 | −7% | 2.5 | 0.3 | −16% | |
9 * | 108 | 0.4% | 8.7 | 1.0 | −15% | 1.3 | 0.1 | −49% | |
≥10 | 303 | 1.1% | 15.0 | - | 73% | 7.5 | - | 491% | |
Total | 27,834 | ||||||||
OA Hybrid | 1 | 1059 | 18.2% | 4.3 | 4.3 | - | 1.5 | 1.5 | - |
2 | 1780 | 30.6% | 7.3 | 3.7 | 69% | 1.7 | 0.8 | 13% | |
3 | 1391 | 23.9% | 11.7 | 3.9 | 60% | 4.2 | 1.4 | 149% | |
4 | 753 | 13.0% | 12.2 | 3.1 | 5% | 3.5 | 0.9 | −16% | |
5 | 365 | 6.3% | 16.8 | 3.4 | 37% | 7.6 | 1.5 | 116% | |
6 | 154 | 2.6% | 15.8 | 2.6 | −6% | 6.4 | 1.1 | −16% | |
7 | 73 | 1.3% | 22.3 | 3.2 | 41% | 15.6 | 2.2 | 144% | |
8 | 66 | 1.1% | 28.9 | 3.6 | 30% | 8.9 | 1.1 | −43% | |
9 * | 50 | 0.9% | 19.0 | 2.1 | −34% | 13.5 | 1.5 | 52% | |
≥10 | 123 | 2.1% | 32.6 | - | 72% | 27.4 | - | 103% | |
Total | 5814 | ||||||||
OA Green | 1 | 5563 | 20.8% | 4.0 | 4.0 | - | 1.1 | 1.1 | - |
2 | 9029 | 33.8% | 6.7 | 3.3 | 67% | 1.1 | 0.5 | 0% | |
3 | 6751 | 25.3% | 8.7 | 2.9 | 31% | 1.8 | 0.6 | 74% | |
4 | 3074 | 11.5% | 11.3 | 2.8 | 30% | 2.3 | 0.6 | 24% | |
5 | 1159 | 4.3% | 14.7 | 2.9 | 30% | 3.2 | 0.6 | 40% | |
6 | 485 | 1.8% | 14.8 | 2.5 | 1% | 2.8 | 0.5 | −13% | |
7 * | 222 | 0.8% | 21.0 | 3.0 | 42% | 6.3 | 0.9 | 125% | |
8 * | 120 | 0.4% | 19.1 | 2.4 | −9% | 9.3 | 1.2 | 48% | |
9 * | 108 | 0.4% | 17.9 | 2.0 | −6% | 7.2 | 0.8 | −23% | |
≥10 * | 185 | 0.7% | 36.9 | - | 106% | 22.9 | - | 219% | |
Total | 26,696 | ||||||||
OA Bronze | 1 | 2403 | 26.7% | 2.5 | 2.5 | - | 2.4 | 2.4 | - |
2 | 2736 | 30.4% | 4.6 | 2.3 | 81% | 2.0 | 1.0 | −16% | |
3 | 1974 | 21.9% | 5.8 | 1.9 | 26% | 1.5 | 0.5 | −23% | |
4 | 1023 | 11.4% | 8.0 | 2.0 | 39% | 1.1 | 0.3 | −29% | |
5 | 336 | 3.7% | 7.8 | 1.6 | −3% | 1.2 | 0.2 | 15% | |
6 | 198 | 2.2% | 8.3 | 1.4 | 6% | 2.5 | 0.4 | 103% | |
7 * | 84 | 0.9% | 11.8 | 1.7 | 43% | 3.8 | 0.5 | 52% | |
8 * | 62 | 0.7% | 9.0 | 1.1 | −24% | 1.9 | 0.2 | −50% | |
9 * | 34 | 0.4% | 9.2 | 1.0 | 2% | 7.4 | 0.8 | 288% | |
≥10 | 147 | 1.6% | 14.6 | - | 59% | 6.5 | - | −13% | |
Total | 8997 | ||||||||
Closed | 1 | 11,590 | 20.0% | 3.2 | 3.2 | - | 0.4 | 0.4 | - |
2 | 16,863 | 29.2% | 6.1 | 3.0 | 90% | 0.3 | 0.1 | −22% | |
3 | 13,825 | 23.9% | 8.0 | 2.7 | 32% | 0.4 | 0.1 | 24% | |
4 | 8052 | 13.9% | 10.4 | 2.6 | 30% | 0.4 | 0.1 | 19% | |
5 | 3613 | 6.2% | 11.9 | 2.4 | 14% | 0.9 | 0.2 | 109% | |
6 | 1750 | 3.0% | 10.0 | 1.7 | −16% | 1.4 | 0.2 | 59% | |
7 | 832 | 1.4% | 8.8 | 1.3 | −12% | 1.0 | 0.1 | −29% | |
8 * | 472 | 0.8% | 7.8 | 1.0 | −12% | 1.7 | 0.2 | 66% | |
9 * | 295 | 0.5% | 12.4 | 1.4 | 60% | 2.8 | 0.3 | 64% | |
≥10 | 557 | 1.0% | 9.9 | - | −20% | 5.3 | - | 92% | |
Total | 57,849 |
References
- Heinze, T.; Kuhlmann, S. Across institutional boundaries? Research collaboration in German public sector nanoscience. Res. Policy 2008, 37, 888–899. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Katz, J.S.; Martin, B.R. What is research collaboration? Res. Policy 1997, 26, 1–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Glänzel, W.; Schubert, A. Analysing scientific networks through co-authorship. In Handbook of Quantitative Science and Technology Research; Moed, H.F., Glänzel, W., Schmoch, U., Eds.; Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2004; pp. 257–276. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Beaver, D.D.; Rosen, R. Studies in scientific collaboration: Part I. The professional origins of scientific co-authorship. Scientometrics 1978, 1, 65–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Melin, G.; Persson, O. Studying research collaboration using co-authorships. Scientometrics 1996, 36, 363–377. