Cargando…

Scientific collaboration dynamics in a national scientific system

This paper examines the collaboration structures and dynamics of the co-authorship network of all Slovenian researchers. Its goal is to identify the key factors driving collaboration and the main differences in collaboration behavior across scientific fields and disciplines. Two approaches to modell...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ferligoj, Anuška, Kronegger, Luka, Mali, Franc, Snijders, Tom A. B., Doreian, Patrick
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Netherlands 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5080332/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27829692
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1585-7
Descripción
Sumario:This paper examines the collaboration structures and dynamics of the co-authorship network of all Slovenian researchers. Its goal is to identify the key factors driving collaboration and the main differences in collaboration behavior across scientific fields and disciplines. Two approaches to modelling network dynamics are combined in this paper: the small-world model and the mechanism of preferential attachment, also known as the process of cumulative advantage. Stochastic-actor-based modelling of co-authorship network dynamics uses data for the complete longitudinal co-authorship networks for the entire Slovenian scientific community from 1996 to 2010. We confirmed the presence of clustering in all fields and disciplines. Preferential attachment is far more complex than a single global mechanism. There were two clear distinctions regarding collaboration within scientific fields and disciplines. One was that some fields had an internal national saturation inhibiting further collaboration. The second concerned the differential impact of collaboration with scientists from abroad on domestic collaboration. In the natural, technical, medical, and biotechnical sciences, this promotes collaboration within the Slovenian scientific community while in the social sciences and humanities this inhibits internal collaboration.