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fanelli, D.; Larivière, V. Researchers’ individual publication rate has not increased in a century. PLoS ONE 2016, 11, e0149504. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Guerrero Bote, V.P.; Olmeda-Gómez, C.; De Moya-Anegón, F. Quantifying the benefits of international scientific collaboration. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 2013, 64, 392–404. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, S.; Bozeman, B. The impact of research collaboration on scientific productivity. Soc. Stud. Sci. 2005, 35, 673–702. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Parish, A.J.; Boyack, K.W.; Ioannidis, J.P.A. Dynamics of co-authorship and productivity across different fields of scientific research. PLoS ONE 2018, 13, e0189742. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Didegah, F.; Thelwall, M. Which factors help authors produce the highest impact research? Collaboration, journal and document properties. J. Informetr. 2013, 7, 861–873. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Huang, M.H.; Wu, L.L.; Wu, Y.C. A study of research collaboration in the pre-web and post-web stages: A coauthorship analysis of the information systems discipline. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 2015, 66, 778–797. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Abramo, G.; D’Angelo, C.A. The relationship between the number of authors of a publication, its citations and the impact factor of the publishing journal: Evidence from Italy. J. Informetr. 2015, 9, 746–761. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Anderson, K.A.; Richards-Shubik, S. Collaborative production in Science: An empirical analysis of coauthorships in Economics. Rev. Econ. Stat. 2022, in press. [CrossRef]
- Mokhnacheva, Y.V. The influence of various forms of co-authorship on the scientific productivity of Russian scientists in the field of molecular biology. Sci. Tech. Inf. Processing 2015, 42, 162–172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dorta-González, P.; Dorta-González, M.I. Contribution of the open access modality to the impact of hybrid journals controlling by field and time effects. J. Data Inf. Sci. 2022, 7, 57–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dorta-González, P.; González-Betancor, S.M.; Dorta-González, M.I. Reconsidering the gold open access citation advantage postulate in a multidisciplinary context: An analysis of the subject categories in the Web of Science database 2009–2014. Scientometrics 2017, 112, 877–901. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Dorta-González, P.; Santana-Jiménez, Y. Prevalence and citation advantage of gold open access in the subject areas of the Scopus database. Res. Eval. 2018, 27, 1–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Thelwall, M. Measuring societal impacts of research with altmetrics? Common problems and mistakes. J. Econ. Surv. 2021, 35, 1302–1314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Priem, J.; Taraborelli, D.; Growth, P.; Neylon, C. Altmetrics: A Manifesto. 2010. Available online: http://altmetrics.org/manifesto/ (accessed on 25 April 2022).
- Sugimoto, C.R.; Work, S.; Larivière, V.; Haustein, S. Scholarly use of social media and altmetrics: A review of the literature. J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 2017, 68, 2037–2062. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Fang, Z.; Costas, R. Studying the accumulation velocity of altmetric data tracked by Altmetric.com. Scientometrics 2020, 123, 1077–1101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Zahedi, Z.; Haustein, S. On the relationships between bibliographic characteristics of scientific documents and citation and Mendeley readership counts: A large-scale analysis of Web of Science publications. J. Informetr. 2018, 12, 191–202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Bornmann, L. Alternative metrics in scientometrics: A meta-analysis of research into three altmetrics. Scientometrics 2015, 103, 1123–1144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Costas, R.; Zahedi, Z.; Wouters, P. Do “altmetrics” correlate with citations? Extensive comparison of altmetric indicators with citations from a multidisciplinary perspective. J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 2015, 66, 2003–2019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wouters, P.; Zahedi, Z.; Costas, R. Social media metrics for new research evaluation. In Springer Handbook of Science and Technology Indicators; Glänzel, W., Moed, H.F., Schmoch, U., Thelwall, M., Eds.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2019; pp. 687–713. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Beaver, D.D. Reflections on scientific collaboration (and its study): Past, present, and future. Scientometrics 2001, 52, 365–377. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Price, D.J.d.S.; Beaver, D.D. Collaboration in an invisible college. Am. Psychol. 1966, 21, 1011–1018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- How is the Altmetric Attention Score Calculated? Available online: https://help.altmetric.com/support/solutions/articles/6000233311-how-is-the-altmetric-attention-score-calculated (accessed on 25 April 2022).
- Rath, K.; Wohlrabe, K. Recent trends in co-authorship in economics: Evidence from RePEc. Appl. Econ. Lett. 2016, 23, 897–902. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Kuld, L.; O’Hagan, J. Rise of multi-authored papers in economics: Demise of the ‘lone star’ and why? Scientometrics 2018, 114, 1207–1225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Galloway, L.M.; Pease, J.L.; Rauh, A.E. Introduction to Altmetrics for Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) librarians. Sci. Technol. Libr. 2013, 32, 335–345. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Dorta-González, P.; Suárez-Vega, R.; Dorta-González, M.I. Open access effect on uncitedness: A large-scale study controlling by discipline, source type and visibility. Scientometrics 2020, 124, 2619–2644. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Letchford, A.; Moat, H.S.; Preis, T. The advantage of short paper titles. R. Soc. Open Sci. 2015, 2, 150266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Bramoullé, Y.; Ductor, L. Title length. J. Econ. Behav. Organ. 2018, 150, 311–324. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Gnewuch, M.; Wohlrabe, K. Title characteristics and citations in economics. Scientometrics 2017, 110, 1573–1578. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Kumar, S. Ethical concerns in the rise of co-authorship and its role as a proxy of research collaborations. Publications 2018, 6, 37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
Number of Authors | Economics | History & Archaeology | Mathematics | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
N | Coeff. | N | Coeff. | N | Coeff. | |
1 | 17,072 | 0.38 | 48,620 | 0.32 | 25,147 | 0.13 |
2 | 16,263 | 0.21 | 5988 | 0.34 | 37,608 | 0.06 |
3 | 12,466 | 0.29 | 2399 | 0.29 | 30,888 | 0.21 |
4 | 5676 | 0.26 | 1336 | 0.22 | 17,307 | 0.13 |
5 | 2615 | 0.18 | 772 | 0.39 | 7815 | 0.15 |
6 | 1376 | 0.24 | 448 * | 0.69 | 3766 | 0.01 |
7 | 766 | 0.26 | 276 * | 0.68 | 1739 | 0.22 |
8 | 496 * | 0.75 | 186 * | 0.47 | 1010 * | 0.46 |
9 | 199 * | 0.33 | 109 * | 0.76 | 595 * | 0.11 |
≥10 | 528 * | 0.65 | 99 * | 0.59 | 1315 | 0.39 |
Total | 57,457 | 0.27 | 60,233 | 0.33 | 127,190 | 0.12 |
Field of Research | Number of Authors n | Articles | Times Cited | Social Attention Score | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Number N | Prevalence | Mean | Mean Per Author | Marginal Contribution 1 | Mean | Mean per Author | Marginal Contribution 1 | ||
Economics | |||||||||
1 | 17,072 | 29.71% | 3.49 | 3.49 | - | 2.87 | 2.87 | - | |
2 | 16,263 | 28.30% | 6.83 | 3.42 | 96.0% | 4.36 | 2.18 | 51.5% | |
3 | 12,466 | 21.70% | 8.68 | 2.89 | 27.0% | 5.40 | 1.80 | 23.9% | |
4 | 5676 | 9.88% | 10.39 | 2.60 | 19.8% | 4.95 | 1.24 | −8.3% | |
5 | 2615 | 4.55% | 9.95 | 1.99 | −4.2% | 6.13 | 1.23 | 23.8% | |
6 | 1376 | 2.39% | 9.52 | 1.59 | −4.3% | 4.83 | 0.80 | −21.2% | |
7 | 766 | 1.33% | 11.28 | 1.61 | 18.4% | 6.92 | 0.99 | 43.4% | |
8 * | 496 | 0.86% | 11.64 | 1.46 | 3.3% | 12.21 | 1.53 | 76.3% | |
9 * | 199 | 0.35% | 7.24 | 0.80 | −37.9% | 4.25 | 0.47 | −65.2% | |
≥10 * | 528 | 0.92% | 16.58 | - | 129.1% | 17.92 | - | 321.5% | |
Total | 57,457 | ||||||||
History & Archaeology | |||||||||
1 | 48,620 | 80.72% | 0.58 | 0.58 | - | 1.28 | 1.28 | - | |
2 | 5988 | 9.94% | 2.02 | 1.01 | 250.9% | 3.29 | 1.65 | 156.6% | |
3 | 2399 | 3.98% | 3.29 | 1.10 | 62.6% | 7.30 | 2.43 | 121.6% | |
4 | 1336 | 2.22% | 4.66 | 1.16 | 41.5% | 8.91 | 2.23 | 22.1% | |
5 | 772 | 1.28% | 5.91 | 1.18 | 27.0% | 13.91 | 2.78 | 56.1% | |
6 * | 448 | 0.74% | 7.15 | 1.19 | 21.0% | 28.68 | 4.78 | 106.2% | |
7 * | 276 | 0.46% | 9.12 | 1.30 | 27.5% | 16.40 | 2.34 | −42.8% | |
8 * | 186 | 0.31% | 9.43 | 1.18 | 3.4% | 26.20 | 3.28 | 59.8% | |
9 * | 109 | 0.18% | 10.96 | 1.22 | 16.3% | 28.71 | 3.19 | 9.5% | |
≥10 * | 99 | 0.16% | 12.04 | - | 9.8% | 56.24 | - | 95.9% | |
Total | 60,233 | ||||||||
Mathematics | |||||||||
1 | 25,147 | 19.77% | 3.46 | 3.46 | - | 0.83 | 0.83 | - | |
2 | 37,608 | 29.57% | 6.00 | 3.00 | 73.3% | 0.88 | 0.44 | 6.0% | |
3 | 30,888 | 24.28% | 7.91 | 2.64 | 31.8% | 1.13 | 0.38 | 27.6% | |
4 | 17,307 | 13.61% | 9.87 | 2.47 | 24.9% | 1.19 | 0.30 | 5.4% | |
5 | 7815 | 6.14% | 11.42 | 2.28 | 15.6% | 1.77 | 0.35 | 48.8% | |
6 | 3766 | 2.96% | 10.69 | 1.78 | −6.4% | 1.82 | 0.30 | 2.7% | |
7 | 1739 | 1.37% | 11.57 | 1.65 | 8.3% | 3.04 | 0.43 | 67.3% | |
8 * | 1010 | 0.79% | 11.26 | 1.41 | −2.7% | 3.31 | 0.41 | 9.0% | |
9 * | 595 | 0.47% | 13.10 | 1.46 | 16.4% | 4.46 | 0.50 | 34.7% | |
≥10 | 1315 | 1.03% | 17.55 | - | 34.0% | 10.48 | - | 135.0% | |
Total | 127,190 |
Number of Authors | Economics | History & Archaeology | Mathematics | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Np | % (of N) | Coeff. | Np | % (of N) | Coeff. | Np | % (of N) | Coeff. | |
1 | 3014 | 17.7% | 0.38 | 4167 | 8.6% | 0.30 | 3794 | 15.1% | 0.13 |
2 | 4189 | 25.8% | 0.19 | 1187 | 19.8% | 0.31 | 6860 | 18.2% | 0.06 |
3 | 3433 | 27.5% | 0.29 | 633 | 26.4% | 0.27 | 6240 | 20.2% | 0.28 |
4 | 1581 | 27.9% | 0.28 | 440 | 32.9% | 0.16 | 3622 | 20.9% | 0.14 |
5 | 684 | 26.2% | 0.14 | 314 | 40.7% | 0.39 | 1751 | 22.4% | 0.17 |
6 | 294 | 21.4% | 0.21 | 204 | 45.5% | 0.75 | 917 | 24.3% | 0.05 |
7 | 201 | 26.2% | 0.24 | 145 | 52.5% | 0.72 | 494 | 28.4% | 0.43 |
8 | 138 | 27.8% | 0.76 | 102 | 54.8% | 0.46 | 311 | 30.8% | 0.45 |
9 | 48 * | 24.1% | 0.09 | 62 * | 56.9% | 0.76 | 210 * | 35.3% | 0.06 |
≥10 | 183 | 34.7% | 0.62 | 51 * | 51.5% | 0.58 | 680 | 51.7% | 0.36 |
Total | 13,765 | 24.0% | 0.26 | 7305 | 12.1% | 0.31 | 24,879 | 19.6% | 0.14 |
Number of Authors | Economics | History & Archaeology | Mathematics | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Times Cited | Social Attention Score | Times Cited | Social Attention Score | Times Cited | Social Attention Score | |
1 | −0.04 | −0.03 | −0.04 | −0.03 | 0.04 | −0.04 |
2 | −0.03 | −0.03 | 0.03 | −0.01 | 0.05 | −0.02 |
3 | −0.05 | −0.03 | 0.10 | 0.00 | 0.02 | −0.02 |
4 | −0.07 | −0.04 | 0.10 | −0.02 | 0.02 | −0.02 |
5 | −0.09 | −0.06 | 0.03 | −0.03 | −0.02 | −0.02 |
6 | −0.10 | −0.07 | 0.06 | −0.07 | 0.01 | −0.03 |
7 | −0.11 | −0.05 | 0.14 | −0.01 | −0.02 | −0.01 |
8 | −0.08 | −0.10 | 0.00 | −0.10 | −0.09 | −0.10 |
9 | −0.20 | −0.24 | 0.03 | 0.00 | −0.03 | −0.01 |
≥10 | −0.29 | −0.22 | 0.00 | −0.11 | −0.07 | −0.05 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Dorta-González, P.; Dorta-González, M.I. Collaboration Effect by Co-Authorship on Academic Citation and Social Attention of Research. Mathematics 2022, 10, 2082. https://doi.org/10.3390/math10122082
Dorta-González P, Dorta-González MI. Collaboration Effect by Co-Authorship on Academic Citation and Social Attention of Research. Mathematics. 2022; 10(12):2082. https://doi.org/10.3390/math10122082
Chicago/Turabian StyleDorta-González, Pablo, and María Isabel Dorta-González. 2022. "Collaboration Effect by Co-Authorship on Academic Citation and Social Attention of Research" Mathematics 10, no. 12: 2082. https://doi.org/10.3390/math10122082